harlekinrains Reviews

Ripley (2024)

Its fitting they left the talented out of the title

[3/10 · 6 April 2024]

Someone else in here characterized it well already, they try way too hard. Way too hard for this to be received as anything of substance. Ripley alone as a character study might have worked, but then when the interactions start to pick up in the plot, you realize that this is a piece created by try hards for people selfidentifying as "cultured" who just have to sing the praises of a work, because its black and white (which nowadays is not less expensive to film). And tonedeath.

As soon as the dialogue delivery starts between the characters, everything is off. Every glance lasts for the usual 5 seconds after it has seized becoming a glance. Every telegraphed "you are not welcome here" gets the extra 15 headnods while the actor really sells the delivery and sells it, and sells it, and sells it - and keeps selling it. Even the self recognition, of ok, you know that I cant paint, but you are being polite somehow manages to come in just minutes after its appropriate delivery time... Its not like the actors are bad essentially, but like they were told to "hold that emotion" so the typical Netflix customer has a chance to "catch the emotion on that face".

At that point all of the deliveries seize to be mediocre and just venture full into bad, which is then underlined by atmosphere heavy scenes, of listening to some chanteuse in a bar where the focus is on capturing her face and everyone being captured by their self indulgent righteousness of experiencing that picturesque moment of consuming an espresso in that venue - but no one cared enough not to hire the directors girlfriend for the singing part.

Sure, if you are the target audience of this, which has to be the tonedeath, asocial beings that Gen-Z are often mischaracterized as today, I guess you love this for all the gravitas it comes with -- but if you are anyone that isnt a self indulgent art lover to the maximum, its hard to see yourself putting up with this neurotic, depressing version of Ripley for more than the appropriate one and a half minutes while your ogling the god darn exit to get out of that social interaction.

This is not a display of a sadly all too likeable psychopath - this is the little wished to be on Apple TV show that fulfills the wish of half of their audience, to at least for once in their life, be able to read an emotion off of someones face - while giving them the impression that "asocial" is the totally new social and accepted, and "no you are perfectly fine in this interaction" if you just take that trip to italy to meet your dream upperclass prince, that always waited for you and you always wanted to have a seemingly meaningful conversation with...

I'll revisit this review, once I've finished watching the series, but just getting through the next scene has become a chore here...

And yet I'm absolutely sure that the mediocraty in filmlovers will love this - because it made them feel some emotions in every scene! Drab, dreary, idiotic, delivery with no timing - but for sure, some emotion will be plastered on every actors face for 12 seconds at least, just so you could catch up with that.

Talented? Who needs to be talented these days?

Argylle (2024)

Oh, wanna be film critics... What is this movie to you?

[8/10 · 8 March 2024]

Couch critics, trying to win over everyone with how they've not understood a movie and therefore it must be bad... Am I getting old, when something like this becomes the expected reaction by about half of the public out there? :) Argylle is an eight easily. If you can get over the new Beatles song product placement.

Argylle strangely enough also is a writers movie first and foremost, where in the middle of the movie the writers banked on "suspension of disbelief", restructured the entire movie, and then fixed up pretty much every plothole that resulted from pulling that stunt (not all of them, but pretty much all of them), its also a writers movie, because from the "suspension of disbelief" to the "deus ex machina" in the end (saved at the last possible moment), narratively it flows with ease.

And its also a writers movie, because in the layered in allegorical storytelling it tells a coming of age story. Rebellion against your parents, overcoming selfdoubts, up until our hero is established, to then just fall back a little on the nerdy, quirky and silly side, to give our hero back the humanity. Its stacked full with motives of selfrejected love, anti-bodyshaming, but also with included male hunks, isolation, male/female role reversals, fossile fuel industry bad tropes and all the things you'd expect a thoughtfully written coming of age tale to be filled with, after about half of our societies went through a Covid lockdown - and so did the writer.

But, and thats the strange part (as in really good writing), it manages to do so in a comedy, thats first and foremost lough out loud funny, while at the same poking fun at some of the recent James Bond movies so expertly, it hooked me just with that. Twice.

