A Clockwork Orange (1971) directed by Stanley Kubrick

AFI Top 100: #70

I'm struggling more than I have in a while to find the words to even begin to discuss this film. Stanley Kubrick's 1971 controversial classic A Clockwork Orange may be one of the most interesting films of all time. Whether the interest stems from the analyzation of the ultra-violence or rape or whether it stems from trying to make sense of the flow of the story, there is no doubt that this movie contains a lot of strange substance to talk about. A fantastic performance from Malcolm McDowell and stunning direction and cinematography make this film absolutely gorgeous, but I simply do not know how I feel about the vague, metaphorical reasons for much of the writing.

A Clockwork Orange follows the criminal life of Alex, played by Malcolm McDowell, a teenager most corrupted by uncontrollable bouts of rape and violence accompanied by a few of his friends. After his friends betray him and turn him into the police, Alex volunteers for an experimental treatment that will supposedly help rid him of these primal desires. This story and the screenplay from Stanley Kubrick, based on Anthony Burgess' novel, is the most interesting aspect of the entire film. Not only was this movie wildly controversial in the 1970s upon its release, but still remains so today. However, before initially watching this film for the first time, I have heard so much about its graphic use of violence and non-consensual sex scenes. While this film did indeed have plenty of both of those, I did not feel like the content was that much different than what could be done today. Perhaps it is because I have become intensely desensitized to subjects like these due to today's media or perhaps it was extremely taboo when this film was released, but I did not feel like the main focus of the film was actually its use of these explicit scenes. I felt more of a connection to the mental health theme that ran throughout the story and I feel like that aspect could be much more suitable for today's audiences. I completely understand why this film would have been banned or heavily restricted 40 years ago, but it has not completely aged well. This also goes for the overall message of the film. Even though there are very heavy, political and social overtones that guide this narrative and the characters, I couldn't help but get lost in what message Kubrick was really trying to display.

Since I was completely thrown for a loop when it comes to the main premise of this film, I was not sure what to expect after Alex was thrown in prison after the first forty minutes of the movie. What I did enjoy after that point, however, was Kubrick's incredible directing and the production design of the movie. The story moved along very nicely as Alex received his experimental treatment and was released back into the world to face the people and things that he had previously tortured. This was one of the most interesting parts of the movie, as it was very engaging to see the contrasts between early and "reformed" Alex. The dystopian and strange futuristic setting of this film helped to inspire the design department and it definitely showed. All of the sets and locations used were gorgeous and helped to set the tone of this peculiar world excellently. I also enjoyed the strange language that the characters spoke to one another. It was obviously English, but with a strange touch of something imaginative. The syllables and inflections in their voices were just odd enough to keep me on my toes when interpreting this film. However, what really kept my attention the most was the performance from McDowell. His portrayal of Alex was deeply haunting at the beginning, eventually turning into one of the most human performances of this time period. He was cast perfectly in this film and truly embodied all of the narrative's weirdest yet most compelling elements.

Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange may be one of the most memorable films in history for cinephiles. I love Kubrick myself, but I struggle to figure out how this movie has become so immensely infamous. A story that lends itself too much to interpretation never impresses me and this film, unfortunately, fell into that trap.

My Rating: ★★★★

He's Out There (2018) directed by Quinn Lasher

Quinn Lasher's directorial debut (and probably swansong) He's Out There seems like the result of someone programming a bot to watch 10,000 hours of horror films and write its own. This movie is so blatantly dull and lazy that I feel like a student film could accomplish more in 6 minutes, least of all be creative in the slightest. I'm not sure whose strings had to be pulled to get Yvonne Strahovski to star in this movie, but her decent performance was utterly wasted thanks to a horrible script and any smidgen of originality that could have existed. There is no excuse for how painfully bad this was and in a current culture of some fantastic horror stories, independent films like this need to take enormous creative risks to stand out.

Yvonne Strahovski stars as Laura, a wife and mother of two who is heading to a remote cabin near what appears to be Crystal Lake for a one-weekend-a-year vacation. Accompanied by her kids Kayla (Anna Pniowsky) and Maddie (Abigail Pniowsky), the three wait for the father Shawn (Justin Bruening) to arrive at a later time for whatever reason. And, of course, there is an axe-wielding killer lurking in the neighboring woods that is seeking out revenge with no motivations whatsoever. If any of these plot elements or character choices seem familiar, perhaps it is because the same, formulaic premise has been utilized thousands of times before. The script throughout this movie (and I'll spare the name of the screenwriter) is duller than anything I have ever seen before. The reason that I could not stand this film so much was the pure mediocrity and laziness of it all. When I decide to switch on a mind-numbing horror film from Netflix, I expect to at least be entertained. Whether or not the story is completely original, I would like for there to be one - just one - aspect of the story that is new. It can be a goofy CGI monster (The Ritual) or it can even be just a weird cult that doesn't necessarily have to make sense (The Endless). Both of those films were generic as all hell, but at least they merely attempted to do something fresh. Every plot point, every character choice, and every beat of He's Out There was nothing more than laughably predictable. I could go into full detail about why every part of the writing in this movie made absolutely no sense, but that would be too big of a waste of time.

Quinn Lasher's directing in this film is the other of its biggest issues. This is quite literally the only project that he has ever worked on in any role of filmmaking. Maybe I would trust him to handle a movie if he had at least any bit of credit, but his experience amounts to nothing and it painfully shows. I assume when Lasher was directing this film that he just had Friday the 13th playing on a small TV next to him as this film is practically a re-creation of that 1980 classic. From the generic plot of hunting down a group of people to the design of the killer's face mask (mummy? Jason? Hush from Batman?), this film takes absolutely no creative decisions. When it comes to the handling of the killer, the suspense was only built up when he was not shown. This is always the case for any typical slasher film, but Lasher apparently was not aware of that. The fact that the masked murderer was shown very early on took so much away from the horror aspect of the story. Rick Shaine's editing was also atrocious, as I do not think that man has ever heard of color correction. This movie did not even have the aesthetic style of a horror film and did not work in the slightest. The one decent aspect of this film that I can confidently say that it achieved was that it was indeed... a movie. It was effectively made and the crew seemed to know what they were doing.

