Watched Arrival again. Probably one of the best sci-fi movies ever made. Perfection from start to finish. Denis Villenueve is something else love that man.
9.5/10
9.5/10
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
Barbie
The real star of the show is Sarah Greenwood set design. Everything from the Barbie houses to the cartoonish landscapes are brilliant and such nice change to the last decade of god awful “gritty realism”.
Gosling and Robbie really carry what are very basic characters with the supporting cast doing some solid work(Given his more recent output it was nice to see Will Ferrell be funny on screen).
As for what the film is trying to say it’s a giant pink mess. Gerwig never comes to any answers on what the doll has meant for women and spends all of the running time stuck between revolution product that changed society and bad unhealthy consumerists role model.
The same can be said of the films feminism which is less theory and more here’s what Gerwig thinks when she just started the second bottle of wine. It ranges from women need to control all government branches because nothing has changed since the 50’s to the patriarchy causes war but is also sometimes cool because looking pretty while bringing the boys their beers can be fun.
Ultimately the film is more than happy to trade any analysis for good jokes. Which works incredibly well along side the colourful ascetics.
It’s a very fun ride and about as good as modern Hollywood can pump out.
9/10
The real star of the show is Sarah Greenwood set design. Everything from the Barbie houses to the cartoonish landscapes are brilliant and such nice change to the last decade of god awful “gritty realism”.
Gosling and Robbie really carry what are very basic characters with the supporting cast doing some solid work(Given his more recent output it was nice to see Will Ferrell be funny on screen).
As for what the film is trying to say it’s a giant pink mess. Gerwig never comes to any answers on what the doll has meant for women and spends all of the running time stuck between revolution product that changed society and bad unhealthy consumerists role model.
The same can be said of the films feminism which is less theory and more here’s what Gerwig thinks when she just started the second bottle of wine. It ranges from women need to control all government branches because nothing has changed since the 50’s to the patriarchy causes war but is also sometimes cool because looking pretty while bringing the boys their beers can be fun.
Ultimately the film is more than happy to trade any analysis for good jokes. Which works incredibly well along side the colourful ascetics.
It’s a very fun ride and about as good as modern Hollywood can pump out.
9/10
I'm so used to reading your reviews as being like "filmed on a potato in Soviet era Czechoslavakia, this silent movie analyses the capitalist west through the eyes of a paraplegic shoe cobbler. Now on Youtube. 10/10."
Tbh when I got home from Barbie I did watch a Soviet animation about a hedgehog from the late 70’s. Just to get back to feeling normal.
I think I've seen that one!
Tbh when I got home from Barbie I did watch a Soviet animation about a hedgehog from the late 70’s. Just to get back to feeling normal.
Don't you think that's deliberate? As is the no clear stance on feminism, just letting people decide what they want to?
no. it’s her own shortcoming combined with mattel being like, no fecking way are you gonna say anything controversial. just stick to girl boss material.
Krusty reaction is perfect.
Possibly although I found the stances to be so extreme that it’s difficult to imagine it’s all deliberately done. Things like -
The brilliant 2001 opening showing Barbie as the destroyer of the old world. Now due to the Barbie toy girls will never again have to only imagine themselves as just mothers. Yet by the end of the film Barbie is having montages of mothers and daughters beamed into her brain.
The film starts off with a almost Judith Butler like worldview. Showing that gender is performative as these dolls have roles placed onto them by a bigger force. It also makes the progressive move of having Hari Nef play a Barbie and never mention that she is a trans woman(Including a scene where Gosling calls her beautiful). Yet the final scene is pure turf fantasy with the movie pretty much saying what makes a woman is between the legs.
Why is everyone having so much fun in the Ken world/the patriarchy compared to the Barbie world ? Gerwig seems to at times believe in the conservative argument that feminism is about nagging men and stopping everyone from having a good time. It’s a very strange choice.
The funniest one is Gerwig repeating The Breakfast Club by taking a mildly depressed opinionated goth school girl and showing the audience the answer to her problems is a pink dress.
