Matty

“What's the point of a fucking window if you can’t jump out of it?” In a different mood, it is possible that I would be bothered by how much the whole thing is done for effect and that it is basically the “Quaalude scene” from The Wolf of Wall Street stretched out to an hour-long runtime, but with its darkness, nihilism and cynical humour, Melrose suited me to a tee and I can’t wait for the next episode. In addition to that, Cumberbatch is in top form, the style precisely corresponds to the protagonist’s level of sobriety and whatever is running through his head, the pace practically never lets up and the musical accompaniment comprises great songs like “Wild World” by Cat Stevens.

In its first twenty-five minutes, Chasing Amy unfolds like a standard romantic comedy: a single guy meets a seemingly single girl, they like each other and start seeing each other. Except this girl isn’t quite so single and other girls are more interested in her than guys are. Or not? ___ Smith does not adhere to genre conventions in hardly any respect. The humour is more profane and the characters are hornier, more adept in pulp culture and not too sure about their sexual orientation. The traditional formula of getting together and breaking up does not lead to a predictable conclusion and, furthermore, is made unique from the beginning by the fact that three interdependent characters are involved. Instead of full-fledged protagonists, however, the film offers only slightly better drawn caricatures, particularly in the case of Alyssa, a sinful, emotionally unstable and somewhat hysterical woman, whom to a significant extent Smith treats as if she is nothing more than the manifestation of every nerd’s dream. As an exemplary manic pixie dream girl, she lacks a more authentic personality, and as a being from another world, her purpose is particularly to force the young, emotionally immature young protagonist to grow up (only once does the film take her perspective, in order to show us how her friends react to the relationship). The director is not interested in her story and does not try to find the logic in her behaviour. ___ Holden’s fear of loss and irreversible life decisions is best expressed by the final confrontation of all three characters. He does not want to lose anyone, nor does he want to see a vacant place on the couch. It is only after this experience that he realises he can’t always have his way, that life, like comic books, is not the fulfilment of his fantasies. So that he can take the next step in his life, he must first kill one of the characters from his comic book and thus symbolically his dependence on his current way of existence. The message that Smith attempts to put across to us certainly contains a bit of truth about life, but it is weightier than his microcosm of comic-book characters and dialogue about pop culture and penetration can bear. ___ Though I perceive realism in the depiction of interpersonal relationships and sensitivity to the characters differently, that doesn’t mean that Chasing Amy is not a first-class comedy. As a matter of fact, it is a very good comedy, thanks especially to how improbably the characters reason and act. Smith knows where to set up the camera and how to place characters in space so that a scene is funny simply due to where someone is sitting/standing and how they look. A static camera and a few alternating environments suffice for most of the film. Without such stylistic mastery and perfect timing (the crash of thunder after the proclamation of “I love you”, a hurtful conversation interspersed with a fight between hockey players), the dialogue that forms the foundation of the film would not stand out. From the midpoint of the film, Holden’s loss of balance and the increasingly dense atmosphere are more frequently expressed using a “nervous” hand-held camera and, at least in terms of the shooting method, the film moves away from the realm of farce with carefully thought-out compositions toward a more realistic recording of spontaneous emotional scenes. Even though the screenplay fails in its effort to reach maturity, I would not hesitate to call Smith’s directing mature. 75%

