Irresistible (2020) directed by Jon Stewart

The American political system is very easy to poke fun at, regardless of what side of the aisle you lie or what your personal morals are. This system is also, unfortunately, run by nothing but money and while there is a lot of comedy to find in that as well, I don't think Jon Stewart was the director to do so. Irresistible is a very misguided and unaffecting satire that had so much potential to take a certain path but really refuses to take a stance on anything. It's easy to tell that Stewart thinks he is breaking boundaries with this story by trying to appeal to both sides of the political spectrum but in reality, this film really had nothing to say. Not enough drama to keep me interested in the characters and not enough comedy to at least make me laugh was its main issue and while I really enjoyed the performances and energy from its leads, there was not nearly enough substance to make this film worth their time.

Gary Zimmer (Steve Carrell) is a Democratic political analyst in Washington, D.C. who sees an opportunity to win a swing vote in the small town of Deerlaken, Wisconsin. When he decides on local veteran Jack Hastings (Chris Cooper) to run for mayor, he must use all of the tricks in his book to win the seat occupied by rival Braun (Brent Sexton), whose reelection campaign is being run by conservative Faith Brewster (Rose Byrne). The performances from the cast throughout this film are really what keeps it going and Carrell, Cooper, and especially Byrne were all brilliantly cast. They play into their nearly stereotypical roles very well and I loved how much chemistry they all exuded. Byrne is spectacular as the Republican analyst and she actually provides for most of the effective humor in this film without being too much of a parody of something else. Cooper is amazing too and I really enjoyed his endearing portrayal of the conflicted veteran who just wanted to do right by his town. I just simply had a really hard time caring about Stewart's script because of how lackluster its genre seemed to be. The comedy never really rears its head and the only amusement that I got from the film was Zimmer's initial introduction to the small-town community. A Washington, D.C. liberal elite being thrown into a small, hometown was entertaining at first but Carrell's shtick could not really keep up with the pace of the rest of the movie. There also isn't enough drama in this film to make me care about the campaign itself. Stewart has a very difficult time juggling these two and I don't think he was ever able to stick the landing.  As a result, this film just felt really awkward and never really leaned into one thing that he was trying to say. As much as I feel like this story was unfocused, there is a very heartfelt message somewhere to be found about accepting small, rural communities as integral parts of this country that should not be taken for granted but it definitely has to be looked at with an eye of optimism to be found.

A film's ending can also really make or break its audience's experience and especially when it comes to a story delving into something as dicey as American politics, it better be quite clear. Irresistible, however, does not provide that and its ending completely negates any so-called message that could have been learned along the way. Spending the entire runtime of this film learning to care about the people of this small town is an obvious tactic screenwriters can use to get their audience to sympathize with them, regardless of the political beliefs they may hold. Stewart did exactly this and I really did want Hastings to win the election after all of the struggles that he had been through. Putting aside my own political leanings, it is very easy for anyone to see why this small town was to be rooted for and seeing the contrast between Zimmer's lack of care and the town's great deal of care did nothing for me. I did not honestly care about Carrell's character and trying to get me to understand where he was coming from was really just a fruitless effort. The reveal towards the end that the entire town had been in on hiring Zimmer from the start for the sake of raising money was some Scooby-Doo level trickery that proved to be goofy more than anything. It's the structure that Stewart chose to use that frustrated me the most. If he would have framed this film more around Hastings and his daughter Diana (Mackenzie Davis) instead of the analysts, I would have been much more on board. Make Carrell and Byrne much more antagonistic and the conflicts that these characters go through would have been much more believable. Jon Stewart is an exceptional voice in political comedy and I really thought that his experience could have led to a much stronger film. If only he would have produced this and had someone else write the more humorous parts of what was advertised to be a comedy, it could have been a much more memorable and much less formulaic look at how politicians and their money simply exist to pander to middle America.

Irresistible is quite a disappointing film that never really tried to be either a drama or a comedy. In the same way that its writer/director tries to split the middle by telling a heartwarming story, nothing ever really gets accomplished in this film. I really wanted to like this but if a filmmaker wants to tell a story about the greed of American politics, I feel like the only way to do it is hard satire. America is a much more complex beast than the ideological one that Stewart tries to present here and while I am a fan of wishful thinking, there is no way in hell that a story about a small-town election like this would turn out so hunky-dory, even for the sake of aspirational storytelling.

My Rating: ★★½

Babyteeth (2020) directed by Shannon Murphy

Pressing play on Shannon Murphy's Babyteeth is like walking into a house you used to live in that is currently occupied by someone else. Audiences have seen this type of story before and audiences know that there will be a great deal of emotion involved but the actual contents of the film and its particular choices are what make it stand out or not. Thankfully, many of Murphy's choices make this movie such an interesting and original look at the tragic type of story that she brings to the screen. Accompanied by some incredible performances from the lead cast and editing that I thoroughly enjoyed, there is so much to adore about Murphy's take on the "terminally ill girl" story. I have been looking forward to this movie since it was supposed to premiere at the Phoenix Film Festival which I was working for and I am so glad that this story is now getting the attention that it so desperately deserves.

Milla (Eliza Scanlen) is a young, chronically ill girl who lives with her parents Anna (Essie Davis) and Henry (Ben Mendelsohn) and is studying to become a violinist. When Milla meets a local drug dealer named Moses (Toby Wallace), the two instantly fall in love against the wishes of her parents and they spark up a relationship that will test the boundaries of family, drugs, and much more. The script, written by Rita Kalnejais, is incredibly solid and provides for some of the most interesting characters in this genre of film. I loved seeing how the personalities and motivations of Milla and her parents clashed and how lax with everything Moses was. This provided such a nice contrast to their characters and throughout the hardships and struggles they all go through, it made me definitely feel for them. The connecting theme of this film that I think really worked well for it was how every character, in one way or another, was tied down and grounded by their use of drugs. Milla's dependency because of her condition, Moses' use due to being a dealer, Anna's tendency to take too many sleeping pills, and Henry's profession being a psychiatrist and having the power to distribute medication were all such interesting character traits that helped to tell this story. Whether or not each character approved of the drugs or not, it gave them all one similar conflict that they had to work through, which in turn helped them to develop as a family. Murphy's choice not to have any drug-fueled sequences or hard-to-watch trips was such a sensible one and I really enjoyed how she structured the characters' experiences with drugs. Utilizing the befores and afters was a fantastic storytelling decision and it definitely made the tone of this film feel unique. Her direction throughout Babyteeth is just wonderful and proves to be the film's strongest creative outlet.