In the end deliberate or not I think contradictions do make the film stand out on its own and one of the reason for its success.
The brilliant 2001 opening showing Barbie as the destroyer of the old world. Now due to the Barbie toy girls will never again have to only imagine themselves as just mothers. Yet by the end of the film Barbie is having montages of mothers and daughters beamed into her brain.
The film starts off with a almost Judith Butler like worldview. Showing that gender is performative as these dolls have roles placed onto them by a bigger force. It also makes the progressive move of having Hari Nef play a Barbie and never mention that she is a trans woman(Including a scene where Gosling calls her beautiful). Yet the final scene is pure turf fantasy with the movie pretty much saying what makes a woman is between the legs.
Why is everyone having so much fun in the Ken world/the patriarchy compared to the Barbie world ? Gerwig seems to at times believe in the conservative argument that feminism is about nagging men and stopping everyone from having a good time. It’s a very strange choice.
The funniest one is Gerwig repeating The Breakfast Club by taking a mildly depressed opinionated goth school girl and showing the audience the answer to her problems is a pink dress.
In the end deliberate or not I think contradictions do make the film stand out on its own and one of the reason for its success.
Last edited:
I saw McDonagh's Seven Psychopaths. I really liked it - it's a little like watching a film unfold while the writer is figuring things out and deciding between taking In Bruges to another level or going with something more introspective (towards The Banshees? Still haven't seen Three Billboards, unfortunately), and kinda doing both and neither. If you just want a film that tells it's story and that's it, this makes no sense, but I really liked the 'meta' focus - even if McDonagh himself criticized the movie for that reason afterwards (too little actual story, too much meta). Plus of course McDonagh delivers a film with great acting and shots and all that. A bit madcap, a lot of fun, rather dark, and very introspective - 4/5.
I was also on a transatlantic flight and saw The Way Back (the drama with Ben Affleck), Branagh's Death on the Nile, and The Woman King - which I think I'd all give a 3/5. The Way Back is OK. Not bad, not really good, but it keeps going decently. They played a little with the usual clichés of the genre (for once, the sporting high point seems to, but then actually does not lead to bliss), but it's not quite revolutionary stuff. Death on the Nile is fun if you like extravagant detective period-pieces. It's all a bit of a mess, but I like Branagh's portrayal of Poirot and would be happy if he produced another couple of films like that. It's a lot of murders and drama, but basically feelgood stuff to me. I was a bit disappointed by The Woman King, a film about the Agojie all-women warrior unit of the Dahomey kingdom in Benin in the early 19th century. I think the story was probably Hollywoodized a bit too much, as everything became too slick and straightforward in terms of human relations, drama, and action. Something a bit more gritty and less panegyric might have been more satisfying; but it worked OK as a movie and at least it wasn't some of Hollywood's traditional subject-matter.
I was also on a transatlantic flight and saw The Way Back (the drama with Ben Affleck), Branagh's Death on the Nile, and The Woman King - which I think I'd all give a 3/5. The Way Back is OK. Not bad, not really good, but it keeps going decently. They played a little with the usual clichés of the genre (for once, the sporting high point seems to, but then actually does not lead to bliss), but it's not quite revolutionary stuff. Death on the Nile is fun if you like extravagant detective period-pieces. It's all a bit of a mess, but I like Branagh's portrayal of Poirot and would be happy if he produced another couple of films like that. It's a lot of murders and drama, but basically feelgood stuff to me. I was a bit disappointed by The Woman King, a film about the Agojie all-women warrior unit of the Dahomey kingdom in Benin in the early 19th century. I think the story was probably Hollywoodized a bit too much, as everything became too slick and straightforward in terms of human relations, drama, and action. Something a bit more gritty and less panegyric might have been more satisfying; but it worked OK as a movie and at least it wasn't some of Hollywood's traditional subject-matter.