Though Isle of Dogs does not excel in terms of narrative ingenuity like The Grand Hotel Budapest or of playfulness as in Fantastic Mr. Fox, it is still such an incredibly clever film that you want to bark with joy. ___ Anderson continues to refine his style, which he barely contaminates with special techniques that are atypical of him, such as the use of a handheld camera, zoom and some asymmetrical composition here and there. The enlivening segments are most frequently in the form of a change in the style of animation (for example, the security-camera footage is hand-drawn instead of stop-motion), which relates to the motif of translating meanings between various languages and cultures (for example, some utterances in Japanese are interpreted, while the interpreter’s reactions to what she hears have an alienating effect). ___ In comparison with Anderson’s other films, this one is unexpectedly and fully intentionally ugly (or perhaps better said, “not cute”) – dogs live in a huge dump among rats, are infected with weird diseases and feed on rotting garbage. Sometimes we see close-ups of a chewed-up ear or a bit of mangy fur (and a kidney transplant), but the gloomy greyness very well suits this film that thematicises (more openly than Grand Hotel) the rise of authoritarianism, the inhumanity of humans and impending genocide (or rather its canine equivalent). It is not a film for children, who might be bothered by the slower pace and the minimum of “obvious” gags (the humour is based primarily on the ironic juxtaposition of situations/objects, both infantile and adult). ___ Anderson again presents an isolated world with specific rules, from which the protagonists try to escape using a well-thought-out plan (instead of repeatedly resorting to improvisation). For western viewers, such a peculiar world to which one can flee from the ordinariness of everyday life is not just the island where most of the story takes place, but the whole of Japan, whose iconography, history and gastronomy are tremendously beneficial to Anderson (sumo wrestlers, cherry blossoms, Kabuki theatre, the preparation of sushi, Japanese woodcuts, chanbara movies, taiko drums as the foundation of the soundtrack…). His approach to Japanese culture is not always so sensitive – the resistance against treacherous cat lovers, for example, is led by an American exchange student, who shows more courage and awareness than her Japanese schoolmates – but, at the same time, he does not turn the Land of the Rising Sun into a museum of curiosities for Japanophile fetishists. ___ Like Anderson’s other films, Isle of Dogs has a block structure with a prologue, an introduction and four chapters, each of which has a different objective and all of which are interconnected by the development of relationships between the characters. Compared to the nesting-doll nature of The Grand Budapest Hotel, the narrative is linear with the exception of a few flashbacks, which, together with an excess of explanatory monologues, disrupt the smooth flow of the narrative. Though the film does not unfold as quickly as Anderson’s previous films and can be a bit more challenging for viewers who go to the cinema to have a good time, it is still broadly accessible and easily comprehensible, and actually, yet somewhat paradoxically (with respect to theme and environment), one of Anderson’s more cautious films. 80%

Infinity War combines within itself several excellent (Thor’s main storyline) and a few average aspects of Marvel movies: achievement of the objective is delayed due to the fact that the protagonists repeat the same “mistake” again and again, by means of which the filmmakers incessantly and semi-pathetically tell us what the film’s central idea is, the most robust action happens basically just to cut something epic into the trailer when the directors switch to melodramatic mode (which they do much more frequently than before), some of the dialogue is pretty “cheesy”, the plot becomes more predictable over time, the postponement of the inevitable more tiresome and the narrative more monotonous ... It holds together thanks mainly to the emotionally dense revealing of negative motives, to which the turning points and the division of the narrative into three large plot segments are tied. ___ The movie strives for an uncompromising climax, but the story is not pervaded with a serious approach to nearly the same extent as in Logan’s or Nolan’s Batman films. Priority is still given to entertaining the viewers and not forcing them to think about the sense of violence or the cost of heroism/humanity. I still consider the best Marvel movie to be the second Captain America, whose stylistic purity and narrative compactness that the rather episodic Infinity War can only dream about, given how it leaves some of the characters out of the story for so long that you almost forget they are in the movie and alternates between too many styles (while quite logically not having its own distinctive style like Thor: Ragnarok or Black Panther). ___ This time, Feige and co., like Singer in the markedly more ponderous X-Men: Apocalypse, go to the limit of how many prominent characters can be crammed into a single feature film without it falling apart, while making sure that viewers who are unfamiliar with the previous eighteen films do not get completely lost and that viewers who are well acquainted with the MCU get what they want without their heads exploding. It’s hard for me to imagine where they can go next and it can b probably be considered a great success that the result is not much less consistent and that it generally has a balanced rhythm (due in large part to the rapid and humorous verbal exchanges). ___ Infinity War is not revolutionary and it contains nothing so stimulating (in terms of style, content or narrative) that I want to see it again anytime soon, but for all the money, it is unambiguously a superbly calculated blockbuster that cleverly serves the fans (starting with the entrances of the individual heroes on the scene), making its production circumstances reminiscent of the golden age of the large-scale Hollywood system (a regular stable of stars + an unchanging circle of collaborators). Furthermore, it can be unsettling for the more sensitive viewers who have become a bit attached to the Marvel superheroes over the years (I myself had a rather unpleasant feeling of helplessness and anxiety during the credits and for a moment afterwards). 80%