The rooftop chase scene, and the smoke dancing scene later on. I couldnt help but to laugh fully, openly an honestly during both of them. And when I did, I laughed with the movie- Its not just expertly written, but also properly directed. They knew where they were hitting with those, what they were trying to achieve in those scenes.

Argylle also introduces some of the most memorable characters in a movie for a while, filled with enough "mystique" to enable them to push out a prequel movie -- just on side character development alone.

Even down to the whimsy that is the story device that is the cat-backpack, this movie just gets it right.

Come to think of it, I think I really dont have anything to fault the movie for, and I'm just giving it an 8 because it didnt try hard enough to be better than then best silly pulp fiction I've seen in a while.

In an age, where we are missing the "camp", and silly, and sexy, and overstylized, a "writers touch" could bring to B movie agent fiction, even fiction in general - in the recent past (thinking about Diabolik for instance), this might be the closest we will be getting to getting it back in a more conscious, politically correct, divers Hollywood nowadays.

But at the same time, the audience seems to have forgotten that its okay to "suspend disbelief". If your are at the hands of good storytellers.

They all now are critics. Already having forgotten, the qualities of a camp, silly but expertly crafted comedy.

Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

The bare kind of bleak

[8/10 · 12 December 2023]

The movie works. As a storytelling device more so than a movie, but substance over style seldomly is a bad thing. Drab, bleak, boring, dull..., uneasy are emotions it conjures up over its running time, all the while the plotdesign is so expertly crafted, that after its all said an done, I cant help but to get the feeling that it was to a large extend intentionally driven.

There is a "showing the audience the door is open, then telling it the door is open" in voiceover (not to be taken literally) moment quite early on, in the earlier parts of the first third of the move, that drives home to the audience what is happening here. There is no mystery - there just is purpose and greed. Then you get introduced to the main cast, then the likeable characters, and then you wait.

And the agony starts building. Come one, we know whats going to happen, let it happen. But the uneasiness is building. Then its happening, but we know it isnt over at this point, so now the agony starts building again, then it happens again, and its a little more painful, because the characters it happens to were a bit more sincere or likeable than before. And thats the loop of the movie. At the moment it is happening to the main character we always knew it would be happening too, the presentation makes it alla blur, and really elongates the moment, then intercuts with second story plot - while in the background we still have the lingering feeling, wait - this is still happening, right?

Then comes the Deus Ex machina which almost didnt happen because of "istitutional reluctance to give 300 USD", as a result of a character overcoming unbelievable odds, then we learn that the Deus Ex machina was bought with 20.000 dollars.

Then comes in the cavelary, and then the excuses start to get stripped away. Wait, that was a likeable fellow, right? Eight kids. But with a redskin it was different. No, no I'm just asking if it is legal and I'd get the money, if I dont get the money I would not do it. Then the matter of factness gets layered in. Yes he held her, and set her up and I shot. You didnt happen to loose the bullet, "carving the flesh from the bone"?

And then we are in the middle of the main characters character struggle. Never quit likeable, always uneasy. Then the main character makes all the wrong decisions as part of that character struggle, but no word is said, no word is uttered to him - even by his wife. He choses to stay on side of main antagonists logic for a little while longer. Then simply unfolds what we as an audience know would unfold. Someone close to his heart dies. Which was foreshadowed by the storytelling.

Then comes the change of heart. Leonardo di Caprio finally beating the struggle. All the while making up a self concept of his actions that makes it bearable. And then it comes down to a final question. What was it that you gave me.

And everything, the entire structure of the redemption arc breaks down at once.

The point is, if you look into the structure of it, it always was intended to move along that arc. Dont go to the doctors, go to the train, get the insulin directly from there. "You'll be next". What was it that you gave me. The entire selfimage the character has at that point, the hope of the heroes arch isnt worth a penny. I thought long and hard how I, the viewer, would weasel myself out of this situation, and the answer is I cant. "It was my uncle." "It was my uncle having power over me". "I did it because of the love of the family." "I dindt understand." "I did it because of the children." "I thought it would just relax you". None of it is possible - its all stripped away by plotdesign.

Its failure set up.