I think my issue with the film is that it doesn't really fully decide on its approach. I agree that the emptiness and nothingness of space theme is interesting, and it interplays well with questions about the meaning of life and relationships, but... (and here I'll spoiler)The emptiness and nothingness of the film is one of the main themes of the film and it achieves this in two ways. The first is to show the vast nothingness in space, and I think Tommy Lee Jones' character alludes to this when he finally meets Brad Pitt. That there really is nothing, and it's all for nothing. That it's all empty and meaningless, and its empty and meaningless is empty and meaningless (I'll circle back to this later).
The second is meant to mirror the journey we made into South Vietnam in Apocalypse Now (this movie is described by the director as a space Apocalypse Now) . A slow, meandering journey from civilisation into barbarianism (or in this case, a slow meandering journey from population into barren-ness). Where with each passing moment, more and more of what we are used to is stripped back until we're in a more primal state. We see this in the journey Brad Pitt takes alone to Neptune.
So what do we learn from all this...well we see Brad Pitt try and find some hope of a life with meaning...meaning that he imparts. I saw the movie when it first came out so my memory is hazy but I think after he returns back to earth, he reconnects with his ex-wife, and appreciates these things because they mean something to him, even if all there is is nothingness. He, and us as the audience, comes back as a changed man. There's some more ontological and phenomenological themes I remember thinking about when I first saw it, but it's been so long they all escape me. Your post has given me a nudge to maybe watch it again.
...the film's focus on that to me was really sidetracked by the moon and primates episodes. At those points, the movie really rather seemed to adopt a Heart of Darkness storytelling approach, and so that's what I was expecting; only for that aspect to complete fade away once Pitt got on the Cepheus on his way to Neptune. So maybe I should watch it again (I won't, but hypothetically ), knowing that this 'meaning of life vs space exploration' theme is really the movie's core focus, and that everything else is basically distraction required by the Hollywood machine.
For that matter, I also felt the ending was off tonally; too 'feelgood' (insofar as anything is in this kind of film); but then I read that the director had to compromise on his original ending as well to get the film made, and so maybe that's another case of Hollywood changing the film's focus in hopes of attracting more viewers.
), knowing that this 'meaning of life vs space exploration' theme is really the movie's core focus, and that everything else is basically distraction required by the Hollywood machine.For that matter, I also felt the ending was off tonally; too 'feelgood' (insofar as anything is in this kind of film); but then I read that the director had to compromise on his original ending as well to get the film made, and so maybe that's another case of Hollywood changing the film's focus in hopes of attracting more viewers.
Headhunters
I rewatched this film over the weekend and it was just as refreshingly entertaining this time. Good script, casting and acting make this crime/thriller/love story an engaging watch.
I rewatched this film over the weekend and it was just as refreshingly entertaining this time. Good script, casting and acting make this crime/thriller/love story an engaging watch.
I think what happened with regards to the ending is Brad Pitt changed his mind, and his company was paying for it - so he got his way. I think the movie looked great, but once it became clear it was a Heart of Darkness/Apocalypse Now in space idea, I lost interest. To be fair, I absolutely would see (and did) a movie that could be described as Apocalypse Now in space.I think my issue with the film is that it doesn't really fully decide on its approach. I agree that the emptiness and nothingness of space theme is interesting, and it interplays well with questions about the meaning of life and relationships, but... (and here I'll spoiler)
I mean, I get why it's a good film and well done and looks great and all that; but I do think it's too inconsistent narratively / dramatically / in its focus to really work as well as a whole as you are suggesting. (Also in response to posts by @Rooney in Paris, and I think @Wing Attack Plan R.)...the film's focus on that to me was really sidetracked by the moon and primates episodes. At those points, the movie really rather seemed to adopt a Heart of Darkness storytelling approach, and so that's what I was expecting; only for that aspect to complete fade away once Pitt got on the Cepheus on his way to Neptune. So maybe I should watch it again (I won't, but hypothetically
For that matter, I also felt the ending was off tonally; too 'feelgood' (insofar as anything is in this kind of film); but then I read that the director had to compromise on his original ending as well to get the film made, and so maybe that's another case of Hollywood changing the film's focus in hopes of attracting more viewers.