He's Out There is not only the title of this film but it also practically sums up the frustrating ambiguity of its plot. Despite the fact that this movie is *barely* sufferable, I could not stop laughing at the horrendous script and overall design of this entire production. If you have seen any C-grade horror film from the past few decades, then you have seen this one already. Spare yourself the time.

My Rating: ★

The Shop Around the Corner (1940) directed by Ernst Lubitsch

The Shop Around the Corner is a delightfully simple romantic-comedy, but the biggest crime that this film commits is insisting that a retail employee's coworkers would cry when he gets fired. Even though this was not even close to one of Jimmy Stewart's best performances, I still loved this movie for a number of reasons; the naivety of the characters and their relationships, the quick and humorous comedic timing, and the masterful setting of one shop that harbored an entire web of subplots. This film is a perfect example of one that was blatantly obviously produced during the big studio system era, but that does not distract from its ability to tell a lighthearted and engaging story.

Jimmy Stewart and Margaret Sullavan star as Alfred Kralik and Klara Novak, two employees of a small department store run by Mr. Matuschek, played by Frank Morgan. Both of them, while beginning to despise one another as coworkers, have a secret pen pal relationship with each other and are unaware that they are falling in love. This relationship is the best part of this entire film as it provides for simple but effective character developments in both of these characters. The way that they interact with each other in every scene and the emotional environment that they create is just cute - there isn't quite any other way to put it. This, of course, is aided by Stewart and Sullavan's performances as they absolutely nail their characters. This is not one of Stewart's best portrayals, but he still brought on his trademark, awkward charm to make his character so strangely lovable. The only issues that I had with this cast of characters were how stereotypical and dull the majority of them were. They interacted well but all of the supporting cast felt lazily written and I couldn't find myself attached to them at all. Even though they made for an engaging movie, I feel as though this film could have been cut down and made into a pilot for a fun TV show titled "Mr. Matuschek's".

I feel as if William H. Daniels' cinematography and Gene Ruggiero's editing had much more potential than what was given. These technical aspects were done effectively, but I did not feel like there was any passion in the creative parts of this film. This also might have to do with the small-scale setting that these characters interacted in, but I would have liked to seen more visual storytelling rather than straight dialogue the entire time. What I did love most about Samson Raphaelson's writing, though, was that it took place in a very small shop. This gave all of the relationships and character dynamics so much intimacy and definitely helped to distinguish the multiple subplots that were happening. The writing was not always incredible, however, as many of said subplots were left wide open, creating this vague feeling of incompletion. Alfred and Klara's relationship seemed to take hold as the main plot, but I feel like the side characters, unfortunately, did not get their due justice. Except for Ferencz Vadas, played by Joseph Schildkraut, who was the absolute funniest cast member and character. His comedic timing and supplementary personality was hilarious to see and made every scene he was in that much more enjoyable.

Ernst Lubitsch's The Shop Around the Corner is a fun and engaging romantic-comedy that accomplishes everything it sets out to do. While it may not be Stewart's best performance or even a story that is completely original, the clever writing and energetic performances make this film very sweet and entertaining.

My Rating: ★★★½

Glass (2019) directed by M. Night Shyamalan

In what seems to be the conclusion to Shyamalan's muted superhero trilogy almost two decades in the making, Glass is quite the personal disappointment for me. Building upon the narratives presented in 2000's Unbreakable and 2017's Split, this film utterly fails at providing any kind of excitement in the superhero genre or testing of personal morals. I feel that this movie was completely unnecessary as Shyamalan should not have been suckered into the shared universe craze of recent cinematic history. Despite this movie's multiple, signature twists, the biggest twist of all was tricking us into believing this movie would get better as time went on.

Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, and James McAvoy reprise their roles as David Dunn, Elijah Price, and Kevin Wendell Crumb, respectively, in this third and final(?) installment of Shyamalan's Eastrail 177 trilogy. Set three weeks after the events of Split, Dunn finds himself hunting down the strangely strong and unpredictable Horde as he (they?) continues to kidnap and threaten young girls. Endowed with an unreasonably passionate sense of justice, Dunn and the Horde end up being captured and sent to a mental health facility, where they discover Price is also being held. The performances from these three and the characters that they play were my main reason for being incredibly ecstatic about this film. While I thought Unbreakable was a bit underwhelming, I love Split and I was definitely on board to see how these three would create a shared story. However, this entire film felt empty. Empty of message, empty of innovation, and empty of Shyamalan's typical filmmaking style. For a movie that claims it reinvents the superhero origin, there was nothing new about this story through its plot or characters. As they spend time together interacting and plotting in the facility, these characters do not develop at all. Dr. Ellie Staple, played by the constantly nervous Sarah Paulson, tries to get to the roots of these men and why they think they are superheroes in order to break them down. However, none of them ever truly change how they feel, making every beat of this movie pointless.

Along with the characters, there is nothing presented in terms of message or morals. Most of this film's dialogue seems to be rehashed from the previous two entries as creativity is nowhere to be found. This makes for a wildly uninteresting story building up tension that goes nowhere. Shyamalan's ambiguity throughout this movie could have led to some very interesting dialogue and connected to our real world in some way, but that opportunity was wasted. Instead, it seems as if he was just grasping at straws in order to find any way to relate to the shared universe culture of film today. Unbreakable and Split are both very good movies on their own and I feel like connecting these two stories was where everything began to fall downhill. If Shyamalan really wanted to get back into the world of Dunn and Price, he should have just made a straight-up sequel to his original film, as fans have been asking for for more than a decade. There are just the slightest of elements that prevent those two distinct stories from being one and the same and this film is enough proof of that.