Another aspect of this story that I really enjoyed was how Murphy and Kalnejais exhibit an equal amount of development for both Milla, Moses, and Milla's parents. Entirely focusing this movie around Milla and how her sickness affects her would be heartbreaking for sure but being able to see her choices from a parents' perspective was very refreshing. Understanding your parents as actual people and more than just your caregivers is absolutely crucial and Babyteeth does a fantastic job of representing this. Having an equal amount of time dedicated to Anna and Henry was such a clever choice and really builds the family dynamic around them well. This would not be as effective, however, if not for the performances from the whole cast. Scanlen is obviously fantastic as Milla and brings such an eccentric and emotional core to her but Essie Davis and Ben Mendelsohn are the true standouts for me. They are wonderfully caring and careful in their performances and just within the little body movements and minor choices, they are able to portray such honest pain and grief throughout the movie. Wallace was quite humorous as Moses as well and was able to really strike a great balance between his character's bad habits and the love that he felt for Milla. The cinematography from Andrew Commis and editing by Stephen Evans really come together to form an amazing technical side of this film. The camera never seemed to stop shaking, even in the story's most tender moments and that choice was such a powerful one. Evans' editing was quite blunt as well, as many of this film's scenes were cut off devastatingly hard and forced the audience to get past their emotions and move on to the next day, just like Milla had to do every day of her life.

Babyteeth takes what audiences already know about the "sick girl romantic drama" genre and makes a lot of incredibly interesting choices to really help differentiate it from the rest. I really enjoyed Murphy's direction and so many of her idiosyncratic storytelling choices that helped to move this story along at an incredible pace. I do wish that some parts of the story could have taken a different route and not ended up so predictable but with a cast this talented and some stellar cinematography, it's very hard to go wrong.

My Rating: ★★★½

The Last of Us: Part II (2020) directed by Neil Druckmann

It's difficult to make a story-driven video game so compelling and actually challenging nowadays, especially given the culture of gaming and its fanbase. However, Neil Druckmann has only proven yet again that he has mastered this art and with his second installment of The Last of Us franchise, he continues this absolutely extraordinary trend. The Last of Us: Part II is an undeniable masterpiece that will, unfortunately, be one of the most divisive pieces of media this year because of the nature of the community that it is set in. I have never considered myself a huge gamer at all but viewing this story as just that, a story, is what makes Druckmann's abilities unmatched. Seeing all of the hate and vitriol online towards this narrative just furthers my point about the gaming community and how frankly, none of them have learned a thing about original storytelling. At its core, this game is about empathy, forgiveness, and the incredibly difficult path it takes to get there; through the wonderful gameplay, unexpected characters, and heartwrenching relationships, any right-minded player will be simultaneously overjoyed and shattered at the path Druckmann decides to take.

Set four years after the iconic events of the first game, Joel (Troy Baker) and Ellie (Ashley Johnson) are living in Jackson, Wyoming at Joel's brother Tommy's (Jeffrey Pierce) massive community and have made a home for themselves. When a mysterious, supposed cult arrives and threatens her newfound way of life, Ellie is forced to go on another mission of vengeance: this time to Seattle and back to the hospital where Joel had previously made the decision to save her life. Neil Druckmann and Halley Gross's script throughout this entire game is the main reason why I was so excited for this to be released. I have been in love with the original The Last of Us since it came out and for seven years now, I have been eagerly awaiting its sequel, despite how perfectly eerie the first installment ended. After all of this waiting, I am so happy that I am one of the apparently few people who genuinely enjoyed this game. I absolutely adored the story throughout this game and despite what many people online are complaining about, I found Ellie's path and the decision to switch between her and the initial antagonist of Abby (Laura Bailey) to be one of the boldest storytelling choices I have ever seen in a game. I'm sure that there are plenty of films that focus on the antagonist and really make its audience question where they stand but this is the first time I have experienced these decisions being placed into our hands through the form of a PlayStation controller. Playing as Abby made me incredibly upset at first, as one is forced to play as the woman who brutally slaughtered Joel in the first few hours of the game. I was so obviously distraught because of this and wanted to kill Abby myself and because I'm just so in love with Ellie as a character but Druckmann knew exactly what he was doing with this brilliant idea. The dichotomy between Ellie and Abby was so prevalent in the beginning but eventually really makes the player wonder who they should be sympathizing with. This was one of the strongest points of this whole game and not only does it make the player truly care for Abby and her struggle with the WLFs but Druckmann and Gross open up an entirely new world of characters in this apocalypse that could be possibly utilized in future games.

The Last of Us: Part II has its ups and downs, making me both joyous and overwhelmingly frustrated at times but all of the emotions that Druckmann puts you through end up being worth it by its utterly cinematic conclusion. Druckmann's direction was absolutely phenomenal and while it does not stick to a typical, chronological timeline (and actually jumps around quite a bit), his use of these flashbacks was highly emotional. Not only do the flashbacks get the viewer to see what led to Joel and Ellie's mild scuffle but they are utilized within this story's emotional beats to really pound home the hurt that is left in one's heart due to the loss of Joel. Both of the leads that we follow throughout the game are developed so damn well and like previously mentioned, the lines really become blurred as to who is in the right. The argument can be made that both are and for wildly different reasons. Following Ellie, players obviously want to root for her. Seeing her grow into her own from the first game is only one of the many things that make her so lovable and to see Joel taken away from her was emotionally shattering. Every smash of the golf club into Joel's skull made me furious and I knew Ellie would stop at nothing until he was avenged. However, Abby's history is fleshed out in such a fantastic way that makes you fall in love with her just as much. Abby's group of friends that all end up being killed by Tommy or Ellie are the main reason that you feel for her wanting to kill Ellie. All of that along with her newfound relationship with Lev (Ian Alexander), a young, ostracized member of a bloody cult known as the Seraphites, and the plot reveal that her father was the doctor who was supposed to operate on Ellie before Joel murdered him were wonderful factors into why I began to love playing as her. The direction from Druckmann was also flawless as he is so good at switching genres. While it could be generally classified as horror, this story is really so much more than that and serves up fantastic drama at its core. However, I would be deep into the heart and soul of a cutscene and then promptly be thrown right back into traversing a dark hotel crawling with infected and would be frighteningly reminded of its horror elements.

