Strong Island (2017)

"Talking head" documentaries can sometimes have a hard time keeping you visually interested in the film. Regardless of how compelling the story is, if there is nothing to watch, the film can become somewhat tedious. That is not the case with Strong Island, director Yance Ford's engrossing documentary about his brother's murder. Ford's strength here is finding a way to fully engross us in watching him and his family members talk to us, to relate their experience of their loss in such an engaging way.

Strong Island is intensely personal on a literal level. It is the story of the killing of a family member. But it is also intensely personal in a cinematic way. Ford puts us right next to him and his family. You get the feeling you are sitting in their home with them, feeling a fraction of their pain, their loss. Ford's talent here is remarkable.

The film is also more than just a personal story. It is the story of being black in America and how violence is directed at black communities. It is the story of the lack of appropriate response to violence by law enforcement, by the justice system. It is both the story of William Ford Jr.  as well as the story of black men in America.

Watching Strong Island one is uniquely honoured to share in this moment in time. It is remarkable.

Strong Island
Writer/director: Yance Ford

The Square (2017)

The Square has been generating a great deal of talk since it's debut and win at Cannes. But much of the buzz is less about the film, and it's meandering yet fascinating plot, or the questions it raises. Much of it is about a somewhat shocking scene, a scene so identified with the film that it is the scene on the poster, a scene peripherally tied to the point of the movie, but far from the main story.

In the infamous scene, shot in a fairly infamous manner, black tie adorned guests in a luxurious ballroom are attacked by an "ape man" (Terry Notary, famous for playing apes in motion capture in films like War for the Planet of the Apes and Kong Skull Island) until the guests finally stop putting up with his attack on a "pretty girl" and attack him back. Supposedly the actors were not aware of what the scene would entail and much of their reactions are real. There is a great deal problematic with this and much of that is exactly what The Square is critiquing. But it is also symbolic of how circular that whole endeavor then becomes.

The Square is a critique of the world of "art," the hypocrisy, the disconnection with real lived experience, the lack of commitment to claimed values. But in so many ways, The Square falls into exactly what it is critiquing. It is scenes like this which make it complicit in that world. It is a rabbit hole which is difficult to deconstruct. I worry it's a bit of a cop out to say "that's the point" or some other such thing. I'm not sure you make your point by becoming the thing you are taking down.

However there is more to The Square than its infamous scenes. Claes Bang's arc is skillfully told and rather enlightening. As his world gets shaken, so does ours. His handsome, good intentioned, horribly flawed curator is perfectly realized. The Square doesn't give him an easy story. It is not straightforward and it's not clear in how we are to react. We don't vilify him or completely sympathize. This aspect of The Square is fascinating.

But the film sometimes loses itself in some strange tangents which feel hard to justify. There is a chimpanzee who lives with Elizabeth's Moss' character for no reason which doesn't feel heavy handed. Their argument over his used condom also feels forced and unreal. These moments which take us out of the film make us question whether the "point" of the film is more important then the story. Cause they don't always feel cohesive.

Yet The Square remains singularly memorable. Its impact is undeniable. And there is much to come back to it for.

The Square
Starring Claes Bang, Elizabeth Moss, Terry Notary, Christopher Læssø, Dominic West
Writer/Director: Ruben Östlund

Maze Runner Death Cure (2018)

In the wake of the success of the Twilights and the Hunger Games, Hollywood was looking for its next big YA series. It failed fairly spectacularly with Divergent. Mortal Instruments went completely unwatched. The Maze Runner has had its tiny niche carved out but certainly didn't make a splash. The Maze Runner movies up to this point have been pretty much just for the fans. Pedantically made and uninspiring with their generically hot young cast of CW show-like actors, nothing about the Maze Runner series stood out and made it special. The series comes to a fitting end therefore with the equally uninspiring Death Cure.

The Maze Runner's story is one of those which sounds like it's all premise ("imagine a teen wakes up in the centre of a maze with no memory and has to figure out how he got there and why?" I imagine the pitch being) that never had a good idea behind it. So they had to patch together the story as it went along and never found anything convincing. It is fairly remarkable how it ends up being both a convoluted mess and a fairly cliched tale at the same time. It pushes no buttons, hits all the traditional marks, and as you leave it's hard to get worked up, emotional, or care much at all.

Death Cure is not terrible and despite it excessive run time doesn't get too boring. It's just not that good. It's so generic and rather meaningless. It's disposable. It's unoriginal.

A great deal of the Hollywood machine is about copying what has worked and trying to recapture it, mostly to fail and make a poor-man's "fill in the blank." Maze Runner has run its course and Hollywood will find the next trend to copy and milk to death.

Maze Runner Death Cure
Starring: Dylan O'Brien, Kaya Scodelario, Ki Hong Lee, Thomas Brodie-Sangster, Natalie Emmanuel, Giancarlo Esposito, Aiden Gillan, Barry Pepper, Will Poulter, Patricia Clarkson
Director: Wes Ball
Writer: T.S. Nowlin

Phantom Thread (2017)

I can't say I've ever enjoyed a Paul Thomas Anderson film and Phantom Thread doesn't break the streak. There are moments in Magnolia I like, some I like quite a bit, but I still found the whole thing to be a bit of a mess. There is something about Daniel Day Lewis' voice, no matter what heavy accent he is affecting, that takes me out of his performances and makes me feel like I'm watching a ham actor. So there are my biases laid out before I discuss their critically acclaimed new drama, showered with awards and accolades, which I pretty much couldn't stand.

Remarkably, I truly appreciated what PTA was doing with his direction on this piece.  I loved the way he shot this film, so structured (perhaps like a good tailor?), to highlight precise emotions. The cinematography is gorgeous (again, like a beautiful gown) all soft light and warm glow. Phantom Thread is a beautiful thing to watch.  Especially when Vicky Krieps is on screen. Her presence is remarkable and her smile is lovely. She inhabits her role here so completely, so perfectly. As does Lesley Manville, often playing opposites of each other, but fitting together so perfectly. Once again I fail to see the charm of DDL but once again I am overruled by everyone else fawning over him.

None of that is what bugged me about Phantom Thread, a completely irrelevant title which nagged me throughout, the whole "thread" reference is wasted and lost on the main story. What truly bothered me was was the story. Billed as a portrait of the struggles of loving an artist, the film is really a romanticization of abuse. Phantom Thread is about a cruel man and the woman who suffers his abuse. When she finally rises to do something about her situation (a moment the film doesn't truly earn but just thrusts on us) I began to have some hope the piece was turning into a dark character study, only to turn her "revenge" turn into playful sparring which woos over the vile man she loves, winning his evil affection and saving the day. Huh? The messaging here is disgusting on so many levels. I was never convinced that there was any merit in her staying with him. The film never convinces me there is a romance to save, just a pattern of dysfunction which the film reads as supporting, not critiquing. 