And its so obvious, that the heart of the film and the "good detective" dont even have to say anything. The lie is laid bare. The good (person) and the hero seperate.

To come to that point, no convincing is needed. The hero is led along that path using "what will you do next" open questions at the moment of his last wrong decision which he then reverses because of the emotional quandaries that follow after the final death, that gets to him.

And then the movie has to break to talk to the audience. Because all the while the parallel powerstructure was explained alongside ("keeping a secret part of free masonry", "brotherhood of the clan"), and in real life, that power structure one upped the storytelling. If the hero didnt change his mind in the end, he would have been better off.

And there is really nothing to say to that. So this is when the director has to explain this to us, the viewer. Here lies a women. She blossomed one more time, seperated from the "hero", she survived her Sister, her other sister, her child. Nothing on the gravestone talks about societies nature, or even that there were murders.

To get that to hit in a "more fast paced movie" is not possible.

Find the wolf in the picture.

The cinematography sometimes was lacking, the "highs" ("falling in love/dependance") could have been more accentuated. De Niro is maybe the only one that always feels spot on, its not a perfect movie, not perfect in an entertaining sense - but then it doesnt try to be.

For a 200 mio USD movie, thats quite something, actually.

So for not being a perfectly directed movie, when its a Scorsese - I deduct a few points. But everyone knew what they were doing here.

I think.

And if that translates to an audience as boring, well - cant fault the audience right? ;) And you also cant fault substance over style.

A Haunting in Venice (2023)

Who killed the Christie estate?

[2/10 · 5 November 2023]

So apparently there is this group, lead by James Pritchard that is supposed to make sure Agatha Christies oeuvre is not turned into silly, useless, toneless adaptations of nothing -- oh sorry, I'm reviewing the movie already.

So Poirot is still the only one in the entire film you cant empathize with - because Branagh still character plays him as the choleric, emotionless can not act, but kicks every door open, one tone mask of a person, that almost rediscovers his childhood in an apple bobbing scene, but then almost gets killed for that - and then decides, to never show any emotion for the rest of the film.

Ariadne Oliver is played as a Bridget Jones "on a constant chocolate high" character by Tina Fey who serves two purposes throughout the movie, first to give the film any humanity and second to give the film the canvas the demographic that buys Tina Fey books as "self empowerment" needs to have a canvas to identify with. No one taught her method acting in a mostly method cast - so thats what you get. Tina Fey. Oh and make her Poirots best friend of course, you know - to increase Brenahs likeability and her on screen time, as the canvas the female audience will identify with. But its Tina Fay. In Venice, in the 1940s. In a horror house. In a mystery tale - explaining to the audience plotpoints, that were introduced by a childrens puppet show.

Javier Bardem is played by Riccardo Scamarcio, doing his best Javier Bardem impression in the role of Poirots bodyguard. The Javier Bardem character interestingly enough is also made into the most likeable character in the movie, because he is played by an actual actor being able to express emotions with a face.

Camerashots have the quality of the camera being tied to a carousel with the focus puller in place, being told "now" to get perfect focus halfway through the shot, on some characters face.

If its a shot from frog perspective, or over the shoulder, or overhead, depends on where the carousel horse ended up at that point. Plenty of circular motion and tight perspective in those camera pans though.

So to fix this, you use mashine gun frequency cuts, of course. Oh look, here is an iron mesh in a tunnel, filmed from an inch away! Perfect sharpness, on that auto focus!

Music is fine.

Film stock looks like digital, no character, no lenswork, and only color grading in post processing -- no depth of field, perfect focus, perfect lighting on closeups, in the darkest cellar with.lanterns being the only light - lighting HD rats, scattering on what look like crates from prop department "sturdy and plywood".

The sound department fixed that though, and is able to give the film some character with the strangest violoncello/contrabass sonatas you have heard in film for a while. But its a horror film apparently, so it serves a purpose and "Those children really died in here".

Sorry, I'm quoting a throw away plotline uttered by Poirots bodyguard to finish painting the scene.

So apparently, this is the new and more "edgy, kicks the door open" with a stone face Poirot, the Briget Jones demographic likes, because he hangs out with Tina Fey in a haunted house. Because thats what younger folks nowadays buy cinema tickets for.