While this game's ending also led many people to become frustrated, I was simply blown away by the choices that Druckmann and Gross made for Ellie. She comes to so many realizations throughout this story, especially in its final scenes, and that is what truly makes her one of the greatest and most well-written video game characters of all time. After seeing everything that Abby has done for Lev, Ellie realizes how much pain and history Abby must be carrying with her. Along with the players, she can obviously see the parallels between Abby and Lev with Joel and herself and knows that her relationship with her father figure is not the only one in the world worth fighting for. Because of this, Ellie realizes that she has come to forgive herself, she has come to forgive Joel, and she has come to realize that the only person capable of stopping this cycle of revenge is her. The Last of Us: Part II for its entirety might initially be a game about revenge, but Druckmann and Gross's decision to have Ellie let Abby go at the end was stellar. Ellie killing her after everything that each of them had gone through would only complicate both of their worlds even more. It would abandon what Ellie stands for as a character and she knew that is not what Joel would have ever wanted. It's also what the audience wants and completely expects. The first The Last of Us ends on such an ambiguous note when what the audience really wants is for Joel to tell Ellie about her possibly being the cure and for Ellie to hold his hand and smile as they ride off into the sunset. That is simply not the reality of good storytelling and that tension between the two immaculately crafts their relationship throughout this sequel.

I may not ever review a video game like this again but the cinematic qualities of this really make it out to be one of the best films of 2020. The gameplay mechanics are also a massive part of this. This world was expectedly gorgeous to play through and the overgrown Seattle contained some of the most breathtaking environments in a game I have ever played. There are countless ways to explore the absolutely massive map of this story and I was consistently taken aback by the graphics. The transitions from gameplay to cutscene and back in this game were flawless and I do not think I have ever seen a game appear so impeccable when it comes to incorporating challenging gaming with its heavy story. Many of the little details throughout this game made it out to be incredibly engaging, including the representation of its diverse cast of characters to the little lines thrown in for the sake of world-building. While Ellie herself is gay and accompanied for a good chunk of the story by her girlfriend Dina (Shannon Woodward), there is also a trans character in the game whose story is written beautifully. In the game, Lev is transitioning and this part of his arc is actually a major plot point for Abby and why she gets caught up in her new life. These additions may seem minor but they are huge for a mainstream title like this, especially in the community in which it exists. This game also makes you do things that you are not exactly comfortable with and while the first game dipped its toes into that idea, this sequel dives right in. The Last of Us: Part II shows the humanity of people in both the brightest and darkest ways imaginable because that is what the reality of a zombie apocalypse would be. I actually felt like a bad person at the end of this game because of the endless slaughter of people that I went through during its nearly 30-hour runtime (and giving every minor enemy a name and feelings did not help either). This game is miles more gruesome than the first and actually very hard to watch at times (RIP to the many dogs I had to put down to an early death). Whether you are quietly choking out an enemy or brutally taking down a disgustingly realistic shambler, the death of every enemy feels personal. All of these elements, like many films or other pieces of media, are brought together beautifully by the score from Gustavo Santaolalla. The melancholy plucking of his guitar fires off into this world like Ellie gracefully taking down a clicker and his calm musical skills in the face of the story's intensity provide for one of the best contrasts in recent, musical history.

Taking risks that normal filmmakers would never dream of and not conforming to what audiences expect is just some of the talent that Druckmann has and what better vehicle to exhibit his story than in the unforgettable characters of Ellie and Joel. Despite me never having reviewed a video game before, The Last of Us: Part II is a long-form film in itself and contains some of the greatest and most challenging storytelling that zombie and gaming media have ever seen. I will be replaying this game for years to come because Neil Druckmann has truly crafted a fantastic and worthy sequel that lives up to (and succeeds) the morally ambiguous ending of his first, iconic game.

My Rating: ★★★★★

Casablanca (1942) directed by Michael Curtiz

AFI Top 100: #3

Humphrey Bogart once again exemplifying how to wear a suit and pull someone into a deep kiss makes me really, really wish that he could have been the first James Bond. Along with Bogart's irrefutably charming energy as a leading man, Michael Curtiz's iconic Casablanca contains endlessly good things, including the wonderful direction, cinematography, and general aesthetic. It is very easy to understand why this has become such a beloved piece of film history over the past 80 years and there is really nothing I can say that hasn't been said already, and much better as well. It may just be my personal preference but I was not fully invested in this film from the beginning but just like its legacy since its release, it began to grow on me more and more until I was completely wrapped up in its story until the final shot.

In the midst of French Morocco lies a private nightclub and gambling hall run by Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart). During WWI, he houses people that are waiting to escape to the freedom of America, and when his former lover Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman) arrives, he struggles to decide between his love for her or helping her and her husband Victor Laszlo (Paul Henreid) escape the country. This script, written by Julius J. Epstein, Philip G. Epstein, and Howard Koch is absolutely stellar and I loved the focus on the relationships between the characters. Rick and Ilsa's past relationship fuels the tension throughout this movie and I loved the dichotomy between them when Rick is trying to figure out what he wants to do. The setting and time also add to this stress, as Rick's business of helping refugees continues to add drama to the already interesting plot. Not revolving this film directly around the war or even directly around the romances between characters was the smartest choice that these screenwriters could have chosen. It never felt like a war film but it never felt quite like a romantic story either. This fluid combination made the story really stand on its own as one of the most original blends of writing I have seen from this time. Because of this, it's difficult to really nail one genre onto the head of Casablanca but that fluidity is what makes this story so timeless and compelling. There's just enough type of genre for everyone and while it never attempts to appeal to everyone, it just so happens to be entertaining throughout all of its aspects. Not only has this film influenced so many movies of the time but it has carried on a legacy with it as well. I still see references and homages to this film in current movies and TV shows and I love how these writers were able to craft such a timeless story. From its iconic ending lines to its unforgettable romances, there really is a lot to love about this film.