Parts that I did enjoy, though, were the performances from the entire cast and their energy towards this world. The first act of the film and the exposition connecting the previous movies was incredible to see as Shyamalan nailed the set-up. The multiple connections and developments in the smallest details of these characters' stories worked surprisingly well together with the fantastic portrayals, but it was simply the directional execution that killed the hype. I also loved the production design and Mike Gioulakis' cinematography. For a self-financed film, the number of creative shots and focus on color design was extraordinary. The therapy scene between the four main characters was my absolute favorite, as their clashing personalities and dialogue were represented in both the colors they were wearing and the different camera techniques. Gioulakis' experience with horror, especially in 2014's criminally underrated It Follows, worked very well with the slightly askew story that Shyamalan was telling.

I would like to be able to say that Glass had a lot of potential, but that would be implying that its story had anything to offer. The excitement surrounding this film is something I was definitely a part of, as I thought Shyamalan would be able to connect these characters' stories in a satisfying way. However, this movie's broad, commercial appeal vastly overshadows its ability to give audiences anything new in terms of what a superhero story could be.

My Rating: ★★

The Graduate (1967) directed by Mike Nichols

AFI Top 100: #17

Simon and Garfunkel, you know that I love you with all my heart, but if I have to hear "Scarborough Fair" one more time, I am going to lose my mind. Mike Nichols' The Graduate is a very interesting film from top to bottom, as it accomplishes so many amazing feats while also having the apparently signature lack of plot direction or reasoning of films from the late 1960s. While Dustin Hoffman provides an incredible performance, his character is not quite up to that same par. Much of the writing is frustrating and nonsensical, but the way that the characters interact and develop can often be attention-grabbing. I am split quite evenly about this film, but there is no doubt that Nichols has delivered the perfect story to dissect.

Hoffman stars as Benjamin Braddock, a recent college graduate who is looking for a sense of purpose in his post-schooling life. He inadvertently becomes entangled with the wife of a family friend and soon finds himself stuck in a sex-fueled and motivationless lifestyle. One of the most interesting - not necessarily fantastic - things about the character of Ben is how relatable his actions could have been. This film explores the taboo underbelly of sexual desires by having Ben start an affair with Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft). The narrative seems to suggest that we all have had unconventional crushes at one point or another and that sometimes it is best to just give in to them. However, as much potential as the character of Ben had, it was never fully explored. I personally did not ever care about what happened to him or how much trouble he got in due to his lack of personality. Perhaps that was the point though, to write a character so bland and shapable that a plethora of various backgrounds would be able to relate. Even though I could not care much for the main protagonist, I loved Hoffman's performance. His stoic and passive portrayal of the confused young man hilarious at times as he was the most engaging part of this entire movie.

Mike Nichols' direction and Calder Willingham and Buck Henry's writing did not do this film's potential justice. Especially Willingham and Henry's screenplay, as the overall story of falling in love with Elaine Robinson (Katharine Ross) was unbelievably messy. The fact that Ben was having an affair with her mother and not treating either of the women the way they wanted to be treated was enough to tell me about his true personality. So one must be able to see how let down I was at the conclusion when Elaine finally gave in to Ben's constant stalking and pursuing of her. This movie had the possibility of being a beautiful love story, but instead, it simply muddled up all of these characters' relationships. This movie also, unfortunately, falls into the same category of late 1960's films that seem to have no concise flow. This subgenre of cinema has become irritating to me, but at least The Graduate has some sense of production design.

Technical parts of this movie that I loved were Robert Surtees' characteristic cinematography and Sam O'Steen's unusual editing. The camerawork is very interesting to watch, as Surtees seems to nail the dull and still vibe of this narrative. This is also aided by O'Steen's editing, as it lingers on certain shots for so long, giving the audience an uneasy feeling of what sexual escapade Ben would embark on next. I particularly loved the editing in the first scene between Ben and Mrs. Robinson as she got undressed in the room. The hyper-quick cuts between her breasts and Ben's anxious mannerisms were hilarious and made for a fantastic scene. This film was also set up like a theatrical production, as the sets and locations used were limited but delightful. The one part of this movie that I simply could not tolerate after the first act or so was the repetitive use of Simon and Garfunkel's music. I understand that they were in charge of the soundtrack and their music did help tell the story, but there could have been a much wider choice of score. It was quite annoying to hear the same two or three songs constantly loop in the background during the entire film.

The Graduate is an engaging but often irritating look at the sexual exploration and mischief of one particular young man. While the story did not do a good job of having the audience feel for the main protagonist, Hoffman undoubtedly made up for that with his relentless charisma and smooth, comedic timing. I would recommend this in order to form your own opinion, but it is still beyond me how films like these keep being considered the greatest of all time.

My Rating: ★★½

The Last Picture Show (1971) directed by Peter Bogdanovich

AFI Top 100: #95

Out of all of the themes presented throughout this film, the most prominent was definitely that the insatiable horniness of high school boys has existed - and probably will exist - for generations. Before the social relevance of The Breakfast Club, before the sexual unabashedness of Fast Times at Ridgemont High, and even before the pop culture phenomenon of Grease came Peter Bogdanovich's The Last Picture Show. This slice-of-life, high school-centric film is as revolutionary in its discussion of taboo topics as it is forgettable to the memories of the general public. It's a shame that this movie does not have as much of a following as those previously mentioned because, despite the controversy surrounding this movie, it provides for an incredibly emotional and oftentimes depressing narrative.