There is this idea that his cruelty to her, and to others, is somehow a charming effect of his artistry. Bullshit. Then there is the idea that instead of deserving not to be treated cruelly, her role is to be cruel to him back, as if abuse dished out proportionately is sexy. Perhaps if the film had tapped into some sort of sadomasochistic vibe we could have seen some merit to where this relationship was going, but I never felt the film achieved that, instead making this abuse seem romantic, like an ill-fitting dress that looks so good you put up with the discomfort. Yucky. It left a bad taste in my mouth.

The film, which is long and slow paced, ends suddenly on this rather truncated moment of almost absurd humour which feels disjointed from the rest of the film. All of the sudden the film is over and the resolution is this supposedly charming moment of the two laughing together. It feels to be about how charmingly sweet the couples horrible treatment of each other is.

I hear Daniel Day Lewis is retiring. Can't say that makes me sad. What about Paul Thomas Anderson next?

Phantom Thread
Starring: Daniel Day Lewis, Vicky Krieps, Lesley Manville
Writer/Director: Paul Thomas Anderson

Marvel Cinematic Universe (2008 - 2020) REVISIT

I know mine is an unpopular opinion. The whole reason I'm writing this is that it is an unpopular opinion and someone needs to give voice to those who don't agree with the monolith which is love for the Marvel Cinematic Universe or "MCU." It's not that I hate the MCU. There are a few of the films in the series which I enjoy quite a bit. But like most movie series, the MCU truly does not live up to the hype and the blind devotion to it audience grant. More importantly than that I worry the MCU is creating trends I don't like for movies in general. As the series continues to dominate cinemas I worry it, like certain movie series before it, is having a detrimental effect on the landscape of popular cinema. Let me explain.

The MCU is revolutionary in how it is the first real success in building a new sort of a movie franchise, perhaps the only one so far of its kind. Normally, a movie "franchise" is a series of movies following one major story in a "chapter one, chapter two, chapter three..." style order, with each film a few years apart. The MCU blew this up by telling one major story through a number of mostly unrelated stories, produced by different creative teams, often in rapid succession (a few months instead of the 2-3 year wait most movie series take between films), therefore building a huge following that had to take in each piece of the story, even if they were widely varying in tone and quality, all weaving together into one overarching story. Movie franchises have attempted in the past to tell divergent stories all within the same "world" but nothing has ever been on this scale or this level of success... if success is making money which, let's face it, it is.

And for that I give it a great deal of respect. As a film lover the idea of this sort of story telling on this scale is something I can get excited about. But where I struggle with this is how the MCU, like certain franchises before it, such as Transformers, Hunger Games, Saw, and countless others, has, in its quest for world domination, sacrificed quality for quantity (in terms both of proliferation and well as bombast). They have struck a formula and now it's become an assembly line. I get it. It works. They sell tonnes of tickets, tonnes of cross promotional items, etc. Good for them. But what they rarely do is tell stories on a level that I find compelling. And when they do, they tend to back away from those films for a more bankable alternative. And the spill over effect is how it doesn't leave room for other approaches to story telling in popular cinema, both in the race to the bottom trend in Hollywood but also in how the MCU takes up so much space in multiplexes and releases so many films with such little space between them, to allow for alternatives. To make this clear I want to walk through the films of this series to highlight my problems with it.

The series started out strong, on a bit of a gamble, with Iron Man. Robert Downey Jr. amazed, in a way quite similar to the way Johnny Depp shocked us all in the first Pirates movie, and won us all over. Iron Man wasn't a sure thing. It as a lessor known property, RDJ wasn't the box office juggernaut he is now, and director John Favreau was a bit of a roll of the dice. He put together a simple, well structured story which highlighted the likable star/character at the centre of the film. It is quite the masterfully made movie. And it works. It works so well no one questions the "great man" premise behind the story, the idea that one well intention billionaire can save us all if we just give him the freedom to dominate us. Why get into the nitty gritty when we can just cheer at the heroics and laugh as the charming RDJ? Years later, Captain American Civil War would promise to address this moral problem but then it completely dropped the ball (more on that later). Regardless, in the beginning we weren't going to talk about it. At the time The Dark Knight series was already wrestling with the subtext of fascism in stories about powerful men fighting crime, but the MCU would keep it all pretty surface level and focus on the big bucks. And that would influence whether movies would be more likely to take the high road or the low road on issues such as this. 

But if we are being truly honest we know that the MCU wasted all the good will of the first Iron Man with two terrible sequels. This is where the Transformers effect comes in. Instead of developing the character (and I use singular because, come on, there is no other characters of any depth in the Iron Man films besides Tony Stark himself), instead of advancing his character arc beyond the surface, they just make bigger and badder set pieces with more explosions. The films go out of their way to be about more special effects, the kind which just get more and more elaborate to the point they make little sense. Boring stories paired with cheesy villains, Iron Man 2 and 3 are hardly watchable and easily forgettable. But it doesn't matter cause we get a cool end credit scene to tease the next film in the franchise. I honestly do not believe the sequels take Stark on a significant character arc but continue to leave him where he is, like an episode of a standard TV show which always resets so you can just start watching from whenever.

Then there is what I consider to be the highlight of the MCU, the Captain America movies. I still joke that if before this started anyone had told me my favorite MCU films would feature Captain America, I would have laughed in their face. But strong film making in both the classic origin story First Avenger and even more so in Winter Soldier, make the Captain America series the only one worth rewatching of this group. Chris Evans' Cap is a progressive and his movies remain the only ones which wrestle with serious issues in an adult way. You have to go to the Netflix series to find other MCU characters who actually have adult lives and serious plots but we're focusing on the movies here.

Sue me for wanting my comic book characters to be taken seriously and not be played as jokes. Captain America gets to be what I am looking for in "superhero movies." I struggle with Civil War for a few reasons. It feels like it is trying to be both a third movie in the Captain America Trilogy and also a third Avengers movie and not being ideal at being either. Unfortunately it takes the tone of the latter, meaning it waters down the more interesting questions raised in the earlier Captain America films, fills in the gaps will jokes, and falls into that Avengers' fetish of "how many superheroes can we pile on here?" (More on that later.) I can still say the Captain America movies remain my favourite of the MCU.

Moving from the best to the worst, the Thor movies are the asshole of the MCU. The first two were down right terrible. Boring, uninspired, cartoony. I say this as a superfan of director Kenneth Branagh who still couldn't stomach his Thor movie. Plodding, silly, and down right boring, the Thor movies just don't work as anything more than spectacle. They are the opposite of the Captain America films and I don't mean that in a good way in terms of offering a diversity of film making styles. I mean as low in quality, execution, and delivery.

I will also take the unpopular position that Thor Ragnarok is a disappointment because it is basically an admission that the series is shit and the film makers don't even care any more, so instead of treating its characters seriously they just make it a parody of itself, telling fart jokes in a plot that is patched together without any cohesiveness. I was confused at the hiring of comedy director Taika Waititi (whose work I normally love) until I saw the film. He brings his comedic styling to the film and imbues it with a sense of social justice, but his approach is still to just rag on the whole idea of Thor and instead just make what is essentially the silliest movie in the increasingly silly MCU. (Again, more on that later.) I just don't want to be told that comic book characters are not worthy of being treated with respect and the only way to handle them is to be so cool we laugh at them instead.