The performances from Bogart and Bergman throughout this entire film really elevate an otherwise run-of-the-mill story into something spectacular. The emotions and energies that these two bring to their characters of Blaine and Lund were absolutely fantastic and they really made the audience care for these fictional people's love for each other. The romance that their characters shared might be seen today as a bit too cliché and overexaggerated by the actors but for 1942, their chemistry was phenomenal. I loved how they took dialogue that could have been incredibly bland and instead livened it up with their pure talent and they definitely prove to be the strongest parts of the entire film. This film's technicals are also astounding and tell a fantastic story on their own. The editing by Owen Marks is deliberately articulate and I enjoyed every last little choice that he made. Some of the cut-ins and establishing shots felt a little out of place but they all worked together for the narrative very well. The cinematography from Arthur Edeson was the most incredible part, however, and tells its story in such a way that I felt like the camera never stopped moving. The constant motion in his shots was fascinating and gave so much life to the little nightclub that pretty much this entire film is set within. The zooms and pan-ins on characters' faces were awesome and really emphasized their performances as well. Casablanca might be one of the most recognizable classic films ever made and for good reason: I might not be the keenest on its impact but if there's one thing I can recognize, it's how films like this come to be so treasured based on their exciting and timeless stories.

Casablanca might not be the epitome of a noir film but its pieces come together in such a romantic way that it is difficult not to fall in love with. I understand the legacy of this movie and how critical it is to learn about the genre but while I am still not entirely a fan of this type of film, it is obvious how exemplary it has become. I adore and appreciate all of the storytelling choices made throughout this film and while I don't think it hit me as hard as it did audiences in the early 1940s, Rick and Ilsa are truly a couple of characters that I could find myself learning about for hours.

My Rating: ★★★★

The King of Staten Island (2020) directed by Judd Apatow

2020 has really proven itself a strange year when two of my favorite films so far feature a fantastic performance from Pete Davidson. Never would I have guessed that such a warm film to comfort me in these times could come from the minds of the SNL star and Judd Apatow but here we are. The King of Staten Island, based upon Davidson's own tragic upbringing, is an incredible film that touches on so many different themes with every trademark piece of Apatow filmmaking. Despite this movie being a bit overly long with Apatow not knowing where the editing room is, this might be his most mature film to date and is helped by spectacular performances from the entire cast. With everything going on in Davidson's world, a film like this is an absolutely solid jumping-off point into the world of more serious drama and I was genuinely surprised at how much I related to and could feel for his character. This film is definitely a lot stronger than I could have ever expected but one that is welcome nonetheless.

Scott Carlin (Pete Davidson) lives with his mother Margie (Marisa Tomei) and sister Claire (Maude Apatow) and spends his days smoking weed and being generally unproductive. When his mom meets and begins a relationship with a fireman named Ray (Bill Burr), Scott is forced to confront his own past and deal with the complicated relationships in his life, namely the one with his late father who was also a firefighter. This script, written by Apatow, Davidson, and Dave Sirus, is undeniably stellar and I loved every scene throughout this film. While some of them might not have been there to really advance the plot at all, they all seemed so necessary in order to get the audience to understand his world. That's where I think this film succeeds the most: it blends Davidson's expected stoner humor with a dark and surprisingly emotional story that will actually make you feel for him. This film never intended to solve any of Davidson's problems or go straight to the point with its plot, but rather just explored the many aspects of his life that led him to be the way he is now. For people out of touch with current culture, it may be difficult to understand what makes Davidson such a special case in examining his backstory, but I feel like this film was practically therapy for both him and the audience. The script touches on some different themes incredibly well, including confronting your past as it meets your present and the trauma that comes from losing a family member. While he has publicly joked about it, Davidson's father's death during 911 is something that will always define him and I feel like this film did a great job of bringing some light to his darkness. Not only has this movie helped him embrace this part of his life but it can absolutely help anyone struggling with the same. His performance in this film is fantastic as well and despite him just playing himself, there's a comfort from his presence. I appreciate the honesty that defines his brand of comedy and it works incredibly well for this story.

Apatow's films are definitely not for everyone but one thing for certain is that he is able to take a universally known comedian and absolutely destroy their public image for the better. What Apatow did for Adam Sandler in Funny People, he does for Davidson in The King of Staten Island and I loved the direction he took with this story, as generic for him as it might seem. Apatow's storytelling is not the forefront of this film but rather the dark content that Davidson brings with him and I think that it works for both of their advantages very well. My one gripe with this film is its length and how the story meanders around a bit too much but in all honesty, that has become so expected of Apatow that it is now almost likable. Taking time to really build upon the characters in Scott's life and give light to how they all influenced him was a great choice. I loved how so many of the characters were so well-developed and the many subplots going on all contributed to Scott's anxiety and sense of overwhelming pressure. The many supporting performances were incredible and the chemistry that this entire cast shared was palpable. Marisa Tomei, Bill Burr, Maude Apatow, and Bel Powley were all spectacular, and to see their characters accompany Scott on his journey was amazing. Burr, in particular, stood out to me and while I am not too familiar with his comedy, his grounded performance as Tomei's love interest was such a strong point to base this plot around. Scott's struggle to accept his mom dating another firefighter after the pain that he was carrying was perfectly embodied by the persona of Ray and Burr carried that out excellently. There's nothing extraordinary about this film's technicals other than its stellar soundtrack and cute montage sequences but this is the first film from the past couple months that I have been genuinely excited for. This movie might not make its way onto my top favorites of all time but the pure excitement of a new release is a fantastic feeling that I have deeply missed during these times.

The King of Staten Island is one of the best dramedies I have seen as of recent and I was positively taken aback by some of the storytelling choices that were used. Just like with most of Apatow's other films, this one did feel a bit too long but as I had mentioned, it really just becomes part of the charm. Diving deep into Davidson's dark past definitely helped to give audiences a glimpse into his mind and while he has been consistently ragged on recently for things happening to him, it's really great to see him thrive in a story of his own.