There were so many amazing side characters and set pieces in Apocalypse Now, and he didn’t get anywhere near that in Ad Astra. I found it completely unmoving emotionally, as cold and empty as the space through which he traveled. Also didn’t like the ending, not one little bit.
I liked the world building it tried to do, the Russians vs US bases. And there was a romantic angle that got left on the cutting room floor. It had no emotion.
Last edited:
Just got home from taking my kid to see Barbie. In some ways it exceeded expectations, and others fell short.
I found the movie a lot funnier than my daughter did. Gosling was great. He was the source of all the laughs. He has a couple of songs, like in musical theater, and I think the movie as a whole would have been improved if they had made it more of a Grease-type of musical. Robbie was also good, nice to see her redeem herself after the god-awful mess that was Babylon.
I think the movie ran out of steam in two places.
First, it flirted with being a pink-hued version of the Matrix, and I think it would have been better if they continued that a little further. Second, the extended Rhea Perlman scenes were way too extended. Like a 10 minute scene devoted to Barbie deciding if she wants to be real, in a mermaid/Pinocchio sort of way.
The tone was breezy and playful with a lot of laugh out loud scenes but slowly its energy diminished. They gave up on one core idea and then slid straight into spoof territory.
The Mattel executives were shit. There should have been one or two references to Mattel, but because it became such a lynchpin of the third act, it got tedious. All the execs are like Agent Smith without sunglasses. They are led by Will Ferrell WHO IS ABSOLUTE DOGSHIT. Think of his minor roles in Austin Powers (Mustafa), or Zoolander (Mugato). Those worked. Now imagine the movie basically stopping and you get 40 minutes of a character like that. He’s basically reprising the role he played in Lego Movie, except a lot hammier and a lot longer.
The movie was neither as subversive as it was made out to be, nor as anodyne and crass as feared. The Kens were a variation on the dumb models of Zoolander. But Zoolander was funnier on Its face because creating a story where Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson are the two hottest male models in the world is ridiculous - and that’s what makes it funny. Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling are too perfect. This movie needed some Jack Black or Zach Gallifianakis energy.
It was basically a kids’ movie that parents could also watch, so not quite a takedown of the patriarchy as hoped, but also not really made for 7 year old girls.
I’d give it a B, B-. Maybe 7.5/10.
Last edited:
Apocalypse Now is probably my favorite movie, so I won't argue with that idea - and the idea that Ad Astra seems to be developing into AN in space got me really excited the first half/third. But I wouldn't mind a much slower, existentialist movie either (which is basically the rest of the movie). What put me off was really that it seemed to start out as one and then turned into the other. Plus that ending.
But now I'm totally repeating myself, so I'll stop here.
Apocalypse Now is probably my favorite movie, so I won't argue with that idea - and the idea that Ad Astra seems to be developing into AN in space got me really excited the first half/third. But I wouldn't mind a much slower, existentialist movie either (which is basically the rest of the movie). What put me off was really that it seemed to start out as one and then turned into the other. Plus that ending.
But now I'm totally repeating myself, so I'll stop here.
The last half/third was both slow, pointless and dumb. Hard to remember another film that started with such promise and went downhill so badly (and slowly).
Even mentioning it in the same sentence as Apocalypse Now is blasphemy (it I were to be dramatic).
Apocalypse Now is also top 10 for me. The playmates scene blew my mind when I saw the movie the first time (I was 12 or 13). Incidentally, I worked in the same wing but two offices away from Colleen Camp (she was the playmate in Indian costume). You wouldn’t.Apocalypse Now is probably my favorite movie, so I won't argue with that idea - and the idea that Ad Astra seems to be developing into AN in space got me really excited the first half/third. But I wouldn't mind a much slower, existentialist movie either (which is basically the rest of the movie). What put me off was really that it seemed to start out as one and then turned into the other. Plus that ending.
But now I'm totally repeating myself, so I'll stop here.
Wouldn't what!