The Last Picture Show follows the intertwining lives of a few different high school seniors in a small, West Texas town in 1951 as they get ready to enter the "real world." Sonny, played by Timothy Bottoms, Duane, played by Jeff Bridges, and Jacy, played by Cybill Shepherd, all lead various lives as they experience the many wonders, horrors, and oddities of different things like sex, marriage, and death. These three provided the absolute best and most sensitive performances throughout this film and the elements of pre-adult life that they all went through was incredible to watch. The character of Sonny is our main protagonist and, starting the film with a heavyhanded breakup, looks to find solace in the bed of any kind of woman. This is where the main theme of the film lies: in following the sexual escapades of our main characters figuring out what they actually desire from life. Sonny sleeps with a few different girls and even begins an affair with his football coach's wife without him ever finding out. The way that he effortlessly travels from bed to bed throughout this movie without seeming to show any remorse shows a lot about his character, even though the audience ends up feeling for him in the third act of the film when everything comes crashing down. This is the same case for the character of Jacy, as her main goal is to prove her mother wrong in her assumptions of her. She attempts this by sleeping around and eventually planning a sham marriage with Sonny all just to mess with her parents. The different motivations and actions taken by characters in this film all mesh very well together to create the perfect forerunner of 80's coming of age films.

The stories of these main characters are all aided by supporting performances too, especially from Sam the Lion (Ben Johnson), Jacy's mom Lois (Ellen Burstyn), and Lester Marlow (Randy Quaid in his first, small role). These characters play such large parts in the story of this town, which actually becomes a character in itself. The way that Sam's death and Sonny and Duane leaving for Mexico affected the town is immeasurable to the point that the town seems to be characterized by feelings. As unfortunate as it was, Sam's death made for an excellent framing narrative throughout this movie. I, for the life of me, couldn't figure out why this film was titled the way it was until Sam left the local theater and pool hall to Sonny to take care of. While these characters were shaped by media and the culture of this town, it only makes sense that this film was aptly named. The story of this town seems to have more descending than ascending actions, but that is what makes it so interesting. In the conclusion of the film, this small town was left in desolation as all of its residents had moved away, started college, or gone through some incredible tragedy. The economic and social destruction of this setting gave way for quite the melancholy ending, creating this unshakable feeling of uncertainty for the future in the audience. While this may seem like too deep of an analyzation, it is quite honestly how it made me feel and for that, I applaud this film for doing its job.

Some of this movie's technical aspects that I loved were its direction and cinematography. Bogdanovich's directing was amazing and gave equal time for the stories and struggles of each individual character. I loved the way that he blended these lives together, despite the dramatic consequences of their actions becoming messy. Even though this movie is not nearly as referenced due to its frowned upon content of the time, Bogdanovich helps to make this film a hidden treasure. Robert Surtees' cinematography was fantastic as well, as he brought along his experience from films like Ben-Hur to make the small town of Anarene seem like a massive and empty land of lost opportunity. The only design choice that I did not understand in this movie is why it was shot in black and white with such poor video and audio quality. Perhaps it was a creative choice due to the film's setting, but I feel that it could have much benefitted from color and a higher quality camera.

The Last Picture Show is an amazing coming of age movie that was unafraid to discuss a lot of various topics of the time. Whether it was the strangely dated style or the more raw nature of the substance, this film has honestly impacted my knowledge of this content more than many others. Accompanied by Bogdanovich's incredible directing and an extremely talented cast, this movie is unforgettable, at least to me.

My Rating: ★★★½

Unbreakable (2000) directed by M. Night Shyamalan

Split is one of my absolute favorite M. Night Shyamalan films and with today's release of Glass, the connection between the former and this movie, I decided it was finally time to see what the commotion was about. Unfortunately, I found Unbreakable to be a very underwhelming drama and thriller that barely passes as a superhero movie. Despite the effective directing and signature twist, I found the story to be mediocre at best. I wanted to be blown away by this narrative and its setup for Shyamalan's shared universe, but I was definitely disappointed by the tame and domestic nature of this entire film.

Unbreakable follows two men who couldn't appear to be any more different: the strong-willed and reclusive David Dunn, played by Bruce Willis and the manipulative and sociopathic Elijah Price, played by Samuel L. Jackson. These two men's lives intersect as it is revealed that Elijah has been searching his whole life for someone on the opposite end of the physical spectrum as him. He suffers from osteogenesis imperfecta, a disease that makes his entire body, especially his bones, as brittle as glass. On the other end, David Dunn discovers his ability to not be hurt by anything, as proven by his lifetime of good fortune in multiple accidents. The best parts of this entire film are the performances from these two and their developed relationship. Jackson's eclectic knowledge of comic books and their history make for a very interesting personality trait that was undoubtedly ahead of its time. Despite superheroes not being a new trend when this film was released, the idea of a shared universe was still a few years off. The fact that Price has such an intimate relationship with the history of this form of media is so engaging and helps to further this narrative in an exciting way; of course, aided by Jackson's stern yet relatable portrayal of the character. David Dunn is this film's main protagonist and Willis plays him just as well as he's played every other action film character: monotone yet strangely believable and emotional when the scene desperately calls for it. Willis was not bad by any means, but I feel as if he was only cast due to his stardom and already close working relationship with Shyamalan.

The writing and directing in this film seem to be its main issue and I feel as if this movie has a premise that could have been explored much deeper. The story of Dunn and Price are owned neither by Marvel or DC, which gave way for Shyamalan to focus more on the grounded background story of the two. However, I don't feel as if this worked because the lack of action and any kind of rising events made this feel like more of a dull, origin story. I did like this narrative a lot, as there is some fantastic dialogue and interactions between characters, such as the rekindled love of Dunn and his wife, but this movie can not tell which genre it is aiming to be. If it truly was a superhero film, I feel as if there would be much more focus on Dunn and coming to terms with his powers, but since this film is mostly a thriller, that aspect took hold of the main story. And even for a thriller, the pacing of the movie was tedious at best. Dunn struggled to accept his powers the whole movie, which was practically his entire arc, until of course, he goes out on his first rescue mission. The only interesting part of this movie's abrupt ending was the trademark twist that Price had murdered all of those innocent people in order to get to Dunn. Eduardo Serra's cinematography also intrigued me, as it was definitely this movie's most interesting technical aspect. His use of constant movement and long takes made for some very cool shots with masterful framing techniques.