My Rating: ★★★★½

Da 5 Bloods (2020) directed by Spike Lee

Spike Lee's films have an incredibly wild and relevant tendency to be released during the middle of something world-changing. His new Netflix film Da 5 Bloods is no exception and while the struggles of black people around the world have been going on for ages, his films have always done a stupendous job of highlighting them in such a stylish manner. This movie is a very solid addition to his politically-fueled filmography and while I did not find it as effective as everyone else apparently has, there is still so much to love about this story. From the performances to Lee's direction to the surprisingly graphic content, every little detail of this movie is brought together in the most "Spike Lee" way that I could have ever imagined. Black lives matter and they always have and the eerie extent to which this film's themes relate to events escalating in just the past few weeks is nothing short of extraordinary.

Four black veterans Paul (Delroy Lindo), Otis (Clarke Peters), Eddie (Norm Lewis), and Melvin (Isiah Whitlock Jr.) reunite to travel back to the old warzone in the Asian country of Vietnam. While they search for the remains of their old squad leader Norman (Chadwick Boseman), they also keep their eyes out for a stash of gold that he had buried as they try to survive the terrain that they had once occupied. If anyone had told me that Spike Lee was going to make a film *slightly* about the Vietnam War, I never would have guessed that it would have been a story like this. Lee's political style is more prevalent than ever throughout this movie and he was really not trying to be subtle at all. He has absolutely no reason to, which is a unique approach, and I have every ounce of respect for him utilizing his platform to bring awareness to people of color through history that have almost been forgotten. The main theme of this film is how the treatment of black people, despite having fought alongside white people for the United States, really has not changed since then. Using his typical real-life footage of organizations and the ideals that they fight for was a fantastic tactic to line up with the narrative of the actual plot. I also really enjoyed, as strange as it sounds, how graphic this film was. Da 5 Bloods is a much more violent and bloody film that I would have expected from Lee but contains everything that I would have expected from a story that he wants to be told. I may have had to look away from the gore at times but the alignment of the violence to really emphasize what happened during the war was fantastic. And it does a great job of making the audience realize that if they can't handle what they are seeing on screen, then they really will not be able to stomach the reality of life for black people.

The performances from the entire main cast were also excellent and in particular, Delroy Lindo stole this film. Playing a black, conservative with clashing political views might have been difficult for him, but he absolutely bodied his characters' devolution. Lee's direction is as solid as it ever has been throughout Da 5 Bloods but at times, it felt like more of a documentary bleeding into a narrative. The constant cutting to images of people or events throughout history that had occurred did not do much but take me out of the story. I know how blatant Lee's style can often be, but because of this creative choice, I consistently felt like a lot of it was forced. Much of the dialogue felt cheesy and some of the characters felt sidelined more than others. I guess this film's usage of footage and real-life stories interspersed into the plot just did not work as well as I would have hoped. I personally find Lee's previous outing BlacKkKlansman to be a much more effective study on how race relations decades ago have not changed, despite what the media and politics might tell you. BlacKkKlansman was much more subtle with its message and because of the gradually building tension, the ending hit that much harder. I was much more invested into the actual plot of Lee's fantastic 2018 film and because of that, the footage of the modern-day KKK and Trump was the greatest smack in the face an audience could get. I never felt that with Da 5 Bloods and instead just felt like I was following around a group of friends that were met with bursts of violence and strange plot decisions. I was also a bit disappointed in Newton Thomas Sigel's cinematography. I don't know if it was just me, but the staging of this film felt really awkward and it was almost shot like a pure, ensemble comedy. I never really connected with his camera work and while there are some intense one-takes that work extremely well, the rest just felt a bit lazy.

Da 5 Bloods may not be my favorite of Lee's movies and not even the most effective but his intentions are quite clear and he obviously sticks with the theme of his life's work. Every film of his that I have seen is so radically different while still feeling that touch of his talent pulsing through every scene. I will always support and watch his incredible films, as his prowess over his career only continues to grow and I believe that he is the greatest filmmaking leader we have today who is willing to push the boundaries of what could be considered taboo to talk about. And all the better for him.

My Rating: ★★★½

The Maltese Falcon (1941) directed by John Huston

AFI Top 100: #31

Discovering the exact point at which genre films began has always been fascinating to me and while there has yet to be one that I dislike, this one came painfully close. John Huston's directorial debut The Maltese Falcon is a solid but quite dull start to the noir genre and one that has almost dissuaded me from seeking out any others. There is a lot to appreciate about the filmmaking that Huston puts into this movie, including his wonderful direction and the performances he gets from the entire cast but I guess I was just not meant to enjoy this type of film. With incredibly quick dialogue and a plot so twisted that it almost becomes unbearable to follow along with, I consistently found my attention waning. Thank God that the way this film was made kept it entertaining or else I might not have been able to make it all the way through. I have so much adoration and respect for Huston for practically kicking off this genre but I feel like there are plenty of much more engaging films worthy of someone's time.

Upon the death of his partner, private eye Sam Spade (Humphrey Bogart) meets with former client Brigid O'Shaughnessy (Mary Astor) to discuss an ongoing case that he feels she might be involved in. As their relationship grows, Spade is brought deeper into a web of crime involving a group of peculiar criminals and a priceless statue of a bird. The most evident thing about this movie that cements it as one of the "greatest" noir films of all time would be its plot. Films of this genre are typically known for the twists and turns that the story takes and this film is no different. My issue with it, however, is how utterly confusing it became. Right off the bat, the audience is thrown into this criminal world without much context, which could be a smart move if executed right, but due to the dialogue, I was completely lost. Perhaps I am just not smart enough to really understand the way that this plot snakes around but I found it to be quite tiresome after a while. The first act sets up the world really well and the third act wraps things up in a decent way, but the plot points riddling the middle hour or so of this film became far too unintelligible. It would definitely take a few, good watches of this film before one is able to really comprehend the actions and motivations behind these characters. Another issue I had, which is one that seems to be prevalent in the noir genre, is how bland and abrupt much of the writing felt. Right after Spade's partner Miles Archer (Jerome Cowan) was killed, he jumps right into action to get justice. His character did not seem to have any emotions about it at all and this lack of sensitivity prevailed throughout the rest of the characters as well. I could not get myself to feel for who was going to jail or who ended up with the falcon because the characters were written so stoically.