AN is also my favourite movie of all time, it's mesmerizing. Ad Astra not living up to that isn't really terrible criticism in my mind, it's pretty much a given, for anything and everything. I still have a lot of time for Ad Astra and for the fact that while it doesn't follow exactly the path of AN, it does its own thing and feels like a surreal journey into nothingness. I also have to say that I'm slightly bias in that I have a lot of love for films about space exploration, as imperfect as they may turn out to be. For a time I was absolutely obsessed with Sunshine, which I still to this day think is a wonderful, underrated film, and holds up super well 16 years after its release.Apocalypse Now is probably my favorite movie, so I won't argue with that idea - and the idea that Ad Astra seems to be developing into AN in space got me really excited the first half/third. But I wouldn't mind a much slower, existentialist movie either (which is basically the rest of the movie). What put me off was really that it seemed to start out as one and then turned into the other. Plus that ending.
But now I'm totally repeating myself, so I'll stop here.
Yeah, I wouldn't really want to compare in terms of quality; I just meant that Ad Astra seemed in the first third to be adopting a HoD/AN-like approach - presumably about how space exploration leads to drama and conflict, and then Pitt's journey to Neptune would lead him past numerous examples of that. I wouldn't assume it would do so and be as good as AN; that's an impossible yardstick. Again, my issue was rather that, after the Mars episode, the movie switches from AN to quiet contemplation. Nothing surreal about it, I would say - although I actually kept thinking/hoping/fearing they might go all Space Odyssey at the very end!
I also saw Asteroid City yesterday. I found it largely impenetrable thematically - I mean, I get the surface themes of emotional maturity, grief, relationships, and the creative process; but why this specific format (a story in a story in a story), and what does each character or even individual events really contribute to those? I can understand some of it of course, but if I assume most of the Anderson's choices for the movie are meaningful (outside his typical style in general), most of that has just completely gone over my head.
That's not ideal, but all the same, I actually loved this. I'm not a big Anderson fan; his work is hit and miss to me. But I thought here he really got everything right - the scenery, the actors, the dialogues: everything fits perfectly while managing to avoid the sense of irritation some of his other films bring about (for me, anyway). This must also be the most ostentatiously deliberate (meticulous, precise, and square) film I've ever seen. I mean, I know e.g. Fincher can demand a zillion takes to get the perfect one, but it doesn't show in the final product, which is a living, breathing thing. In Asteroid City, everything feels almost robotic, and stale - but in a way that I thought really worked.
So, I may have little idea of what I really saw, but on the surface level, I loved it, and I was in awe of Anderson's overall vision for this film. 4/5
That's not ideal, but all the same, I actually loved this. I'm not a big Anderson fan; his work is hit and miss to me. But I thought here he really got everything right - the scenery, the actors, the dialogues: everything fits perfectly while managing to avoid the sense of irritation some of his other films bring about (for me, anyway). This must also be the most ostentatiously deliberate (meticulous, precise, and square) film I've ever seen. I mean, I know e.g. Fincher can demand a zillion takes to get the perfect one, but it doesn't show in the final product, which is a living, breathing thing. In Asteroid City, everything feels almost robotic, and stale - but in a way that I thought really worked.
So, I may have little idea of what I really saw, but on the surface level, I loved it, and I was in awe of Anderson's overall vision for this film. 4/5
Have you watched Silent Running?
I was just checking, and I think so, but probably as a kid because I have a very hazy memory of it. You'd recommend a rewatch? (or maybe actually just a... watch)
I only watched it as a kid too but it really stayed with me (even though my memory is also hazy). Mark Kermode absolutely loves it though. Maintains it’s one of the best Sci Fi films ever made. He even wrote a book about how good it is. So I’d say it’s worth a rewatch if space exploration is your jam.