Don't get me wrong. Superhero movies can be funny. I just want smart funny a la Deadpool not dumb funny like Thor Ragnarok. 

I guess I should talk about the bland, vanilla Incredible Hulk movie. This one off film couldn't even inspire its own mini franchise within the bigger universe. It takes what might be interesting about the Hulk character and instead dulls it down to the simplest of stories. I actually like Ang Lee's flawed but fascinating non-MCU Hulk movie but most people disregard it outright and it isn't technically part of this series so we can ignore it too. The Hulk is a character who has been given short shrift in this universe (like Hawkeye) and his best moments aren't in his own film.

But let's get to the film with ties the whole series together; The Avengers. Joss Whedon pulled off a minor miracle by putting together the first real team up movie of this scale. The Avengers mostly works and ends up being fairly fun as it, like the first Iron Man, sticks to the formula. The film brings the disparate characters together, they inexplicably fight cause that's what Marvel heroes do, then they come together to fight a conveniently dues ex machina threat to humanity's existence. It feels very Marvel, which it should. A tight story, fun banter (shwarma), and well paced set pieces deliver a successful (if rather average) blockbuster type film which doesn't hold for me an emotional punch that would make me love rewatching it. I am impressed with the achievement it is but the entertainment value dries up over time. Sure we have come to learn in the intervening yeas that Whedon is abusive and this film shoot, like many of his others, was toxic leading him to later leave the franchise which is probably best for all. Still, the film remains entirely watchable.

Unfortunately the magic doesn't strike twice. Age of Ultron is overloaded and, like the Iron Man sequels, goes for bigger explosions and throw-in-as-many-characters-as-you-can dynamics which basically keep any of them from having interesting arcs. The X-men films were able to make Quicksilver interesting, how come The Avengers couldn't? Scarlet Witch? Snore. The MCU just can't seem to get female characters right with the sole exception of the Netflix series and Black Panther.

Then comes Captain America Civil War, an Avengers movie in all but name. As I said the film attempts to wrap up the threads form the Captain America series and the Avengers series. This is where things start to get dicey. The balance between telling one over arching story and telling individually sustainable stories begins bleeding together. One begins to have to see every chapter to understand what is going on. This isn't a problem in itself, but in how the sheer size and rapidity of the series becomes more challenging to be manageable.

The film succeeds at somethings and doesn't with others. While Spidey's appearance is a lot of fun, and Blank Panther's arrival is intriguing, the story and the questions it raises are minimalized. There was a chance here to do something interesting and dark, truly wrestling with the struggle between the unchecked reign of powerful beings over the marginalized and the role/power of the state to control their involvement, to explore the conflict when world views collide. But instead Civil War's priority is to be spectacle. It focuses on the match ups, hero on hero smackdowns, sidelining the characters' moral questions which the Captain America series had been building to. 

The best moments of the film appear to be there just to have the heroes fight each other (cause that's what Marvel heroes do) and these are great moments. The film cheats with setting up Iron Man's motivations pathetically with one Alfie Woodard scene, skipping over the kind of character development which would have made the story to come feel more honest and which should have been done in Iron Man 2 and 3 but was not. The chase of the Winter Soldier where we first see Black Panther is awesome and the big Avengers pile on fight is super hero super fun. But by the end when Iron Man takes on Cap and Bucky the fight goes on too long and the reasons for fighting are almost forgotten. It's just about another set piece. And we won't even get into the pathetic villain McGuffin... While other film franchises focused on struggling with darker themes, the MCU, already stuck in its light, crowd-pleasing formula, decided to go another way. The road more taken. The easy path. The one that lead to bigger box office. Congratulations. And it's all kind of the fault of the next film I will talk about...

No one had heard of the Guardians of the Galaxy before 2014. Film maker James Gunn had the chance to do something really fun as there wasn't so much riding on this film. He could just tell an amusing story that didn't need to propel the main series forward. The marketing knew it needed an angle to sell the less known property and they decided to go super tongue-in-cheek. Chris Pratt was up and coming and his shtick fit perfectly for the tone. The folks at Disney were hoping for a minor hit here but what they got was something else.

Guardians of the Galaxy is easily one of the best MCU films. Entertaining, super fun, compelling story and characters. The freedom Gunn had paid off and led to a great summer popcorn flick. It remains one of the only MCU films I enjoy re-watching. But here is where I think the MCU took a turn for the worse. I honestly believe that the surprise mass success of Guardians, paired with the way more serious super-hero films were struggling in other franchises, lead Marvel to course correct towards the irreverent. They were already on the light side so it was a minor correction. Civil War was already going to be a fairly light movie but this, followed by Ant-Man, showed Marvel an easy way to the bank was by making people laugh. It was less risky than making serious films which tackle serious issues which might alienate audiences. Instead just make slick, cool, funny movies and the audiences will line up. And hence we get silly as all fuck Thor Ragnorak, a light and breezy Spider-man, a take nothing too seriously Civil War. The MCU has taken a turn away from the Winter Soldier style movies towards the Guardians style movies. And while I loved Guardians, I want to see comic books movies which are for grown ups too (a la Logan). I doubt we're going to see many in this series any longer.

And Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is pretty much a complete misfire. It loses all the charm and originality of the first film by being (like other MCU sequels) just amping up the big explosions and throwing in more characters because more is better, right? They lean so heavy into the jokes that the whole story feels crafted around getting from one joke to the next. I'd love to see one of their sequels (well, I guess Winter Soldier actually did this), move the story and characters forward and not just be bigger, sillier, and more bombast.


The series then spawned a few side projects and to ensure their success they tie them very closely to the main threads. As per the Ant-Man poster which makes sure you get that it's part of the MCU. The Captain America shield takes up so much of the poster there is hardly any room left for the star of the film, a character and film which is quite fun in its own right. This is similar to what happened with Spider-man Homecoming whose marketing reminded you that Iron Man was pretty much a co-headliner.

And on that note, Robert Downie Jr. Keeps playing Iron Man in everyone else's films and the shtick is getting oooooold.  Remember when I compared Iron Man to Jack Sparrow. Well both have long overstayed their welcome. In Homecoming I truly began to bristle each time he came on the screen. I really enjoyed Ant-Man and Homecoming, but each time they spent time taking us out of their stories so tie us into the larger story I got pulled out of the films. But the series has gotten to the point where it needs to so closely connect all the films and they also begin to all feel like copies of each other. It's that homogenization trend that I spoke of. Does Spider-man need to be a Jr. Iron Man? Iron Man's Robin? In Infinity War Spider-man wears an Iron Man suit. Cause why should the heroes not all be the same? I am looking forward to seeing what the MUC can be now that Robert Downie Jr. has retired this character (although rumors of his and Captain America's return mean we might just continue to get more of the same old same old). It is important to know when to bow out gracefully and Iron Man has long ago reached that point.