Even though the plot was incredibly difficult to get invested in, there are a lot of fantastic aspects of this film that make it so understandably iconic. The Maltese Falcon practically kicked off the noir genre and with its depictions of criminal activity and backstabbing, it was almost unseen in that era of film. Not only does this film have some of the most exciting action I have seen of this time (however rare it was) but it also has some great direction to bring it all together. It's strange to think that this movie was Huston's directorial debut, as his later works seem to be much grander in scale. What I really loved about his direction was how he hit the ground running from scene one. Huston wastes no time establishing anything that could be deemed unnecessary and while this might have been offputting for audiences in the early 1940s, it works very well for the atmosphere of how hectic this story became. One of the other, most impressive things about this film is how it all takes place in the matter of just a few rooms and buildings. This entire film could almost function as a bottle episode of a noir television show because of how little sets and special effects are used. There is something so admirable about making a film this way and still making it decently entertaining. The real standouts of this film, however, are the performances from the cast and how they each made their character so unique. Nobody looks better in an oversized suit and tie than Humphrey Bogart and his character of Spade really brings out that over-emphasization. Bogart is fantastic in this film and is aided by the performance from Mary Astor. The two have wonderful chemistry together and I could really feel the pain that Spade felt having to eventually turn her over. Peter Lorre, Sydney Greenstreet, and Elisha Cook Jr. were all great as well in their supporting roles as the eccentric bad guys and the story definitely would have not have been as chaotic without their talent.

If The Maltese Falcon is any indication of what I can expect from the noir genre, then they can honestly count me out. There is a lot about this film that I genuinely loved and appreciated, including the performances and the unstoppable direction but I just really could not get myself to care about the story. This film might be the most exemplary when it comes to fans of the genre but I do not find it the most accessible for easy viewers. Even though that is not necessarily the point, it was just a bit disappointing what the audience gets in a film with a poster as exciting as the one above.

My Rating: ★★★

Vertigo (1958) directed by Alfred Hitchcock

AFI Top 100: #9

Poor Jimmy Stewart: always getting typecast as a creepy man watching people. I kid, of course, but this idea is one that flows through the heart of Alfred Hitchcock's fantastic Vertigo. This movie is such a landmark in suspenseful filmmaking that, even with its handful of problems, does not fail to live up to its reputation. As the themes of mental health and obsession plague this film like the fear of heights plagues its main character, Hitchcock leads his audience on a very well-crafted story that will undeniably make them shudder. Although it shows its age quite prominently, there is a lot to adore about this psychological murder-mystery, including the performances from its entire cast and the absolutely immaculate cinematography. While this might not be my favorite of his films so far, it is plain to see why it has become such a beloved classic in the world of American film history.

John 'Scottie' Ferguson (Jimmy Stewart) is a police detective suffering from a dreadful case of acrophobia - the fear of heights and falling. He is called out of retirement by an old friend named Gavin Elster (Tom Helmore) to follow Elster's wife Madeleine (Kim Novak) when she begins to not act like herself. Scottie soon finds himself down a rabbit hole of mystery as he forms a strange kind of relationship with Madeleine. This script, written by Alec Coppel and Samuel L. Taylor, contains some of the most interesting and taboo themes that a story written in this time could explore. The film's main focus, of course, being the eventual obsession with Madeleine that Scottie goes through and how well it characterizes them as people. Stewart's character is undoubtedly the most compelling part of this film and to see him devolve into what he was fighting against in the first place was so engaging to watch. Turning this story almost about voyeurism into a story about obsession was a fantastic arc for Scottie to go through and it also helped the psychological aspects as well. The mystery elements of this film were fantastic and the script unravels in such a way to keep you guessing. The infamous plot twist in this film is hidden incredibly well and while it might seem obvious once someone sees it, it was written in such a way that only helps to advance the story. Along with the good parts of the script, the performances from Stewart and Novak were phenomenal. Stewart really is an everyman type of actor, as he can brilliantly embody the happy-go-lucky good guy or the more unlikable lead such as Scottie. His charming charisma was perfect for his character and I loved how he was able to utilize his good manners in such an eerie way. Novak was also extraordinary and even for playing two roles, she was able to contrast them in excellent ways. The cinematography from Robert Burks was absolutely stunning and he embodies every little good thing about a Hitchcock film. He shoots San Francisco in such a way that makes it its own character and his use of closeups and animation was groundbreaking.

However, Vertigo would be infinitely better if not for the treatment of its women characters and how disposable the writers treated them. I completely understand how different of a time the 1950s were than they are today and while this misogynist writing was only a pet peeve at first, it became a bit of a problem. I am certain that Hitchcock's goal was for his audience to root against Stewart's character at the end but the issue was with how overly submissive the women were. Novak's character Madeleine was such a fantastic case study in the beginning but became more of an accessory for the story and hard transitioned into a weaker character. Scottie's best friend and former fiancée Midge (Barbara Bel Geddes) also suffered from this same part of the writing. She was a perfectly good character on her own but was completely tossed aside when she did not live up to the expectations of Scottie with her art. These screenwriters had so many opportunities to include any kind of redemption arc or agency for the women characters but refused to do so and instead focused on Stewart's character the entire time. I also wish that Coppel and Taylor could have utilized Scottie's acrophobic condition much more into the film. While the inclusion of this character trait worked for particular, coincidental scenes, it did not do much in terms of the depression that he went through and eventual obsession, which I can argue was the most interesting part of his story. As for Hitchcock's direction, I also wish that the third act of this movie did not drag on for so long. The first hour and a half are perfectly directed and left me with this hanging sense of dread and wonder of what Scottie was going to encounter next but I found the story after the plot twist to be a bit redundant. Much more editing could have been done to personify Scottie's paranoia and it also would have made the abrupt conclusion of this film much more impactful.

Hitchcock's Vertigo is a wonderful mystery film that accomplishes a plot twist better than filmmakers today could ever dream of. Despite issues with some pivotal characters and some direction that could have used a bit of tightening up, it is impossible to not appreciate the unique style that this revered director brings to this adapted story. Never before have I seen a character on screen so obsessed with building his perfect life despite seeing what happens when you struggle with trauma and a superiority complex but if there was one filmmaker to do it, it would be Hitchcock.