A Quiet Place is primarily an outstanding psychological drama about loss (of a loved one, one’s own voice) and the impossibility of letting go of the attendant pain (which, however, can be turned into strength, an idea on which the film’s climax is partly based). The characters have to keep all of their emotions bottled up inside, which only deepens the trauma. Their resources and manifestations of joy, which would bring them relief, are severely limited. Playing the game on which today’s society is based (because we do not want only to consume, but also to have fun) means risking one’s life. In this respect, the film is the antithesis of the dystopia of Ready Player One, which depicts a society focused solely on playing a game. The initial tragedy occurs because of a toy, the next one nearly happens while playing a board game (typically, that game is Monopoly – this is the only way that the characters can treat themselves to the pleasure of shopping). Partners can dance only while wearing headphones; otherwise the use of the technologies on which we are so dependent today is practically out of the question. Thanks to the superb actors, information conveyed in the mise-en-scène and the way the characters react in certain situations, we always understand what the protagonists are going through and what they are doing, even though there is almost no dialogue in the film. It is in this aspect that I see the film’s main element of exceptionalism. It shows what many directors have learned in (not quite) a hundred years of cinematic sound design – how a psychologically layered story can be told without words. Due to the focus on the characters, the slower middle section of the film, the woman’s decision to conceive another child (to fill the void) and some slightly sentimental moments (which, however, are disturbing only when applying a purely horror reading) find their justification. As a horror movie, Krasinski’s film is brilliantly directed and hardly allows us to breathe, even though he uses relatively well-known tricks and rarely gathers the courage to be truly silent. Not only with its content, but also its style, A Quiet Place essentially confirms that American filmmakers fear few things more than absolute silence. The film is thus not remarkable so much because of its work with silence than as a clear connection between the basic conditions for survival in the given fictional world (on must not make any louder sounds) and what the characters are going through. The fact that the film ends in the best way (without eliciting the feeling that something essential remains unexplained) compelled me to add a fifth star to the obvious four. 90%

“Thank you for coming back to me.” Lean’s thoroughly British romance is the right opposite of the trashy melodrama Flames of Passion, which the protagonists disgustedly watch in a cinema (and don’t even stay until the end). The restrained style, which employs long shots, slow dissolves and minimum details, reflects the nature of the relationship between Laura and Alec. From the opening minutes of the film, society (of others) prevents them from finding happiness. Because they are bound by conventions and Christian morality, they cannot fully give themselves over to their passion (for which they seek substitutes in cheap films and pastries, which Alec refers to as “one of my earliest passions”). As an (un)happily married wife and mother of two, Laura is condemned to live through (and for) others rather than for herself and to feel guilty for something that she has not yet decided to do. Until she met Alec, she had never had a moment for herself; no one was interested in her desires and needs. Thanks to her new friend, she again learns to share (joy and laughter) and replaces subordination with the balance of a relationship. Despite its conservative tone, the film is relatively modern, as it boldly takes feminine subjectivity into consideration (both visually and with sound). Thrown into disarray by the affair, which peculiarly began at a place of perpetual comings and goings and fleeting encounters, Laura realises that her whole life does not belong to her husband. When she speaks to him with her inner voice, she is also addressing her thoughts to the viewer, from whom, as from her husband, she requests understanding and forgiveness. A characteristic aspect of her commentary is the attempt to rationalise the decisions that she has made and to make sense of her experience by retelling it. Thanks to the retrospective narrative, the film manages throughout its runtime to keep a slight distance from the events (for example, the first kiss is filmed in its entirety), which is balanced, however, by subjective scenes of intense emotional motives (the expressive tilt of the camera in the conclusion). Together with the sparing use of classical music (Rachmaninov) and the interspersion of the main storyline with comical episodes with strong supporting characters, the tension between maintaining distance and giving in to emotions helps to superbly bring rhythm to the film, which is not only short, but is also fast-paced, despite being part of a genre with tendencies toward immoderation. The length of the film corresponds to its original title and also reflects the brief time that Laura and Alec spent together. If you do not wish that the film would not have to end and that they could be together longer, you can congratulate yourself on the fact that you were not touched by one of the purest (in terms of genre) and narratively most brilliant romantic films of all time. 85%