Another example of how I feel the MCU is keeping it all too simple for my tastes in Doctor Strange. Often incorrectly described as "mind-bending" I find the well plotted but typical narrative of the film to be anything but mind-bending. It is a very straight forward, logical story with a predictable end goal. This isn't a critique. I enjoyed the film, but it is not a mind-bending movie. I would suggest Primer or Lost Highway if you really want to something to wrap your mind around... hell, Doctor Strange isn't even Inception. Doctor Strange is a decent superhero movie with some lovely special effects. If it makes your mind hurt, I really have to wonder what you would do with a truly abstract film. Also its plot is an Iron Man redux, again we can't seem to do anything in this series without references Stark. 

But that's the point right? The MCU is about playing it safe and giving audiences exactly what they expect and want. That's how you make the big blockbusters. There is a lot good about this franchise. But to be fair a lot of it isn't great. It is just the "thing" right now, the series that everybody goes to see regardless of what they throw at us. Sure movies don't have to be brilliant and there is room for mediocre. More and more they are throwing sub-par films at us knowing we'll just eat it up. They are moving away from making the films feel original or making films which explore interesting ideas, and moving towards silly, light fun, the more irreverent the better. Damn you Star Lord for being so appealing. And as blockbuster films which take risks (a la Ghostbusters, Dawn of Justice, Alien, or The Last Jedi) get savagely pulled apart by audiences unwilling to waiver from formula, the minds behind the mega successful MCU aren't going to be motivated to take those risks. And neither are other studios who will try to reign in film makers with different perspectives.

Fortunately Black Panther seems to be a move in the other direction. As a film which actually struggles with issues of colonialism, gender, and race relations, Panther seems to buck the trend. It was in itself a cultural phenomenon, destroying all our preconceptions about what action movies need to be. The film specifically critiques western culture and still becomes a huge success critically, artistically, and commercially. In the following years the loss of star Chadwick Boseman means that part of the franchise will take a different direction and if any corner of this universe that makes me excited to see what will happen next, its this part. At this point we appear to be getting a female Black Panther and that in itself gives me hope. 

Especially after the franchise's next big character. Captain Marvel just isn't a character that resonates for me and her movie with all it's plot failings and its vanilla structure, mirroring the typical Marvel formula, was a snooze for me. Black Widow had already been established as the franchise's first female character and I had far more invested in her. The fact that she wasn't getting her movie and this character, a truly uninteresting character, was made no sense to me. And her introduction to the rest of the world in Endgame felt so forced in. Captain Marvel suffers the most from having all of the aspects of this franchise that don't work for me. So after we go from Black Panther's groundbreaking direction change, Captain Marvel is a return to the same familiar safe story telling. As was Spider-man Far From Home, which felt less like a Spider-man movie and more like a Nick Fury film. 

And the series' first chapter (I know they've broken it down into three phases already but really this is all one story up to this point) culminates in the double feature Avengers Infinity War and Avengers Endgame. People complain about fan service until they are the fans being serviced. Nothing is more fan service than these movies, needlessly drawn out plot, stories that awkwardly get the characters to the end beats the film s are plotting towards, time travel elements that just don't hold up once you start thinking about them. They are stories designed to feature certain set pieces. And never has there been a more deliberate attempt to fill the screen with so many characters packed into one scene as there is here. 

Perhaps one of the most egregious moments in Endgame is the women characters attack scene. There is nothing in the plot that necessitates it. It is there only for the wow factor. Suddenly in the big battle all the female characters are assembled for no reason and they all jump into an attack. The audience goes crazy and it's over after 5 seconds. Probably what makes this so frustrating for me is that this is what is substituted for actually developing and featuring female characters in the series, instead we get this little moment and we're supposed to be satisfied? Especially after the artistically disastrous Captain Marvel film? 

So I'll say this next. I actually have no issue with fan service. When I am part of that fan base I love it and eat it up as much as the next guy. Giving us what we want to see on screen can be glorious. But I can tell you when you are not part of that fan base it holds nothing for you unless there is more to it. And the final two Avengers films there is just nothing more to it. So for those of us who haven't drunk the Kool-aid we're left with a long, drawn out, rather light and easy action film. I felt like Elaine in that famous Seinfeld episode where she goes to the the English Patient and is screaming "just die already!" 

So here is my problem. If the films were just not to my tastes, I could just ignore them. But they are so dominant right not in pop culture and film culture that their effect bleeds into everything else. They set the bar and they set it low. So when other franchises attempt to go higher, audiences are primed to reject those because they are not what we expect from a "blockbuster." Everything has to fit into this mold or else it gets rejected. This homogenizes popular films and stunts the development of more risky films, more adult films, more divisive films, films that are big budget but don't adhere to the lowest common denominator style. They release them so rapidly there isn't time for other films to find an audience because they are taking up all the screens. I am older and lived through a period when big summer movies were of the Michael Bay, Jerry Bruckheimer variety. I know what sort of effect that has on Hollywood. We've moved past that but now Marvel is dragging us back.

And for more evidence speak to the MCU fans. MCU fans can't seem to enjoy their series without bashing other franchises. Whether it's beating up on the DCEU for not being the same as the MCU or insisting the X-men would be better off as part of the MCU (I strongly disagree, see below) MCU fans seem incapable of enjoying their films without bashing others. This is the exact effect I am concerned about, the idea that all films have to fit into this certain mold to be "good." For those of us who appreciate diversity of films, this is troubling indeed.

But as the juggernaut moves towards its next arc there is something to be hopeful for. Black Panther is truly revolutionary just by existing at all. I am cautiously optimistic about how Disney will incorporate the X-men and Fantastic Four characters into their growing universe (Wandavision is a strong start in this regard). I remain cautious because while the X-men films haven't all been perfect, they have produced some of my favorite comic-book movies, and mostly for reasons which are anathema to the approach of the MCU. But all of that remains to be seen. Will the MCU grow into something more than it currently is as it moves into mixing serial storytelling (on Disney+), or remain the average, lightweight crowdpleaser it has been to this point in time? I have no doubt that audiences will continue flocking to what is safe and accessible and doesn't push any buttons. What I am not sure of is whether this series will begin to offer me anything that I can sink my teeth into.

Weekend (2011) REVISIT

I'm often drawn to stories which explore the impact of a connection between two people cross paths for only a short time. There is something subversive about the idea of a relationship being important when it doesn't last in our society which preferences the "happily ever after" story which is fed to us time and time again. Whether it's the Before Trilogy, the classic Brief Encounter, or the recent charming Before We Go, these films touch something for me about the lost moments, those things that will live in our imaginations. The stories where the ending isn't prepackaged for us, doesn't wrap itself up conveniently.

Weekend is a film I had meant to see for a long time, one of those I had heard about for a while but never got around to seeing. Now that I have it blew away all my expectations. From Andrew Haigh's incredibly honest screenplay (which I hear had plenty of improvised input from the film's leads) to the intimately intricate performances of those leads, everything about how Weekend comes together is masterful. The film ends on a moments of remembrance, and I knew at that moment, I wanted to revisit it all again right away.