While many fans of this shared universe of films will be undoubtedly excited for Glass, I will be seeing it solely for critique (and James McAvoy, of course). Unbreakable is a film with an incredibly interesting idea that was never fully fleshed out; an origin story with no idea where to take its characters next at a painfully dull pace.

My Rating: ★★★

Baby Face (1933) directed by Alfred E. Green

Alfred E. Green's 1933 film Baby Face is an amazing example of a film that has aged excellently while providing a fresh meaning to new audiences. This very quick movie's narrative makes for its most interesting aspect, as its characters and story can be evolved in today's culture as creating a strong, feminist, film. Barbara Stanwyck gives one of her best performances in this pre-code film that not only shocked many audiences, but paved the path for more female-led films in the time to be released. Despite this movie's predictability and often flat plot, there is no doubt that pre-code Stanwyck is much better than post-code Stanwyck.

Barbara Stanwyck plays Lily, a young woman working for her father who runs an illegal drinking hall and sexually exploits her for his own profit. After a fatal accident leaving her father dead, Lily moves to New York in order to use her sexuality to climb to the top of the corporate ladder. Stanwyck amazingly embodies this character who definitely would have been banned if this film were produced after the Production Code took effect. Her character of Lily is one of the most complex female characters of this era of film and makes for the most interesting performance out of all the cast involved. Her multidimensional characteristics stood out the most, as the majority of female characters in this time were delegated to one of two roles: wife or mother. Lily, however, is neither, as she plans to do what she does best in order to get what she wants; sleeping her way to the top of the bank that she works for without batting an eye. Lily's corporate ruthlessness and relentless quest for control began with the death of her father, as she watched him burn to death without remorse in a strangely emancipating scene. This of course was aided by Stanwyck's amazing performance, as her face in that one shot said it all. The performance by Alphonse Ethier as Lily's friend Cragg was amazing too and provided a lot of motivation for Lily's character as he helped her gain her confidence in turning the tables on the men. We love a male-feminist, best friend character!

Lily's reverse exploitation of men is not only hilarious but also empowering to many degrees. I personally feel as if the aging of this narrative has not devalued what the original filmmakers intended, but has evolved to fit today's culture. This story, especially when it was released in 1933, was attempting to create a negative reaction towards Lily from the audience. Since the biggest portion of moviegoers at the time were white males, they most likely rooted against Lily until, of course, she was "tamed" by the CEO of the bank in the conclusion as they fell in love. The ending of this film is happy regardless of personal taste, as Lily decides to put emotional feelings over monetary gain, which is a sweet message for any generation. However, in today's culture, I feel as if Lily has become more of an icon for her actions in this movie. Since women's rights and feminism are rightfully gaining more traction in popular culture and Hollywood, Baby Face is a fantastic film to look back on and see that these kinds of characters did exist. Lily was aware of her powerful sexuality and weaponized it to attain what she wanted; by taking advantage of the stupidity and carelessness of the male characters in this film. This provides for an excellent look at how many aspects of femininity have changed but also stayed the same in order to empower women. The only part of this movie that I did not particularly enjoy was Green's direction. This was an incredibly quick film without too much complex plot and I feel that it could have benefitted from either a more developed screenplay or more flushed out supporting character arcs.

Baby Face is one of Alfred E. Green and Barbara Stanwyck's best movies that they ever worked on, as there are so many elements that prove it to be unusually timeless. With an incredibly emotional performance from Stanwyck and a groundbreaking narrative, I would absolutely recommend this film. Especially to experience the kinds of stories that were unfortunately banned once the Production Code was put in place.

My Rating: ★★★½

Do the Right Thing (1989) directed by Spike Lee

AFI Top 100: #96

Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing is an extraordinary piece of filmmaking, examining so many different aspects of life in Brooklyn, New York in the 1980s. This film may be Lee's most renowned accomplishment and for good reason. The dynamics of all of the characters is the aspect of the writing that really fuels this story and provides for such an interesting and oftentimes terrifying narrative. Even though I wish the coherence of the story would have been more focused on, I really enjoyed this movie for the eye-opening and shocking scenes that prove relatable even in today's time.

Lee writes, directs, and acts in this film which to some people might be considered overkill, but he is able to excellently balance these aspects without giving himself too much attention. Despite Lee being 32 years old when this movie was released, he looks and acts like a young 20-something. His performance and storyline in this movie was undoubtedly the most interesting piece as that plot line is the driving force behind not only the racial tensions throughout but the fiery conclusion. Lee plays a pizza-delivery boy named Mookie who is caught up in his own drama while being the only black employee of an Italian-owned pizzeria. His portrayal of this character was amazing as he was able to deliver a solid performance of the lower-class worker while also being strong-willed enough to stand up for himself and be his own man. The setting of the hottest day of the year on this one street in Brooklyn was a fantastic choice by Lee, as it gives a physical and metaphorical meaning to how sweltering hot all of these characters get by the end of the story and its injustices. His direction is also another part that really impressed me, as he is able to interweave these multiple stories in a way that brings them together at the end. My only issue with this movie, however, is how the different characters' stories did not necessarily mesh well together until the conflict in the third act.

The character relationships and how they all interact with each other is very interesting to not only watch, but compare to similar dynamics of today. Even though not every single black or Italian person living in New York had this same experience in the late 1980s, this film paints a great look at many of the stereotypes and profiling between different communities that can become explosive. The contrast between Mookie's friends and the family operating the pizzeria was interesting to watch and see that even in low-income communities like this one, hate still runs excessively rampant. I also enjoyed the dynamics between the different age groups in this movie. The three men sitting under the umbrella and the neighborhood drunk held so many different views than characters such as Buggin Out or Radio Raheem, despite them all being black. Lee's trademark racial message in this film was that peace is not achieved through protest but through acceptance. Hate begets hate and violence begets even worse violence and the way that Lee was able to show this message was incredible. He was able to display the violent actions of the community after they had burned down the pizzeria and how it only contributed to the negative environment that was being built upon. I love how Lee is able to show the messages of his films, despite them being blatant with his use of motion graphics and oftentimes footage from outside of the movie's narrative.