SPOILERS AHEAD (though most of the essential bits are revealed in the trailer). Revenge is a stylish and intense ecofeminist rape-revenge flick whose protagonist could be the younger sister of Furiosa from the last Mad Max (rather than the new Lara Croft, who isn’t nearly so cool). Coralie Fargeat does not deny her heroine the right to behave provocatively, but she definitely does not claim to be responsible for the rape either (as indicated by the person from whom she would expect support and who turns out to be the cruellest bastard). Fault lies solely with the frustration of a man who needs to assert his dominance. The only witness to the crime, which basically takes place in the environment of home, pretends not to see or hear anything. Similarly, all evidence of the rape is subsequently destroyed, as if it had never happened, which is still rather characteristic of society’s approach to sex crimes. ___ In any case, the extreme experience initiates the woman’s transformation from a sexy object into an agent. (In the conclusion, particularly during an extraordinarily long one-shot walk through the house, when together with the hitherto fearless male antagonist we are afraid of what might be lying in wait around the corner, the object becomes a [completely nude] man.) During most of the film, however, she acts frightened, occasionally bursting into tears and the recoil of first rifle shot throws her back several feet. In short, she is not an inhumanly infallible and cold-blooded murderer, even after she becomes an avenger. At the same time, however, she can bear more than an ordinary mortal, thanks to which she can properly exact bloody revenge. ___ The varying degree of her vulnerability corresponds to the needs of the narrative rather than to reality. Nit-pickers who do not recognise the ontological peculiarity of the fictional world may object that if a twenty-six-year-old woman loses so much blood, she is done for (not to mention the impossibility of her other actions), but dealing with realism in a deliberately exaggerated exploitation flick (offering, among other things, a splatter homage to the scene in Die Hard in which McClane pulls glass shards out of his foot) seems rather misguided to me. Similarly out of line are criticisms about the predictability of the story, which is basically summarised by its one-word title. What happens isn’t important, because we already know what happens (and the director knows that we know and therefore constantly plays with conventions and the viewers’ expectations); what’s important is how it looks. ___ Revenge is one of those films in which even a shot of a corpse with its eyes gouged out floating on the surface looks “nice” and you want to enjoy it for a moment (which you can do thanks also to the unusually long duration of the shots). Subjective perspectives, large details in addition to large units, the visceral effect enhancing amplified sounds, ironic cuts from one event to another... Besides some extreme European and Belgian horror movies, the film is artistically reminiscent of the work of Tom Ford or Nicolas Winding Refn and, furthermore, has a perfect soundtrack from the person who created the no less wonderful music for the remake of Maniac. Therefore, it is a pleasure to just watch and listen to it. ___ If that’s not enough for you, you can consider the film’s biblical symbolism (the bitten apple of sin, the protagonist’s rebirth begins with a burning bush and she blinds her first victim) and the conflict between technology and nature. On the one hand, there are men with their cars, walkie-talkies and guns who rape women and hunt animals (and drown spiders in their urine). They subjugate the world around them and destroy it. On the other hand, the woman is gradually helped by fire, water and the “Indian drug” peyote, under the influence of which she brands herself on her abdomen with an eagle from a beer can in one of the film’s wildest scenes, which stylishly begins with Mozart. The technology repeatedly lets her down (she runs out of gas on the four-wheeler, the first rifle is not loaded, the second sends her flying). She does not conquer the landscape, but rather blends into it and draws from it the strength that had been taken from her by men. ___ If you do not approach Revenge as a silly B-movie from the outset, you will find that it is a relatively clever film from a director who learned from (especially) European exploitation flicks and is not afraid to touch a raw nerve. I’m quite curious as to what she will make next. I highly recommend Revenge, especially to horror fans. Viewers who have the compulsive need to express their alleged intellectual superiority by laughing out loud even during scenes that are supposed to be serious would be well advised to stay home. 80%