Weekend is provocatively honest. It treats sex between two men in a way that feels the most honest I have seen it in a very long time. Perhaps something Call Me By Your Name could have learned from. The sex and physical intimacy of the leads is raw and real, not glossy and easy. It is extremely hot yet grounded in a very tactile reality. But the intimacy is truly achieved through the discussions, conversations, reactions. As each man begins to let his guard down and open himself up to showing a bit of who he is to his new partner, a partner he may never see again, the film becomes more and more fragile, more achingly beautiful.

And its ending is one of those perfect ending moments which satisfies everything that comes before. This is a film I wish I had seen sooner. a film that will haunt me for a while. I'm not sure if writer/director Haigh would be interested in following up with where these characters are at 10 years later (a la Before Sunset) but I would be up for that. I'd also be happy with how this film finishes and always just sitting with the ending forever wondering, relishing that feeling.

Weekend
Starring: Tom Cullen, Chris New
Writer/Director: Andrew Haigh

Hostiles (2017)

The story of Hostiles is fairly straight forward, if brutal. In the war between first nations peoples and the new American, people on both sides did horrible things, suffered terribly, and finding salvation in such a world was practically impossible. This thesis is constructed here in the story of two men, American Captain Joseph Blocker (Christian Bale) and Chief Yellow Hawk (Wes Studi), who, despite hating each other and having both done inhumane things, are forced to stick together to survive, learning about each other and being transformed.

Yes it sounds like a simple premise, but writer/director Scott Cooper's strength comes from telling it so well. Cooper doesn't try anything revolutionary here, instead sticking to laying one piece of the story after the next. Cooper rarely shies away from the brutality in his stories and so we see children being murdered, we see very few of the cast survive until the end. All of this is historically accurate and Cooper doesn't revel in it, instead choosing just to show it to us, as it is an essential party in who these men are and how their journey unfolds.

He also gives a great deal of perspective to Rosamond Pike's Rosalie Quaid, a widow who sees her family murdered in front of her and also ends up on this transformative journey. The entire cast is strong, even those who don't last long, and their road trip is strung together nicely even if it is a bit episodic, and to be honest, a bit foreseeable. It is the film's unblinking determination in its moral and a gorgeously filmed plot which make Hostiles an emotionally powerful film and a completely engaging one.

The downfall comes in how white centred the film is. The story, while trying to bring in the perspectives of the non-Christian Bale characters, never quite gives them the stage as much as it does him. Perhaps this is Cooper's attempt not to tell someone else's story, or perhaps it is due to the intended audience. I might have appreciated if the film found a way to give its audience as much of Yellow Hawk's perspective, as much of Quaid's. What it does do it powerful and effective. I just imagine there is another story here and wouldn't that be fascinating.

Still Cooper's film is beautiful as is the moral of the story. War creates in us the kinds of monsters that appear to be all but irredeemable, until we can find a love and respect to being the healing again.

Hostiles
Starring: Christian Bale, Wes Studi, Rosamond Pike, Adam Beach, Q'orianka Kilcher, Ben Foster, Stephen Lang, Timothee Chalamet
Writer/Director: Scott Cooper

The Commuter (2018)

Making a movie like The Commuter work is tough business. If you've seen the trailers you know there is an intriguing mystery, someone asks Liam Neeson's everyman character to find someone on the commuter train he rides everyday. Heavily implied is there are nefarious intentions behind the scheme. Curiosity peaked. What the heck is going on?

Films like this can be difficult to pull off. The more "interesting" the  mysterious catch 22 our hero finds himself in, the more outrageous the plot often ends up being. Making it believable, that someone would go to the trouble of setting up our everyman the way they are here, that he can accomplish what he needs to, becomes the challenge to make something Hitchcockian like this work.

Unfortunately The Commuter doesn't make it. The problem arises in that the gimmicky plan the plot is based on requires a long series of incredibly timed steps, bordering on coincidences, to pull it off. There is no way a plot like this could happen in real life. And the end goal of the villains? Well that also doesn't realistically warrant the drastic lengths they go to to make it happen. I kept thinking, "why didn't they just do this and save themselves all this risk and hassle?" I guess there would be no movie, but you're asking me to suspend so much disbelief that I can't really hold onto any of the story.

The Commuter's plot is not only farfetched, I might be able to get into a fun farfetched plot, but it is also hopelessly cliched. The everyman's family is held hostage, the "master" villain turns out to be just pretty much who you'd suspect if you've ever seen one of these things before. Then to generate excitement for the audience they throw in over the top action sequences which feel disconnected from the story.

The Commuter is one of those movies that is all interesting idea and poor execution. It devolves at the end into just another excuse for Liam Neeson to do his shtick so if that's something you're really into that might be enough to make it work.

I do have to give props to the film's marketing. They have the best posters.

The Commuter
Starring: Liam Neeson, Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Jonathan Banks, Elizabeth MaGovern, Sam Niel
Director: Jaume Collet-Serra
Writers: Byron Willinger, Philip de Blasi, Ryan Engle

Lucky (2017)

Lucky is one of the best cinematic reflections on the end of a long life I have ever seen. Not only does Harry Dean Stanton give a career topping performance in his final role, but first time director John Carroll Lynch (an actor you'd remember as Francis McDormand's ever caring husband in Fargo) films it with an eye for finding the beautify in the worn down, dried out, sun burnt desert and faces of the cast. Lucky is the word to describe those who see this film.

Lucky is a series of conversations between folks wrestling with the day to day, and many with the end of their days. Stanton's Lucky is a man who knows his time is almost up and is struggling with being generally satisfied, pressured to be wanting more even if he doesn't, and confused about how to feel as he approaches what he believes to be oblivion. It's fascinating to watch him, his gaunt and meticulous face, and he goes forth, managing the relationships around him.

There are a number of moments that had me transfixed. From his discussion about how his own homophobia kept him from appreciating fully the genius of Liberace, to his friend's loss of his tortoise companion, to his moments alone, living fully as he wishes. Lucky will surprise you in just how compelling every small moment is. Lynch (no relation to the other Lynch director who happens to costar in this film) shows an amazing talent which makes me want to see whatever he does next.

I am sure most film actors wish they could have such a movie to end their careers on. As Stanton walks off into the sunset at the end of the film, I couldn't be happier for him and getting to experience this wonderful piece of work.

Lucky
Starring: Harry Dean Stanton, Beth Grant, David Lynch, Ron Livingston, Ed Begley Jr., Tom Skerritt
Director: David Carroll Lynch
Writers: Logan Sparks, Drago Sumanja

Proud Mary (2018)

Ah this movie should have been so much better. Taraji P. Henson has the star quality to carry a movie but Proud Mary feels like they didn't quite have the confidence to pull it off. The short running time and pedestrian direction of Babak Najafi, make Proud Mary amount to a very standard action movie, just another like you've seen so many times before.