Oppenheimer was aware this wouldn't be my jam but I still left feeling disappointed. Mega Hollywood mode obviously (which I'm not automatically averse to) but it was a lot - incessant dramatic music and fanatical editing, particularly the first 30 minutes which felt as if someone with uncontrollable ADHD was in charge. 2.5/5
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles a lot of fun and surprisingly actually funny (towards the end the Rogen and Goldberg style humour has been rammed home to the point that it gets annoying). The animation and art style is reet good, as is the soundtrack (loads of crowd pleasing hip-hop - Trent Reznor did the score). Really excellent chemistry with all the actors/characters although Seth Rogen shoe-horning himself in was a minor misfire, despite my love for him. Preferred this over the new Spiderverse. 3.5/5
In the Heat of the Night unbelievably good. Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger put on an absolute masterclass. 4.5/5
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles a lot of fun and surprisingly actually funny (towards the end the Rogen and Goldberg style humour has been rammed home to the point that it gets annoying). The animation and art style is reet good, as is the soundtrack (loads of crowd pleasing hip-hop - Trent Reznor did the score). Really excellent chemistry with all the actors/characters although Seth Rogen shoe-horning himself in was a minor misfire, despite my love for him. Preferred this over the new Spiderverse. 3.5/5
In the Heat of the Night unbelievably good. Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger put on an absolute masterclass. 4.5/5
Last edited:
In The Heat of the Night is a great movie indeed.
TMNT better than Oppenheimer. I've seen it all now.
Turtleheimer is the true double feature for filmgoing purists this summer, don't you know.
I judge films based on what they were attempting so it's not really useful to see it as a direct comparison (having them in the same post helps..!). I don't think TMNT is necessarily a better film, but I enjoyed it more than Oppenheimer because my expectations were different. But I'm not a Nolan fan. Too annoyingly bombastic while trying to be deep. Quite enjoy Memento, though.
Yeh I wanted to watch something else by Steiger but nothing really caught my eye sadly.
Interesting. @entropy has mentioned that film could have been more musical. Definitely for me the high points where the music numbers.
Tbh I didn’t mind the Rhea Perlman scenes as it was nice to see her in a big cultural hit again. Plus while these didn’t work for me it did sort of work for the rest of the audience.
With Farrell my expectations were rock bottom. Was convinced we would get something like Get Hard. So my rating for him is more a relief than anything else.
With the SNL cast it gave me original Ghostbusters vibes(Pretty sure Bill Murray was still a SNL member in the 80’s). With the set design while a Jadorowski style could have been amazing I did love the toy like tone the film took(Along with the cartoon special effects)
What's actually Ferrell's status among comedians? I find him embarrassingly unfunny in most cases (very few exceptions), to the point where seeing him in a movie's cast is a huge red flag for me. But I get the impression he is rated pretty highly, at least in the US. Is that true?
(I have to say I also don't think I've found any SNL sketch I've seen in the past couple of years funny (or almost none). I've only seen a few snippets so nothing representative; but it makes me think there might be an SNL sense of humor that just doesn't work for me.)
Ferrell's as funny as Chris Farley. Both are / were embarrassingly poor comedians. Thankfully Farley hasn’t assaulted our sensibilities for some time now.
You’re not the only person who looks at Ferrell’s work as completely ‘no go’ if he is in a movie / tv show.
I think he peaked at 'if you were a hot dog would you eat yourself?'. That was back in 1997ish.
Elf and Anchorman and .... erm ... that is it.
I actually like Will Ferrell a lot
I'd add Old School and Talladega Nights to this list, plus his legendary performance in Eastbound & Down.
Yeah I think he’s hilarious if you give him the right material to work with, loads of movies and shows he’s had me pissing myself laughing inI actually like Will Ferrell a lot
Step Brothers
talladega nights
Old school
Eastbound and down
he just picks a lot of drivel too.
I actually like Will Ferrell a lot
Same. He’s been in a lot of awful movies but I think he’s one of the funniest actors around. Even in a crap film there’s usually one scene where he’s funny as feck.
My kids watched one where he’s a soccer coach to a kid’s team (can’t remember the name) which was a super lame kids flick but there’s a scene where he gets too competitive (after getting addicted to coffee) that had me in stitches.
EDIT: Kicking and Screaming. It’s on Netflix.