Or so the person who murdered the Agatha Christie estate seemingly thought.

Die drei ??? - Erbe des Drachen (2023)

What are closeups?

[6/10 · 11 August 2023]

So close, and yet so far away. Setdesign and location scouting is stellar - bordering on really well done. Casting in parts did its job - thats the best rendition of a Bob and Peter so far - in any of the movies around. Both teen actors are amongst the best actors in the movie in general. Shot design has flashes of true greatness, when it was planned for longer than two seconds. Pickup exposition sequences with 2D art are very well done, score was very well picked - and thats where the positive parts end.

When casting a the "Three Investigators" movie you have exactly one task you cant possibly fail at. Don't cast a pretentious, out of his depth Justus (/Jupiter) Jonas. Who's younger than the others in the trio, and then stands in the middle of the frame, feeling out of place. Because his delivery was so bad (with scenes feeling like on set he wanted to make the others crack up to get at least some positive affirmation during shooting breaks, and that had crossed over into the actual scenes) - you could see him recalling lines from memory always a few milliseconds too late, that therefore you have given most of the exposition to Bob anyhow.

Its a Justus (/Jupiter) Jonas you simply cant cast.

You can see that the stage direction was there, because in some scenes he can fill his role, and he tries his best - but then its never the default and the role never comes naturally to him. When he nails his delivery, as an actor, the boy is quite good - so its not that he doesnt have the capability, its just - that it doesnt come natural.

And its probably not so much his fault, as it is the fault of the director - because there are scenes left in the movie that would have benefited from another five takes. The shot planning, when its done quickly during 80% of the movie falls flat. You miss closeups for emotional delivery, not just for the teen actors but in general. The framing is often bad (with effort spent on getting each character centered in the image or the entire trio in a shot), character introductions sometimes are done in medium long shots, when a shot needs to breath no one told the director to move the camera out for more impact, and the dialog sequences are stale, usually complimented by stale shot, countershot cinematography.

This is then amplified by dialog that is even more stale... Characters internal motivations are glanced over and wrongly molded all the time, apparently the three investigators are pumped to be on a movieset, during the establishing minutes of their character introductions, and then pumped to see a bat-bot, and then extremely intrigued by a whole hooking sequence that just registered to the audience as weird...

... and then there is the meta-level on which the producers and the director decided, lets just make this a movie about a child trio on a movieset, and of course shoot it in Romania where it doesnt cost us as much - so now the kids are pumped to go to Romania over the summer, and of course give them some really child level edgy things to do - like you know, making filmblood - and now the children are pumped to make film blood and --

where is the plot development in all of this? Which plot development. After a full day of being pumped on a filmset about being on a movie, the three investigators wander trough an empty corridor at night - and dont you worry, a plot point will hit!

And the shot framing will be bad. And Justus' delivery will be off, and the supporting actors will be really overacting, like they were cast into a childrens movie (and thats right about their mindset during their text delivery), and the emotional reactions on screen will represent something, or someone, that we as the audience have only seen in a wide shot so far...

Supporting actors are often not very good, filler plotlines like Peters dad not having time for him in place, and then at some point, the least settled and sure of himself in the trio has to drop another plot developing line, that - the trio "must watch the empty corridor where the first plot point hit at random last night". Why?

Because strange music played. And because, apparently, aside from being pumped all the time, to be on a filmset in Romania, this also has to be a detective movie of course! So now this leads into a chase sequence!

The thing is that with its visual presentation, set design and music choices and its emotional story telling - especially in the bigger choreographed scenes, and also during the entire intro (which feels mostly rushed, probably because they booked not enough days to shoot in the US) the movie hits its mark. So someone knew what they were aiming for, and during those bigger planned scenes, the execution is there. Its just, that it falls apart during the remaining 80% of the movie.

They achieved flashes of excellence, but that in itself doesnt make a congruent or fun to watch movie.

Copenhagen Cowboy (2022–2023)

Starts slow, ends with the world exploding

[9/10 · 17 January 2023]

(In an allegorical sense.)