Proud Mary's ad campaign tried to sell it as a modern take on Foxy Brown. The opening credit even call to this by giving us a cool 70s vibe. But the movie drops that moments in and becomes bogged down in a rather uninspiring plot that just feels like it's going through its paces. Set pieces are muted and stilted. It felt like a TV show through most of it, not taking advantage of the big screen. And the story gets rushed to meet a very truncated run time, meaning that character development and action get shunted to just make sure we get through the story.

Henson is strong despite the film not going all in. The story itself isn't bad and if the film had taken time to tell its story, build its characters, and set up some great action sequences, I think Proud Mary could have been great fun with an emotional punch. I know this because near the end, the film begins to start to do this. The climactic scene is where  the movie truly comes alive with impressive sequences and some true tension. But by then it's almost too late as the film hasn't gotten its audience to buy into its hero and her plight.

The strong cast saves the film from being a total bore but it's just not what it could have been. It feels like everything we have seen before without the kind of style that Henson could have truly sold.

Proud Mary
Starring: Taraji P. Henson, Billy Brown, Donald Glover, Jahi Di'Allo
Director: Babak Najafi
Writers: John S. Newman, Christian Swegal

The Post (2017)

It's easy to see why critics fall over themselves to praise films like The Post. It is an example of one of America's most accomplished directors showing us all how it's done with his romantic eye and kinetic lens. It has two of America's greatest actors doing what they do best, giving nuanced and gripping performances which hit all the right notes. And it tackles an important, of the moment, story which speaks to essential pieces of western culture. While that's all well and good, sitting back one must admit that The Post is a very entertaining film with an important point, but it's also very on the nose, paint by numbers, and we've seen it all before.

Spielberg, Streep, and Hanks all elevate this into a very good movie and it's worth seeing. It is enjoyable. Really my only complaint is how standard it is. There is nothing remarkable or original about The Post. Everyone does a great job with it. Certainly this film would have suffered under the hands of lessor artists. However that doesn't mean the film isn't by the book. Like much of Spielberg's recent works (Lincoln, War Horse, Bridge of Spies) The Post is what one would expect. It's very good. It shows great craftsmanship. It entertains. But then it falls onto the shelf not to be enjoyed again.

Let me say it again. The Post is very good. Everyone does great things here. There are moments of pure joy in Streep's and Hanks' performances. There are little beautiful moments in Spielberg's filming of this story. And yes, the story is damn important and needs to be told, even if it is with such rose coloured glasses, glossing over the faults of the paper's history just a tad. However one point needs to be made.

Historical films often struggle with how to build momentum, suspense, that edge of your seat quality, when you know the outcome. Even without being page and verse familiar with the Pentagon Papers events, I knew how things would play out. Spielberg never finds a way to make it feel fresh. I have seen certain films which manage to transport me out of my own knowledge of history to be whisked away on an adventure. The Post wasn't one of those films. Spielberg plots out his argument methodically, setting all the pieces in motion fairly pedestrianly. And then the dominoes fall, just as we would expect. 

There is nothing revolutionary about The Post, nothing surprising. It is very good. You should see it. It is worth seeing. As I said it kind of glosses over the complicated history of The Washington Post and other papers like it. At one point Streep gives a throwaway line about "we're not always perfect." Well duh, no one is. But often they have been worse that "not perfect." Still their point about freedom of the press is essentially important.

The Post
Starring: Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, Sarah Paulson, Bob Odenkirk, Bradley Whitford, Bruce Greenwood, David Cross
Director: Steven Spielberg
Writers: Liz Hannah, Josh Singer

Paddington 2 (2018)

Already a huge hit in the UK, Paddington 2 follows the surprisingly good first Paddington film and guess what, it is also a delight. Perhaps not quite as much of a surprise, and I admit much of the charm of the first film was being in shock of how much I was actually enjoying it, Paddington 2 hits all the right notes and entertains completely.

Like a good British comedy should be it is filled with tonnes of physical humour, all of it good natured and clever. The film is shot it lovely sunny tones, even the prison all decked out in pink to match the transformative mood of this bear. That's the point right? Paddington affects those around him and inspires us without being condescendingly sweet. He just feels natural. The combo that writer/director Paul King and star Ben Whishaw have put together here with this classic character truly works and it works again.

Sequels shouldn't just exist to do more of the same. There need a reason to tell more of the story or a new story. Paddington 2 pushes this limit a bit but really not being much more than what came before. So it's a true achievement to make us forget that and make a truly enjoyable return for this charming little bear.

Paddington 2
Starring: Ben Whishaw, Sally Hawkins, Hugh Grant, Brian Gleeson, Hugh Bonneville, Julie Waters, Jim Broadbent, Peter Capaldi, Joanna Lumley
Director: Paul King
Writers: Paul King, Simon Farnaby

The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson (2017)

The title of David France's documentary is a curious one. While the film is about the death of LGBTQ activist Marsha P. Johnson, and it touches on her life to some degree, it is about much more than that. The film doesn't achieve being a portrait of her as a person, but more as a symbol, a historical figure. The film doesn't end up answering many questions about her death or give us a great deal of insight into her life. Instead it is about her affect on the LGBTQ movement and the community.

Presented as a procedural, The Death and life of Marsha P. Johnson focuses on the efforts of another trans-activist, Victoria Cruz, as she attempts to investigate the mystery around Johnson's death. Although that investigation turns up very little, what it does is accomplish what the film is trying to do, give one of the most compelling cases to mainstream American society, about the struggles and persecution of trans people in America. Cruz' journey here is one through the lives of trans people in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, and for many still today. Johnson is the catalyst for that. As she was such a torchbearer in her life, this film helps keep her in the role in death, despite her own community's often short memory.

The film focuses on many who knew Johnson, including another trans activist Sylvia Rivera, whose ups and downs are presented here as caused by the way not only mainstream American society treats queer people but how more mainstream LGB people treat trans people and people of colour. The film's point again, not so much about Johnson specifically, but about the barriers trans people often faced in that era. The film connects this to the present. Johnson's story may not have been made conclusively as a murder, but the film shows us that trans women especially are being killed still to this day and that their killers are not receiving the same punishments that other murderers are.

France centres Johnson in this story, ensuring that she and her legacy are always present. But he doesn't really tell her story. He tells s bigger story, ensuring her role in that, but leaving her a bit to the side. I would like to see a movie about her. This isn't that. That's not a critique, just an observation. This is about the nature of all sorts of violence that trans people faced in America and continue to face today and that is a story worth telling as well.

The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson
Starring: Marsha P. Johnson, Victoria Cruz, Sylvia Rivera
Writer/Director: David France

Jumanji Welcome to the Jungle (2017)

Jumanji's got it's problems. Yes it is a poor-man's Breakfast Club meets low-rent Indiana Jones. The threadbare plot with its greeting card moral rings as false as one would imagine. And the characters (not the "avatars" but the actual characters each set of actors are playing) are the height of cliche. But for some reason the less than necessary Jumanji reboot pulls off a rather entertaining, if completely superficial, adventure.