My Rating: ★★★★

Shirley (2020) directed by Josephine Decker

The only way that a biopic about the terrifying mind of horror author Shirley Jackson could work is with a fantastic cast and impeccably gothic direction. There is so much potential to make this story as compelling as one might expect, but unfortunately, for director Josephine Decker's Shirley, it never quite reaches that height. There is a lot to love about this film, including the performances from the entire cast and the cinematography that will leave the audience woozy, but there were also a lot more areas that this film could have covered to make its core plot even more interesting. Because of the influence that Jackson has had in the genre of horror and the familiarity I carry with some of her short stories, I was expecting a much more suiting story for audiences to learn more about the author. Decker plays around with a lot of interesting ideas but her failure to commit left me as unnerved as many of Jackon's stories have for decades.

Eloping to start their new life together, Rose (Odessa Young) and Fred (Logan Lerman) are offered free room and board by college professor Stanley Hyman (Michael Stuhlbarg). The only catch is that Rose must look after and care for Stanley's wife, the famed horror author Shirley Jackson (Elisabeth Moss). However, Rose and Shirley's developing relationship begins to threaten both of their marriages as the line between Shirley's fiction and reality begin to blur. This script, written by Sarah Gubbins and adapted from the novel by Susan Scarf Merrell, has some incredibly interesting things going on with it that, when they arose, made for some fantastic storytelling. The best part of this film were the relationships between the wives Shirley and Rose and their husbands Stanley and Fred. It was absolutely compelling to see how the pairs of people influenced each other and how, despite their best and most vocal efforts, Rose and Fred slowly began to turn into Shirley and Stanley. The impact of the older couple was tremendous and it was so interesting to see how Rose begins crawling down the same path that Shirley had once before. It was a strange idea to focus this film on Jackson's writing of her novel Hangasman but it created some fantastic comparisons from her internal reality of the story to the reality of the marriage between Rose and Fred. The performances from the entire cast were phenomenal, especially from Moss and Young and Stuhlbarg even excels as this supporting character. Moss continues being one of the best working actresses today and Young absolutely surprised me with the amount of depth she brought to this character. They all prove to be a captivating team but the technicals stood out to me just as much. The cinematography from Sturla Brandth Grøvlen was amazing and there were some great, characteristic choices to make the camera unsteady. As well made as this film was, however, I found the direction and rest of the script quite dull and, as Stanley puts it in one scene, derivative.

Calling Shirley a biopic about the famed writer would almost be incorrect but calling Shirley a deliriously informative horror film would be just as incorrect, I fear. This is where the majority of my problems with this film lie: the script is full of incredible themes and relationships to follow along with and see how Jackson came up with some of her most terrifying stories, but it never really went too deep into who she was as a person. This story never did much to explain how Jackson got the way that she was, with her plaguing alcohol and anxiety problems, and because of that, I was never fully invested in her as a human being. Moss does the absolute best she can with making Jackson interesting but I do believe she deserved more of Decker's focus, given that it is supposed to be a biopic on her after all. I was never expecting this film to follow the route of the typical biopic, however, as it definitely had the potential to be something much darker. This film could have greatly benefitted from plunging fully into the gothic horror that its titular character is so known for but it is constantly afraid to take that leap. For one of the gothic genre's greatest authors, I did not feel like Shirley did her much justice. The dream sequences and imagination that Jackson had while writing her novel did not happen enough to justify the prospective horror behind them and because of that, they just eventually felt out of place. And when the shy terror of this movie did attempt to show itself, it only came out in small bursts of Kubrick-esque eerieness, akin to the "crazy writer" stereotype made famous by The Shining. This film might not have ever chosen which side of its genre to stick with and while that works for lots of different movies, it just did not bode well for me. Overall, this film just left me feeling uneasy about everything that happened and now knowing who to empathize with because of its tone; so in that regard, I guess Decker did her job incredibly well.

Shirley is a film that is absolutely held up by its cast and technicals and one that a lot of audiences will still be able to learn from, thankfully. While I think Decker's intentions with this film were clear and she did a decent job with it, there is a lot of improvement that I feel could have gone into this movie to make it a much more engaging character study. Throwing in the additions of Rose and Fred was a smart choice to help personify the effect Jackson had on people, but in the long run, I would have much rather preferred a more concise telling of her life story.

My Rating: ★★½

Bringing Up Baby (1938) directed by Howard Hawks

AFI Top 100: #88

I'm a simple man, really. I like chemistry between attractive actors, charming comedy that will leave you snickering, and an outrageous plot that would have only been deemed acceptable in 1938. Thankfully, Howard Hawks' Bringing Up Baby provides all of these simple pleasures in one of the most entertaining comedies I have seen from this time. I knew that this film was going to be right up my alley from its very first scene and I began to fall in love with each aspect of this movie with every passing minute. Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn absolutely rule this movie from start to finish and while they were the definite stars of this hilarious story, the writing and production design helps to make it that much better. I did not know that it was this easy to fall head over heels for a pair of characters but here we are.

Bewildered yet talented paleontologist David (Cary Grant) is on the verge of securing a $1 million dollar donation for his prehistoric museum from an anonymous donor. When David gets unintentionally entangled in the hectic life of a young woman named Susan (Katharine Hepburn), they end up taking a long list of wild misadventures to get back where they started. The script, written by Dudley Nichols and Hagar Wilde, contains some of the most genuinely sweet and heartwarming comedy of a film from this time that I have yet to see. All of the humor holds up very well and nothing was incredibly offensive, even for a time period that seemed to take liberties with that kind of content. I loved the focus on David and Susan's developing relationship and while it might not have been the intent, this film eventually became a bit of a rom-com. The gags throughout this film are also incredibly quick and dialogue-driven and the wordplay coming from these characters' mouths is just as humorous. The script provides the perfect amount of goofy material and puns for this entire cast to play with and I loved how well they all took it and ran. Most of the written humor throughout this film would not have been delivered as well, if not for the near slapstick qualities that Grant brought to the table. Watching David fumble over himself and his words is quite honestly more entertaining than most of our culture's modern comedy. What I loved most about this story, however, was how these filmmakers were able to take dramatic situations and find comedy in them. Forced scenarios for characters in order to squeeze humor out of them has always been an outdated and lazy tactic and while Bringing Up Baby is indeed ridiculous, it was never too much so. The drama of what could have been a much more serious story is flipped on its head and utilized for comedy incredibly well.

