I haven’t seen it, but it sure sounds like something that Dr Gyllenhaal stitched together from the dead corpses of other genre movies. Is it intelligent? Ugly? Most of all, is it alive? Alive, I tell you!
I enjoyed the movie storytelling: The bride of Frankestein meets Bonnie and Clyde, with a good dose of black humor. + I loved the movie's feminist tone.
I saw this today mainly because I wanted to get out of the house and it was this, a second viewing of Wuthering Heights, or some animated and horror films I care less than zero about at my local cinema. This one at least had the potential to be visually unusual, which it was and that was nice but not enough to make it rise above "interesting" in the end. In that vein, I've got two main pointers for anyone telling stories in the future:
1) 'Show don't tell' is true for a reason.
2) Narrative shrapnel is not the same as having an actual plot conflict.
I think I could have seen past all the meta non-sense if the story had fixed on an actual story it wanted to tell. As a woman, the way Frankenstein just created a mate because he was lonely and no one could love a monster like him hit me hard, and the way this was treated as something he didn't even need to grow past left me deeply uncomfortable. At the risk of reading too much into it, it felt like it was up to Ida to come to terms to who she was and just accept her fate as that help-mate. That mobster could have been an interesting villain, I guess, as an exemplar of how men do women dirty, or the powerful those who lack power. But here we knock up against my first maxim up top.
It's a shame because there's actually a really interesting conflict staring us right in the face: what does chaos cost us, and what are the other options when the established order doesn't make space for us? If this is where chaos lands us I don't want it, though I suspect I'm one of the few these days.
Also, this is the second movie in a row that's just done a classic gothic novel very, very wrong. Filmmakers shouldn't get to play with them until they can prove they'll stop breaking all my favorite toys. At least that's how it would work in a better world
I had decided to give this movie a miss but now, after reading about Det. Jake Wiles I am tempted to tune in to check out his sins. Or his atonement. Whichever. Cheers, Sonny!
My wife really wants to see this movie. From your review it sounds like something she'd hate. My dilemma now is, do I show her your review or just watch it with her and see wait for the fireworks of her discontent.
I was holding my breath by the end of this! A review that took me on a ride and ultimately convinced me I need to see the film. The trailer also left me breathless, particularly when the Bride says something like, ‘the dead have something to say.’ I’m more curious about it after reading you’re looking forward to reading essays about the film, sounds like an interesting discourse is ahead!
Confession: I have only seen Sonny on podcasts and enjoyed them very much.
In all my many decades on earth, I have never found movie or book reviews to be very good - or interesting. Then I read this one. Good god that was fabulous.
I agree more with NYT review. I was entertained on many levels, including the camp, and the me,too.
Enjoyed immensely. Cohered where it was meant to, and when it didn’t ,the willing suspension was so in play, I bought the ticket and I was riding. The maniacal uninhibited of bacchae was fun, too. Christian Bale drew me in immediately.
In film school, I remember a lecture from a producer who said, "It doesn't matter if you have the best actors, directors, cinematographers and effects team in the world - you can't make a good movie with a bad script."
The only counter-argument I've ever come up with is 'Pacific Rim', but aside from that he's dead right.
"Can Det. Jake Wiles (Peter Sarsgaard) atone for his sins, about which we care nothing at all since they seem to have been invented halfway through the production of the film and parachuted in like a care package floating onto a crater-filled battlefield? Who can say."
Sonny, this is completely irrelevant to this review, but how the hell do you have Man of Steel rated over the newest Superman movie on letterboxed? Insane take.
Because THE MAN OF STEEL is great and SUPERMAN is fine. This isn’t even close to my hottest Superman take though. Which is this: MAN OF STEEL is also better than any of Reeve’s Superman movies.
I especially agree with the point of interesting =\= good. Have a buddy who’s a real pretentious film lover that’s always on about defending movies that are bad because they’re interesting.
I do agree in that I’d rather watch an interesting bad movie vs a boring bad movie, but being interesting only gets you so far. You have to, like, be a good movie.
It's a trap that critics fall into sometimes because we see A LOT of movies, particularly critics working at daily papers who have to see everything. I definitely felt that burnout and I only worked as a daily critic for about 20 months. And I still, honestly, prefer a wild, messy failure to boring competence. But that's just because big swings are easier to write about than a movie that boils down to "eh, it was fine," haha.
I am a big Jesse fan and will watch her in everything she does. Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian loved this movie. I look forward to watching with both your review and The Guardian's in mind. Thanks Sonny!
First, let me note that there were a couple laugh out loud funny lines. This was a fun read.
My kid will make me watch this when it streams, so eventually I will have to confront this "interesting" movie. More and more, it seems, movies are "interesting" and the ambiguous place they leave me is disappointing. Intellectually, I've never known quite what to do with "interesting" movies. Now, I think I do.
Thank you for the kind words. I honestly hate writing pans, I'm always trying to find why a movie works. But I think even on its own terms this is a tragic mess.
I haven’t seen it, but it sure sounds like something that Dr Gyllenhaal stitched together from the dead corpses of other genre movies. Is it intelligent? Ugly? Most of all, is it alive? Alive, I tell you!
Alive!
I enjoyed the movie storytelling: The bride of Frankestein meets Bonnie and Clyde, with a good dose of black humor. + I loved the movie's feminist tone.
Wow, talk about a narrative missed opportunity.
I saw this today mainly because I wanted to get out of the house and it was this, a second viewing of Wuthering Heights, or some animated and horror films I care less than zero about at my local cinema. This one at least had the potential to be visually unusual, which it was and that was nice but not enough to make it rise above "interesting" in the end. In that vein, I've got two main pointers for anyone telling stories in the future:
1) 'Show don't tell' is true for a reason.