Do the Right Thing is the epitome of rightful and racially-fueled filmmaking. With some fantastic performances and a frightfully-relatable story, this small-scale, slice of life movie has a bit of everything: humor, drama, and a haunting message. I would absolutely recommend this film, not only because of its interesting characters and message but also because of its raw yet stylized hip-hop direction.

My Rating: ★★★★

Moon (2009) directed by Duncan Jones

After I had watched Mute, Duncan Jones' horrible misfire of a science-fiction film earlier this year, I was undoubtedly turned off from this director. But now that his 2009 film Moon is on Netflix, I decided to give him another shot, thinking maybe his earlier work could prove better. However, even though Sam Rockwell provides one of the only enjoyable parts of this movie, I found many of the same problems throughout this narrative. This film is another tonal mess that does not exactly have a clear message despite its high-concept and creative premise. I really wanted to like this movie and while it is miles better than his 2018 flop, I'm finding it harder and harder to defend not only Jones, but generic science-fiction filmmaking in general.

Moon follows Sam Bell, played by Sam Rockwell, an astronaut who has been assigned to a three-year contract of mining valuable resources on the moon to save Earth from an energy crisis. This script could have proven to be a very interesting take on this monologue-fueled solo film, especially since it was set in a place in space not too far away from comfort. Instead, all of the different characters (or rather, the different Sams) remained very archetypal and did not ever develop or stray from what their typical dialogue would be. This was painfully evident when they first met each other. I feel as if any sane person would go through quite the existential crisis when finding out that they had a physical clone of themselves standing right in front of them. These different versions of Sam remained so nonchalant about the peculiar things that were happening and I could not see where any of their relaxed attitudes came from. The only decent part of these characters happened once it was revealed that none of the Sams on that lunar station were the original one. Rockwell is an incredibly well-rounded actor and he was able to portray each version of Sam a slight bit differently, no matter how dull the versions were. Accompanied by an insignificant vocal performance from Kevin Spacey as Sam's personal robotic friend GERTY, Rockwell's performance may be the only part of this movie that I actually enjoyed.

The plot of this film had so much potential to be more interesting or original, but that was squandered from very early on. The trope of having a single actor's performance in space is so dull at this point and did not help me feel for this character in the slightest. This narrative is not bad by any means, but there seemed to be no attempt at any kind of human message for this character to learn. All in all, the story is just monotonous and could have showcased Jones' writing talent, but at this point, I am beginning to wonder if he has any. I also believe that this story could have been handled much better with a different director and editor. Jones may be an effective writer, giving the audience every predictable piece that they want, but he does not belong as a director. This film is paced very poorly and obstructed along by the tone-deaf writing of the characters. Nicolas Gaster's editing seemed to be straight out of a sitcom, despite this movie having nothing to do with that style. The horrendous transitions and constant dipping to black reminded me of a TV show and I felt as if it was time to go to commercial between every scene in the movie.

Special effects and the design throughout this movie is quite a double-edged sword. The outside shots of the moon's surface and the rovers driving from outpost to outpost was disgusting. The effects looked unfinished and this really took me out of the spectacle aspect of this film. However, the interior design of the main station was very nice. It functioned very well for this story and provided a good playground for Sam Rockwell and his duplicates. This aspect was also handled very well, and the green screen and camera techniques utilized for this doubling of character effect were great. Especially in the choreography and stunt coordination done by Rod Woodruff. The tussle scenes were great to watch and I could not suspect any obvious stunt doubles at all.

Moon is another one of Duncan Jones' four-letter, science-fiction films that have failed to impress me in the slightest. His take on the last man alive trope has not proven to be anything groundbreaking, despite an enthusiastic and lively performance from the adorable Sam Rockwell. I would recommend this film if for any reason you enjoy mediocre space thrillers, but I simply could not care any less about this story.

My Rating: ★★

Private Life (2018) directed by Tamara Jenkins

Paul Giamatti and Kathryn Hahn surprisingly make the most believable and down-to-earth cinematic couple. Tamara Jenkins' Private Life is an amazing look at a couple's journey of attempting to have their first child. While both of these leads provide honest and raw performances, I found myself most engaged in the story. Accompanied by some creative cinematography and solid supporting performances, I absolutely adored this movie. However, I desperately wish that I would have watched this before 2018 had ended, as it definitely would have made it on my Top 20 list.

Hahn and Giamatti play Rachel and Richard, a mid-life couple trying any means necessary in order to have their first child as they fear they are growing too old. As their various attempts of different procedures and operations go wrong, they start to lose hope until they agree to let their niece Sadie, played by Kayli Carter, move in with them. Sadie becomes an integral part of this couple's story and the character development between all three of them is incredible to see. Not only is Sadie a vital piece of solving this couple's puzzle, but they begin to start a sort of family of their own. This, of course, is shown by the performances by all three of these actors and actresses as they progress through this film's narrative. Hahn and Giamatti have amazing chemistry and despite their typical comedy backgrounds, they were able to show some fantastic acting chops in practically every scene. The tenderness and care put into each performance were great, and the absolute raw nature of this movie's subject matter only helped that. I could truly see every emotion through these performers' portrayals. Carter's character provided a nice contrast to the couple too, as she initially brought in a lighter tone and more comedic air. Once she eventually became a deeper part of the couple's pregnancy plans, that is when the motivations and aspirations of each individual character intertwined to make for an extremely compelling story.