“Fuck me gently with a chainsaw.”  Heathers sometimes unintentionally finds itself beyond the boundaries of a lot of black comedy, which today, after numerous school massacres, enables us to see the film as a somewhat stylised, yet otherwise accurate depiction of the micro-society of high school. It is a case of sociological research, one of many in fact, from which no one has learned. 75%

Phoenix, the sixth collaboration of Christian Petzold and Nina Hoss, revives the legacy of so-called “ruin films” (Trümmmerfilmen) such as Murderers Among Us and Germany, Year Zero while also enriching it with elements of Hitchcockian thrillers. In an attempt to overcome the horrors of war without erasing six years of history, Petzold decided to present the story of the Jewish singer Nelly. The first transformation that awaits her following her return has only an aesthetic nature. Though she was able to get her original face back thanks to plastic surgery, her husband does not recognise her. For reasons that will be made clear to us later through the inventive doling out of information, she refuses to admit that she was able to survive. Just like Scottie in Hitchcock’s Vertigo, the film’s main male protagonist begins to “create” his fated wife. He is not aware that he has had her right in front of him the whole time. Nelly obediently fulfils her husband’s wishes, she learns to be herself again and hopes that in the end, with the right dress, hairstyle and walk, she will be accepted in the role that belongs to her. ___ The film’s plot has a slight whiff of trash. However, Petzold resists the temptations of the genre and, through the gradual development of a complex portrait of the central heroine, lays the groundwork for the emotionally devastating climax. He is not interested in shocking plot twists and, with his strictly linear narrative, he does not want to keep us waiting for Johnny to finally recognise his wife. The tension in the film is more subtle in nature and is derived from issues pertaining to shared responsibility for the history of the nation. ___ Viewers who are familiar with German cinema will be pleased by the fact that Petzold intersperses his multi-layered study of the human (in)ability to accept the past with references to Weimar culture, while the stylisation of the mise-en-scène is reminiscent of the style found in film noir. Alongside the identity of one woman and one nation, a film style created by post-war traumas arises us before us like a phoenix from the ashes. ___ Petzold’s outwardly calm and inconspicuous film is a masterfully structured drama that balances a thematically rich web of metaphors with a gripping narrative without the aid of formal or content-related clichés. 85%

The absence of initiation ceremonies is stated as one of the causes of the growing infantilism of post-industrial society. In the Western world, there is no crucial event that would distinctly separate the childhood phase of one’s life from the adulthood phase. The French drama Eat Your Bones conversely introduces us to one of the last surviving communities that do not underestimate the importance of initiation rituals and continue to hold out against the formative influence of civilisation. With all of the risks associated with such traditionalism. ___ The plot takes on its specific outline only gradually. During the first few minutes, we watch a single large family, whose members spend time hunting rabbits and stealing gasoline, without being incorporated into the story. From the dialogue, it gradually becomes apparent who carries what sort of past with them and the fragmented narrative begins to coalesce around the central heist, which, however, does not comprise the dramatic core of the film. The crime serves only to accelerate Jason’s process of growing up, which we watch almost in real time following the mosaic-like prologue. It is clear that the testosterone-fuelled night-time ride will be more important to the group of volunteer social renegades than their destination…or maybe not. ___ A heightened willingness to take risks is only one of the qualities that Hue takes note of in his study of male togetherness. The film’s protagonists are reminiscent of western cowboys with respect to the importance that they attached to totally unrestricted freedom. If the boy’s devout mother represents civilisation, Jason’s three cronies represent the wilderness. He gives a young associate lessons on survival in a world clearly divided into hunters and prey, while Frank would rather die than become a man who respects defined boundaries. For him, the highest value lies in not allowing himself to be constrained. ___ The open conclusion of the film indicates that the family heritage does not necessarily perish if it is enriched with new values. The ambivalence of opinion corresponds to the docu-realistic shooting style. The camera, clinging to the actors’ bodies, highlights the motif of intermale intimacy and close emotional ties, while also contributing to the intense feeling that we are witnesses to events that are happening as we watch. 65%