2) Narrative shrapnel is not the same as having an actual plot conflict.
I think I could have seen past all the meta non-sense if the story had fixed on an actual story it wanted to tell. As a woman, the way Frankenstein just created a mate because he was lonely and no one could love a monster like him hit me hard, and the way this was treated as something he didn't even need to grow past left me deeply uncomfortable. At the risk of reading too much into it, it felt like it was up to Ida to come to terms to who she was and just accept her fate as that help-mate. That mobster could have been an interesting villain, I guess, as an exemplar of how men do women dirty, or the powerful those who lack power. But here we knock up against my first maxim up top.
It's a shame because there's actually a really interesting conflict staring us right in the face: what does chaos cost us, and what are the other options when the established order doesn't make space for us? If this is where chaos lands us I don't want it, though I suspect I'm one of the few these days.
Also, this is the second movie in a row that's just done a classic gothic novel very, very wrong. Filmmakers shouldn't get to play with them until they can prove they'll stop breaking all my favorite toys. At least that's how it would work in a better world
I had decided to give this movie a miss but now, after reading about Det. Jake Wiles I am tempted to tune in to check out his sins. Or his atonement. Whichever. Cheers, Sonny!
Honestly, one of the best movie reviews I’ve ever read. Love this.
Thank you!
My wife really wants to see this movie. From your review it sounds like something she'd hate. My dilemma now is, do I show her your review or just watch it with her and see wait for the fireworks of her discontent.
Let her see it and then compare notes after!
I was holding my breath by the end of this! A review that took me on a ride and ultimately convinced me I need to see the film. The trailer also left me breathless, particularly when the Bride says something like, ‘the dead have something to say.’ I’m more curious about it after reading you’re looking forward to reading essays about the film, sounds like an interesting discourse is ahead!
Again, not a good movie, but one that’s interesting enough to spark discussions!
Is this a fair summary? So bad, that it’s bad?
Confession: I have only seen Sonny on podcasts and enjoyed them very much.
In all my many decades on earth, I have never found movie or book reviews to be very good - or interesting. Then I read this one. Good god that was fabulous.
The "You may have questions..." lines got me. Good review, was considering watching it & I think I'll sit this one out for a bit 🤣
I agree more with NYT review. I was entertained on many levels, including the camp, and the me,too.
Enjoyed immensely. Cohered where it was meant to, and when it didn’t ,the willing suspension was so in play, I bought the ticket and I was riding. The maniacal uninhibited of bacchae was fun, too. Christian Bale drew me in immediately.
Aw. Shame it didn't work. It looked like a neat idea, and the plain ol' craft of the filmmaking on screen looked pretty well done. Oh well.
Again, it’s … interesting! It just has real problems at the script level.
In film school, I remember a lecture from a producer who said, "It doesn't matter if you have the best actors, directors, cinematographers and effects team in the world - you can't make a good movie with a bad script."
The only counter-argument I've ever come up with is 'Pacific Rim', but aside from that he's dead right.
Finally, somebody has recognized the miracle that was Pacific Rim, an anime come to life.
Del Toro is an absolute treasure. 😁
So, this doesn't explain why I had to watch Maggie Gyllenhall dancing last week. Or does it?
"Can Det. Jake Wiles (Peter Sarsgaard) atone for his sins, about which we care nothing at all since they seem to have been invented halfway through the production of the film and parachuted in like a care package floating onto a crater-filled battlefield? Who can say."
Boffo, 10/10, no notes.
I live for sentences like these.
Sonny, this is completely irrelevant to this review, but how the hell do you have Man of Steel rated over the newest Superman movie on letterboxed? Insane take.
(You still rock tho)
Because THE MAN OF STEEL is great and SUPERMAN is fine. This isn’t even close to my hottest Superman take though. Which is this: MAN OF STEEL is also better than any of Reeve’s Superman movies.
MAN OF STEEL is a science fiction movie. SUPERMAN is a comic book. Comparing them is like comparing Dr. Strangelove and Fail Safe.
I'm down with your hottest of takes. Christopher Reeve was a great Superman. Reeve's Superman movies were not great. Rewatches make it more obvious.
lol. We’ll have to agree to disagree on that.
Still, love the reviews. 🍻
I especially agree with the point of interesting =\= good. Have a buddy who’s a real pretentious film lover that’s always on about defending movies that are bad because they’re interesting.
I do agree in that I’d rather watch an interesting bad movie vs a boring bad movie, but being interesting only gets you so far. You have to, like, be a good movie.
It's a trap that critics fall into sometimes because we see A LOT of movies, particularly critics working at daily papers who have to see everything. I definitely felt that burnout and I only worked as a daily critic for about 20 months. And I still, honestly, prefer a wild, messy failure to boring competence. But that's just because big swings are easier to write about than a movie that boils down to "eh, it was fine," haha.
I am a big Jesse fan and will watch her in everything she does. Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian loved this movie. I look forward to watching with both your review and The Guardian's in mind. Thanks Sonny!
First, let me note that there were a couple laugh out loud funny lines. This was a fun read.
My kid will make me watch this when it streams, so eventually I will have to confront this "interesting" movie. More and more, it seems, movies are "interesting" and the ambiguous place they leave me is disappointing. Intellectually, I've never known quite what to do with "interesting" movies. Now, I think I do.
Thank you for the kind words. I honestly hate writing pans, I'm always trying to find why a movie works. But I think even on its own terms this is a tragic mess.
Some movies don't work, though, despite the talent of actors, writers and directors.