Tamara Jenkins' writing and directing for Private Life is incredibly impressive. I am not sure if this film is based upon any personal experiences for her, but whether it is or not, the subject matter proves to be emotionally devastating. Jenkins' script is amazing and shows that this slice-of-life topic should not be taken lightly. As much as we take life and childbirth for granted, it is definitely not that easy for many others. This film showed the darker side of wanting to bring new life to the world but being unable to. Both Hahn and Giamatti displayed their roles perfectly for the amount of despair and grief that this couple had to go through. The directing in this film is fantastic too, as the story moves along very nicely from one pregnancy procedure to the next. My one small issue with this film is that there never seems to be a solid structure for its narrative. Three basic acts can be seen but I could not feel the emotional swells of the movie despite its substance; performances are the one aspect that truly carried it. I loved the cinematography from Christos Voudouris as well, and his use of small-scale framing. Even though these main characters lived in a cramped, New York apartment with two big dogs, I could feel the entire world that had been built around them. Voudouris also experiments with focus techniques and different kinds of shots for the individual characters, which resulted in some beautiful camerawork.

Private Life is a personal and engaging look at a mid-life couple's struggle to get pregnant. Hahn and Giamatti's chemistry was fantastic and I love the various directions that the story took. Even though the overall narrative was not the most compelling, this fictional slice-of-life movie was able to bring out so many different emotions.

My Rating: ★★★½

In Bruges (2008) directed by Martin McDonagh

I would like to greatly thank the many smart users of Letterboxd for recommending this film to me. Martin McDonagh has succeeded as both a writer and director in many cases, but this film may be my personal favorite of his. In Bruges is an excellent dark comedy that proves itself as a screenwriter's dream. Only McDonagh could have written a script this intensely emotional and bleakly humorous while maintaining a fantastic level of detail and entertainment value. I was not entirely sure what was in store for me as I started this film from Netflix, but I sure am glad that I did.

Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson play Ray and Ken, two hitmen who have been assigned to lay low in Bruges, Belgium until a botched job blows over. While Ken loves the time spent in this morbid city, Ray is on the verge of losing his sanity, mentally and physically. The chemistry between these two actors is undeniably perfect as they play off of each other very nicely. Even though their two characters display quite the contrast, their relationship is one of the best driving forces throughout this film. The vulgarity and unrelenting honesty that is shared in the scenes between the two is fantastic and humorous. Even though they do not take any prisoners when it comes to using profanity and the way they treat others is not the best, the writing truly makes the audience feel for them more than anything. Similar to how Tarantino's Pulp Fiction got people to sympathize with hitmen on their day off, McDonagh is able to do one better and get people to entirely love these two troubled men. Especially since the botched job that they were hiding from was Ray's first in the field, this movie actually makes hitmen lovable. Farrell's performance is the greatest throughout this film, as he rightfully won a Golden Globe for his portrayal of the young and snarky Ray. Not only was Ray incredibly troubled by what he had accidentally done, he was able to bring so much quick humor and bodily expressions to lighten up the movie's tone and Farrell embodied this excellently. While both Farrell and Gleeson were fantastic, their boss Harry, played by Ralph Fiennes, was great too. He unfortunately did not show up until the third act of the film or so, but since we only heard his voice on the phone, his appearance tied up a lot of loose ends and was exactly what I was expecting.

Martin McDonagh's script for this film is an amazing combination of wisecracking writing and intense, high-stakes drama. This balance of humor and drama was fantastic, as neither had to rely on each other too much to carry a scene. My only issue with this was often times throughout the movie there would be a heavily depressing scene regarding a disturbing backstory that would be sharply interrupted by a joke. The transitions between these moments were often too rough and took me out of my emotions during that current scene. Despite the jolting transitions, the plot of this movie wraps up so nicely. Every single detail is brought full-circle and wraps up very well; I was left putting the pieces back together the moment they happened on screen, which made for a very enjoyable experience. It was also fun to see a movie about hitmen that was not excessively graphic. While there were a few, well-choreographed action scenes, it did not take away from the quirky personalities of these characters and their "vacation." Bruges also plays an obviously large part in developing the story and it actually becomes a character of its own. Aided by McDonagh's smooth directing, these multiple aspects helped the narrative flow beautifully. Like previously mentioned, this movie is absolutely a screenwriter's dream.

In Bruges is an extremely well-written and clever film, as each scene is riddled with emotion and engaging substance. Along with Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson's incredible performances and plot points that pay off very satisfyingly, this movie is a great mix of originality and satire of the crime thriller drama.

My Rating: ★★★★½

Clerks (1994) directed by Kevin Smith

This might be the true definition of a cult classic film as Kevin Smith's Clerks has all of the genre's best features: a down-on-his-luck protagonist, witty and memorable dialogue, and technical aspects that are definitely not seen in many mainstream movies. This slice-of-life film is a very entertaining look at the lives of two convenience store workers in the 1990s and the many strange things that happen to them on a daily basis. While the majority of the writing throughout this movie is heavily exaggerated to further the plot, Smith still delivers a fun film that is still surprisingly relatable to today's culture.

Clerks follows the part-time jobs of best friends Dante and Randal, played by Brian O'Halloran and Jeff Anderson, who just so happen to work right next door to each other. Dante runs the local convenience store as Randal manages the video rental store (a phrase right out of the 90s). Their relationship and how they handle their respective establishments makes for the best scenes in this entire film and paves the way for some great humor. These two have already been established as being best friends but the actions throughout this film only cement their friendship, which was a nice change of pace in terms of character development. The relationships in this film are what make it the most interesting, as the audience is able to see how the many different people and experiences shape our lead Dante. As Dante struggles with trying to remain positive on his supposed day off, many various people come in the store that are written solely to test his patience. The wild cast of characters that visit the store throughout the day pave the way for some very wacky and almost slapstick-style scenarios that are hilarious in the long run. And this, of course, includes the debut of Smith's Jay and Silent Bob, as they are written as junkies dealing outside of the store. These quick back-and-forth scenes and how Smith was able to write them all together was genius. Along with his writing, the directing was incredible as well. This film flew by without missing a beat and makes for a quick but wildly amusing watch.