I give most of this responsibility to the cast, Jack Black and Kevin Hart as the stand outs. They bring a level of charm and wit to an otherwise dismal script and make it hard not to smile along despite the more than obvious flaws. Black manages the most remarkable performance of the bunch (more on that later) and will have the audience in stitches, but impressively not in the way one would imagine.

The thing about Jumanji is that there were so many instances for it to get ugly. The conceit, that teenagers have been pulled into a lifelike jungle adventure game, and into the bodies of characters in that game sets up a rather cliched troupe about a girl in a man's body. See where this is going? There was such potential for the film to milk that in a truly ugly way, a way that plays on mainstream audiences level of discomfort with queer identities. Not only is she in a different gendered body, she also develops feelings for a handsome young pilot (Nick Jonas) while in the the body of middle aged man. I kept waiting for the film to fall to those depths... and it never did. Black keeps the humour very honest and never relies on homophobic or transphobic jokes to sell it. Kudos to him.

Yeah the dialogue is clunky and the story super predictable, but there is a charm to this film to that makes it a relatively enjoyable waste of time. And since it doesn't attempt to get laughs by exploiting vulnerable people, I guess there is nothing wrong with that.

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Jack Black, Kevin Hart, Karen Gillan, Nick Jonas
Director: Jake Kasden
Writers: Chris McKenna, Erik Sommers, Scott Rosenberg, Jeff Pinkner

All the Money in the World (2017)

Ridley Scott is a masterful director. Even when his films are mediocre he finds a way to make the stunning. All the Money in the World had the potential to be something fairly standard and he made it beautiful and compelling and powerful. The script reads like a typical ripped-from-the-headlines procedural, but Scott's eye and deft handling make it something more.

He paints a very ugly portrait of money and wealth. The story keeps returning to the evil nature of money, and his camera keeps finding ways to make it, and all it's corollary paraphernalia (art, luxury items, vehicles) seem cold, classless, depraved. The hunt for money, and hoarding of it, the desperation for it. Scott takes it all and makes it painful to watch.

Scott famously reshot much of the film (much more than I had believed) so that he could replace disgraced actor Kevin Spacey with Christopher Plummer. The reshoots are seemless, again speaking to Scott's proficiency. And after seeing Plummer take on this role, it's hard to imagine anyone else in it. He nails it. His John Paul Getty is a true villain, but not a caricature. He is decisively humanly evil. He is the kind of evil that lives and breathes, is not a cartoon twirling a mustache. He is the natural product of capitalism and greed. And he, like a tragic greek hero, falls at his own hand.

Casting Plummer turns out to be another masterstroke of Scott's. He has put together a very watchable potboiler, beautifully filmed, and gripping. And he gives us enough to think about that the movie sticks with us.

All the Money in the World
Starring: Michelle Williams, Christopher Plummer, Mark Whalberg, Romian Duris, Charlie Plummer
Director: Ridley Scott
Writer: David Scarpa

Wonder Wheel (2017)

Woody Allen's recent films haven't held much for me. That coupled with a greater understanding of Allen's ugly personal failings make me less and less interested in him as an artist. Not since Midnight in Paris have I enjoyed one of his films. I keep coming back to them in the hopes that he might turn out another Husbands and Wives, Hannah and Her Sisters, or other of his greater films. Wonder Wheel isn't bad, especially when compared to other recent Allen films, like Cafe Society, Irrational Man, or Magic in the Moonlight, but I'm not sure it indicates a return to greatness for this questionable artist. What is clearly the bright spot of this film and redeems it at all, is its lead, Kate Winslet.

Wonder Wheel plays more like a stage play than a film. It feels like it is aping Neil Simon or Tennessee Williams. Winslet's Ginny is a great character, like Maggie in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, complicated, deeply flawed, and irresistible. The whole film is an opportunity for a great turn by a wonderful actor and Winslet pulls it off wonderfully. Allen has a history of writing great women characters (Diane Wiest in Bullets Over Broadway, Mira Sorvino in Mighty Aphrodite, Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine, Annie Hall herself), and Ginny is right up there. But, as with most of Allen's great female characters, she is brought to life by an incredible actor like Winslet who make the character be alive. Winslet, who has rather clumsily struggled with justifying working with someone like Allen for the benefit of taking what is obviously an amazing part, wins me over despite my distaste for the film maker.

Part of the problem with the film is that the rest of the characters just don't hold up. It's like all the energy when into creating this one character so none of the rest are fleshed out in a real way. And therefore when Winslet begins to loose it, especially tied to her affection for Timberlake's character, it feels misplaced. I still found her descent fascinating but the story doesn't necessarily support her arc as well as it needed to.

Then again women being let down by the disappointing men around them has a fairly realistic feel to it.

Softly shot and rich with colour, Wonder Wheel is rather a pleasant watch, even beyond Winslet's performance. I completely respect those who can't separate the artist from his work and therefore choose not to see his films. I struggle with that myself, not sure how comfortable I am with seeing his work any longer. For those who are open to seeing, Wonder Wheel isn't a complete disappointment and provides the opportunity to see a great actor do great work.

Wonder Wheel
Starring: Kate Winslet, Justin Timberlake, Juno Temple, Jim Belushi
Writer/Director: Woody Allen

Downsizing (2017)

Often I find writer/director Alexander Payne's films uninspiring.
Sideways, The Descendants, About Schmidt, they are all fine but hold little interest for me. Rarely does Payne bridge the gap between what is interesting for his specific demographic and what is interesting for anyone else. He rarely finds a way to make the woes of unsatisfied privileged late middle aged white men mean as much to the rest of us as they do to those unsatisfied privileged late middle aged white men.

Now he has tackled a "high concept" story. These kinds of movies can go one of two ways. They can tell an interesting story which, through its narrative, explores themes and wrestles with important ideas. Or they can focus so much on the concept, the conceit, that their story is never quite developed enough to be compelling on its own, as a story. So instead of being a told a fascinating tale with a "moral" that we can ruminate on, we are instead lectured to while having to put up with a rather dull story. Unfortunately Downsizing was the latter.

I appreciate what Payne is getting at here. The issues dealt with here are important and the questions it asks are fascinating. But the story of Paul Safranek, Matt Damon's suburbanly bland main character is just not compelling in anyway. The story walks through all the predictable motions; he gets all despondent when things don't go his way, he finds out others (who have been there all along) have it harder, he is inspired to do something to help the less fortunate and become a white savior. Yada yada yada. It's just not a narrative that I can find very compelling.

Payne has made a film which raises interesting issues, but I'm not sure his level of analysis gets to the point where this becomes interesting. He scratches the surface and offers solutions which seem a bit pat, a bit overly simplistic. It's almost like poverty tourism in a way. Anyway, he hasn't managed to make an interesting film or tell a compelling story. It takes more than just an interesting idea to make a good movie. The execution is important too. I was bored enough by the film I couldn't get myself to spend time thinking much about the issues the film raised. 