The chemistry between Grant and Hepburn throughout the entirety of this movie is something a casting director, even today, can strive towards. Their relationship over the course of this film was just delicious and these characters were written to complement each other so well. Not only were they both very well-suited to deliver some of the lines with comedic ease, but I genuinely believed how this story made them fall in love. Grant's lovable and goofy persona combined with Hepburn's witty and charming persona made for such a fantastic couple that they could only pull off. Some of the technical pieces that I enjoyed as well were the production design and animal handling. I was surprised at how large-scale the design was, as this film does a great job of building upon the world. The gags that they were able to pull off exclusively due to the massive dinosaur built and the sets that they had to work with were extraordinary. I also appreciated how well-trained and comfortable the cast and crew felt with the literal live leopards and dogs throughout this movie. It was delightful to see how Grant and Hepburn reacted to them and it made their shared scenes even more hilarious. My only gripe with this film, however, would be the direction from Hawks. It was definitely fine but it began to feel very slow, especially in the film's third act. Bringing Up Baby works best when it focuses on the random, unexpected misadventures that Susan and David wind up in and I just think that Hawks started to run out of steam with his humor towards the end. It was just a bit unevenly paced and while it might not have been his tightest story ever, Hawks still manages to do a solid job.

Howard Hawks might be known better for his work on more dramatic pieces of storytelling but this comedy is the perfect example of his many talents. Accompanied by the wonderful performances from the cast and a stellar script to work with, Bringing Up Baby is a comedy that is definitely worth the time to check out. I genuinely loved every moment of this film and there is a lot of substance that modern humor can derive from early stories such as this. Long live goofy, relationship-based comedy and long live the allure of Hepburn and Grant.

My Rating: ★★★★

The High Note (2020) directed by Nisha Ganatra

It's really a shame that films such as these are having to be released on home digital instead of a normal, theatrical run because this would have absolutely killed it. Nisha Ganatra's The High Note is a very entertaining and crowd-pleasing story that contains some great performances and music that are sure to get stuck in people's heads for a while. What really brought me into this film was its cast, as I have been seeing more and more of both Dakota Johnson and Kelvin Harrison Jr. that I have been impressed by recently. They were my central draw-in if I'm being honest and while they did not disappoint, I was quite let down by how run-of-the-mill this entire story was. The writing and direction were some of the most cookie-cutter storytelling I have ever seen and it frankly did not do much for me. However, if there's one issue that this film suffers from more than anything else is not its mediocrity but its lens flares. No more lens flares! The world has progressed past the need for more lens flares!

Maggie Sherwoode (Dakota Johnson) has been world-renowned music icon Grace Davis' (Tracee Ellis Ross) personal assistant for three years but dreams of one day becoming a producer of her own. When Maggie meets a young musician named David (Kelvin Harrison Jr.), she begins a double life of producing for him while not trying to jeopardize her career with Grace. What I really like about this film is how invested in it the entire cast and crew felt. While it might not have been the most original film of all time, in fact far from it, there is an evident amount of hard work that these filmmakers put in. The script by Flora Greeson was solid and I really started to feel for these characters. The journies that they took as characters individually were decently interesting and I really enjoy how she tied everything together in the end. What really brought this together were the performances from Johnson, Ross, and Harrison Jr. They are all such amazingly talented performers and I really enjoyed how dedicated to their roles they seemed to be. This story might be a bit too cheesy for the talent of these actors and actresses but they definitely took what they were given and ran with it. I also adored how these three actually sang all of their own parts throughout the catchy music. I had no clue that either Johnson, Ross, or Harrison Jr. had any musical background but they carried each other to the beat incredibly well. The High Note may not be on its way to winning any Grammys but the music by Amie Doherty was very well-written and fit the tone of the story. My one complaint is that many scenes were overlayed with music that felt very out of touch for the moment and I wish that Ganatra could have brought together those moments in a more concise way.

The most glaring part of this film that I could not help but notice was its sheer mediocrity. I am not complaining about how this film was written or directed but I just think that so many of its choices could have been much stronger. Every scene is filled with some of the most stereotypical dialogue and it got to the point that I could not even feel for these characters as people. Then again, it's a bit difficult to make a musical story like this more compelling than the slew of others. More than anything, this film kinda felt like a Disney Channel original movie but with more "mature" themes. Other things that needed desperate improvement were the direction from Ganatra and the cinematography from Jason McCormick. It seems like Ganatra knows that her audience knows how to tell a story and instead of trying to deviate from that norm to tell something interesting, she instead put all the replaceable pieces together in workable order and called it a day. She has an obvious knack for telling these kinds of feel-good and progressive stories but there was nothing in this film that really warranted too much discussion. Deeper themes are hinted at but little to nothing is done to explore what could have been a much more interesting conversation. A film about racism and misogyny in the music industry would have been stellar and while that is hinted at in one line, nothing else is done about it. Just a simple shift of focus from the dull, central story would have been incredibly beneficial. McCormick is also a fantastic talent, as he even shot my favorite movie of 2019, but this entire film felt very commercialized and plastic. Way too many cheap lens flares, way too many establishing shots, and way too many boring ways of staging these characters. A musical film like A Star is Born took its time to really focus on the cinematography and framing and while that film is nothing like The High Note, it at least had a stronger plan of action for its impactful, visual storytelling.

The High Note definitely did not reach any new heights that it so promised, but it is quite serviceable nonetheless. I would not be opposed to visiting this film again because it really contains everything that makes a musical story of this magnitude so rewatchable but this is just amusing background noise at best. I really appreciated the efforts from Ganatra and the entire cast but I feel like a generic story like this is way below them. I know that there is so much talent behind this entire cast and crew but I just never felt like this was the passion project of anyone involved.

My Rating: ★★★