The clever dialogue written for this movie is the narrative's main focus throughout. Every single character comes off as a fast-talking and sly individual, but the way that they interact with each other is where the true colors of each character shines. Dante is an insecure lowlife afraid of change while Randal is a secure lowlife comfortable with the life given to him. However, Dante's girlfriend Veronica, played by Marilyn Ghigliotti, is the main agent for Dante's change. Their romance leads to the opening up of some fantastic conversation about relationships and human decency. That theme is especially important in this film as Dante struggles to figure out his life and what he really wants from it. My favorite aspect of the dialogue, however, is how the words that are spoken greatly contrast the stereotypical character that spoke them. The smart and witty conversation happens so quickly throughout this film that it can be easy to miss some one-liners and full-circle jokes, but the way the words are presented is so surreal compared to those saying them. Our society tells us not to expect a convenience store clerk and a video rental employee to speak so intelligently, but this film turns those archetypes on their heads. A few small issues that I had were some outdated and derogatory terms and Dante's questionable view of women, but the majority of the dialogue in this movie stands out the most as it proves itself to be strangely timeless.

Technical elements about this movie obviously stood out to me as well, as this small, independent film's budget was a measly $28,000. While this might discourage many filmmakers, I am glad that Smith was able to put more of his focus on its script instead of its aesthetic appeal. Although, some like me would argue that the black and white choice was not only smart, but fit the tone as well. The way this film was shot was amazing too; David Klein's single-camera cinematography and jolting movement not only put the focus on the cast, but solidified the convenience store setting. Towards the end of the film, I could actually feel like I was in the store with the characters sharing a room with them.

Clerks is a vulgar and unapologetic slice-of-life masterpiece and while it did not necessarily contain some of the strongest or most original plot points, it surely helped to further Kevin Smith's career into the pop culture icon that we know today. I would definitely recommend this movie if you are a fan of this genre or just want to see the funky, offbeat origins of the infamous Jay and Silent Bob.

My Rating: ★★★½

Blade Runner (1982) directed by Ridley Scott

AFI Top 100: #97

Hey Siri, set a reminder for November 1st to check in on Los Angeles and see how their society is going. I'm starting off the New Year the right way by finally watching the classic sci-fi thriller Blade Runner, set in this year of 2019. While I have seen the newest, Ryan Gosling-led installment, I was lost on many of the aspects of its story simply because I had not seen the original. With this, I was expecting a high-octane 80s action film with a plethora of special effects and cheesy dialogue, but what I actually got was a futuristic noir drama, complete with the same confusing tone of the 2017 film. While that may or may not be the best perspective, I still relatively enjoyed this movie for the world that it has created.

Harrison Ford was one of the most versatile actors of the 1980s. Only a year after his *much better* debut portrayal of the classic treasure hunter Indiana Jones, Ford leads this film as Rick Deckard, a hired mercenary who hunts down replicants for a living. Five of these replicants, on the run from committing mass homicide, are being hunted by Deckard and as they are picked off one by one, Deckard begins to experience something he was never allowed to before: feelings. This was the most interesting piece of Ford's character, but it is also one of the least focused-on aspects of the writing. This movie unfortunately relies on the strange, steampunk version of Los Angeles to tell its story rather than show development in its characters. Especially Deckard, being the protagonist of the film, as he does not change at all until the last few minutes of the movie. After falling in love and running away with the fifth replicant Rachael, played by Sean Young, Deckard is finally able to be the human version of himself. I wish that this relationship and how it affected the main character was made more of the focus in this movie, rather than trying to get the audience to sympathize with the other, antagonistic replicants. Then again, Deckard is not written to be very friendly to women, as seen in the uncomfortably aggressive intimacy scene, so I am not sure who the writers were attempting to appeal to.

The tone of this film is its other main issue, as it remained monotone for its entirety. This was the same problem that I had with Blade Runner 2049; the story did not seem to build tension or narrative at all. In practically any other film, the audience should be able to feel the swells in the story without being able to predict too much else. This movie was very predictable as its plot was laid out in the first few minutes and did not stray from it. Perhaps it is due to the imaginary setting's bleakness, but I could not feel any parts of the writing that got me excited for the next scene. It was not until the final fight scene between Deckard and Roy, played by Rutger Hauer, that I became engrossed in this movie. I actually began to feel the stakes that had been previously laid out and this action should have occupied all of the previous scenes. This was of course, also because of Ford's and Hauer's fantastic performances that brought the only beam of energy through this dark dystopia.

I hate to be one of those film students, but Ridley Scott works best only as a producer and visionary for films. I appreciate the nostalgia and world-building that Scott has accomplished, but leave the breathtakingly artistic direction and cinematography to Denis Villeneuve and Roger Deakins, especially in the realm of this fantasy world. Or better yet, I would have loved to seen how Spielberg would have handled this story, as he has proven himself much more capable of working with Ford. *cough* Raiders of the Lost Ark *cough*. Fortunately, what made this film the most enjoyable for me was its production design and music. The futuristic alternate reality of Los Angeles paved the way for some incredible shots and design, whether it was special effects or not. Even though these effects have not aged the best, they are stunning for the time period that they were released in. I also love the noir vibes that are emitted not only through the costuming, but also the lighting and certain parts of the script. The score in this film by Vangelis is amazing as his use of mostly electronic instruments definitely fit this film exceptionally well.

Blade Runner is not at all what I was anticipating. Harrison Ford carries this movie into the exciting, aesthetic world that many cinephiles adore. While it is refreshing to see a film from this time period that does not overly rely on explosions or one-liners, I was disappointed to feel the exact same way that I did about the newest installment: bland.

My Rating: ★★★