Downsizing
Starring: Matt Damon, Christoph Waltz, Hong Chau, Kristen Wiig, Jason Sudakis
Director: Alexander Payne
Writers: Alexander Payne, Jim Taylor

Favourite Films of 2017

Not all of my favourite films are “perfect” films. Often they are admittedly imperfect yet hold for me a special quality which brings me back to them time and again, providing me with endless joy despite any so called “flaws.” Sure there may be things to critique about them but that doesn’t matter when I love watching them over and over. Other times my favourite films are movies which I love to pieces and also happen to be technically and artistically exquisite. What is important in either case is they provide that emotional resonance which moves me. Sometimes they may not live up to objective standards despite my undying love for them. I don’t care. For me my favourite movie each year is the one which gave me the greatest film going experience I had that year and the movie I will watch with pure joy over and over for years to come.

2017 was a year that provided for me a copious amount of amazing films and I will look back on this as another stellar year for cinema. Sure there were disappointments but there were so many films I enjoyed quite a bit and many I downright loved. From innovative films like Get Out, I Tonya, Colossal, Ghost Story, Personal Shopper, The Bad Batch, Brawl in Cell Block 99, Loving Vincent, and Patti Cake$; to fun and inspiring blockbusters like War for the Planet of the Apes, Kong Skull Island, It, Lego Batman, John Wick 2, and the lovely Coco; to fascinating dramas like Molly's Game, Gifted, Maudie, My Cousin Rachel, Beatriz at Dinner, Dunkirk, Lady McBeth, Wind River, Lady Bird, Wonder, Wonderstruck, T2 Trainspotting, Gerald’s Game, the Breadwinner, and the beautiful Mudbound; to funny and romantic movies like The Big Sick, Battle of the Sexes, Victoria and Abdul, and A United Kingdom; 2017 was full of great films.

However none of the above made my top favorites of the year.

I even enjoyed some so called “disappointments” such as Justice League, The Dark Tower, Alien Covenant, and Bright. While I found some hits disappointing (to say the least), such as Thor Ragnarok, The Disaster Artist, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, Kingsman the Golden Circle, and Beauty and the Beast, there were still plenty of other movies for me to enjoy. And there was mother! a film which both fascinated me, frustrated me, and bored me simultaneously.  I have to mention Call Me By Your Name, a beautiful and confounding film which will many people loved but I struggled with for a number of reasons, despite loving so much about it. Sometimes it is the films we struggle with which end up meaning the most to us.

Like last year, I had a hard time, no impossible time, narrowing it down to only 10 films, so I’ve expanded that list once again to encompass all the incredible films 2017 had to offer. Despite all of the above fascinating films, here is my list, in no particular order (except my favorite), of imperfect but fabulous films which I love and will enjoy time and time again into the future.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Writer/director Martin McDonough has been a critics darling for a while now but it wasn’t until this quiet, odd masterpiece that I have fully come on board. It completely defied my expectations, is filled with some of my favourite performances of the year, and moved me in ways I did not contemplate. Funny, tragic, and melancholy in the very best way, Three Billboards is the kind of film that gives you so much more than the sum of its parts.

Sleight

A movie that flew under everyone’s radar but when discovered delivers magic (pun intended). This powerful unassuming tale surprised me and made me an immediate fan of writer/director J.D. Dillard who I believe has a very promising career ahead of him, as does magnetic star Jacob Latimore. One of four films on my list made on a shoestring budget showing just what amazing talent can do with very little.

The Florida Project

Sean Baker is the king of the microbudgets. Working with very little he has delivered another powerful story that is easily one of the best made films and most engaging movies of the year. Newcomer Brooklynn Prince is amazing. Willem Defoe does some of his best work ever. Up and comer Bria Vinaite is heartbreaking. This film will rock you right up to its ambiguously tragic/happy ending.

It Comes at Night

A truly terrifying film. Not because of any jumps or gore or violence. It is terrifying because of the way it deconstructs how easily we can become our own worst enemies. It Comes at Night implicates us in the horror while most “scary” films pit us against the “villain.” But this film is villainless and explores how we become horrible to each other. It is truly terrifying.

Good Time

Another film which pounced on me out of no where and destroyed all my expectations. Yes, believe it or not, Robert Pattison gives one of the best performances of the year. This chronicle of one disastrous night is emotionally powerful and charged with adrenalin. It is a beautiful portrait of love.

The Shape of Water

A Norman Rockwell world turned inside out so we can see the beauty of the so called monstrous, The Shape of Water is writer/director Guillermo Del Toro’s most stunning and daring work yet while also being one of his most commercial. A grotesque love story which goes so far as to make us question who we are.

Murder on the Orient Express

Remaking a film which is already a classic is not only a challenge but also a task filled with hubris. Fortunately actor/director Branagh was up to the job. He has delivered a clever reworking of the famous story which explores issues not touched on before. He also delivers one singularly delicious performance which, when paired with his signature operatic directing style, reminded me why I have been a fan of his for so long despite the last decade of disappointments from him. This is his glorious return to the top of my list of film makers to watch. 

 

Baby Driver

Edgar Wright is another of my favourite writer/directors and with Baby Driver he has made another wholly original movie which entertains with pure unadulterated joy. Baby Driver is one of those films which provides us with a completely fleshed out world, showcasing extensively developed characters and creating an entire universe for them to live in. He tells a story that invites us a long for one very well appreciated ride.

Blade Runner 2049

I love it when a sequel can not only live up to its predecessor but enrich it even further. Villeneuve has achieved a minor miracle by making a worthy follow up to one of my favourite films of all time, and making it a strong contender to join that list on its own. A lot has been said of how visually stunning 2049 is and that’s hard to deny, but it is the emotional journey that 2049 takes you on which is the most stunning thing about this brave film which takes the time it needs to truly tells its story properly.

Logan

The X-men franchise at Fox is one I love. It has had it’s ups and downs with Days of Future Past being, for me, the pinnacle of the series, but that is now challenged by this beautiful melancholy noir piece, best watched in Black & White filled with the kinds of performances from Jackman, Stewart, Merchant, Pierce, (and the remarkable debut of Keen) that we have been waiting all series for.

Star Wars The Last Jedi

Dark and difficult for a blockbuster. Writer/director Rian Johnson took a chance by making a film about loss, bad decisions, death, and holding out against the worst odds. Instead of making a crowdpleaser, he took a different path making a challenging and subversive film, and it paid off with one of the deepest tentpoles you’ll come across. Star Wars is the reason I first became a cinephile and The Last Jedi reminds me why.

And on that note, my all time favorite film of 2017:

Wonder Woman

For me this is THE film from 2017 I will watch over and over with a big goofy grin time after time for years to come. It’s a film I have been waiting my whole life for, a film which managed to not only made my dreams come true but exceed all my expectations. Director Patty Jenkins pulled off a miracle with her loving tribute to superhero films, feminism, and the elusive beauty of true peace and justice. I will never tire of the way the stars align to make this movie be the experience it is. While I appreciate that it has received both the critical and popular success it deserves, that has nothing to do with the love for this movie, a film which easily sits among my favorites ever, a film I know I will continue to enjoy for years to come.


So that's it, another great year for film lovers. Here's hoping 2018 can live up to this legacy!