Any show that makes you say to yourself - well, the internal ethics of the chinese triads, probably are better than what was depicted of the balkan mafia, then instantly regret it, because of what you just thought, not because of anything that happened - and then has a meta commentary on it within the same series, is -- well really effed up to begin with, but in this case also something really special.

Show can hit you like a brick, when you realize that its dialogue is written for the main character to hardly ever say a word, while the exposition is provided by the people that interact with her, and then - at the same time also crafted to expose their internal wants and needs, and more often than not - obsessions - always in some way playing out to the detriment of the main heroine, or at least some person involved in the plot arc, and when the show then starts to do it over and over and over again, to show you different slices of human psychy, not in a university - first semester sense, but through myths that are rooted in collective memory -- almost shocking you with the simple "this is our interpretation of the collective unconscious - and why humanity produced those myths" statement it offers. Its outright perplexing, that tonally its never feeling out of place while hitting on one traumatic theme after the next, but then doing that thing that good storytelling does in those instances, and crossing over into creating hope, and divine justice, and magic at the point of utter despair.

Other people have touched on the body horror elements in this, and its hard not to, when its the opening shot on the first episode, but its the psychological horror thats overcome time and time again within this show, that really grips you conceptually and that will become the more lasting memory.

Its like Brothers Grimm, if told in the modern age by a master storyteller.

It suspends disbelieve to the point, where you are literally hearing advice from Hideo Kojima to seek out the Giants, because those are the only ones that can help in a situation, without this having any context in the storytelling so far - whatsoever, and you are saying to yourself - yeah, that sounds about right.

But more so, for me it always will be a show about overcoming traumatic events by the mind crossing over into magical arguing, the trappings of that, and the power of story telling that springs from it.

The last episode is kind of a departure, that maybe takes it too literal ("she is many"), but then offers some of the most visually stunning eyecandy of the entire series, as well as cliffhangers and and a glimps into what a second season might be interested in exploring - and in that it kind of feels disconnected from the rest, but nevertheless, the plot arc is completed by that point so its hard to really fault the show for it.

Loro (2018)

Wow.

[10/10 · 12 January 2022]

(Differences between the international cut of the movie, and the version distributed to italian cinemas are described in the last paragraph of the review.)

Is wow more than one word? Because when reflecting on this movie it sure lingers for a while... Lets start again. If you are a heterosexual male, watch this alone the first time. Lets start again. The first 40 minutes of the film are a visual, sensual, guttural, powerfantasy on screen force majeure. Then you also slowly start noticing that the movie layers meaning in allegorical structures (when commercials are used as standins for the character that hasnt been introduced yet, or the sheep falls over in the first two minutes, or the political theme tune of the electoral campaign kicks in...) that decidedly seem hyper real. Then you'll start realizing, that this is "the best commercial shoot type production" you'll ever see in your life, because the women in it know its a persiflage, and knew where its hitting, and the main cast so far (again, we are still in the first 40 minutes) doesnt ruin the scenario, he focuses it. Then the main character (Lui? Lui, lui.) enters and the movie gets even better? Sure does. Then you have presence intercuts for a look of a sidecharacter, just to underline, that body language is a story telling device here as well (Oh it sure is... sorry my mind went back to the first 40 minutes...), then the movie becomes lyrical? But in a persiflage, that also kind of isnt? Its not so much that my mind was blown several times throughout the movie, its - that the powerfantasy became palpable. The draw in of that presentation is immense. And the absurdity gets sidelined even when its turned up to eleven, because you are still so mesmerized by the ride. And at the end of the movie you pick yourself up in pieces, and start to question who you are... And you might have learned a thing or two, about Lui lui, you hadn't picked up from the international press. Oh and "When Putin was here a few years ago..." Did I mention that its laugh out loud funny as well?

The international cut is the "better version", to it stripping out mostly political background and side character development. All the iconic scenes are in the international cut as well, basically uncut - so as a result the movie flows better, but misses many of the political allegories, that explain some of the setups you see playing out. So pacing and the main character (of the first 40 minutes, not Lui) arc benefit from the international cut, the message of the movie does not. Also the funniest scene of the movies got lost on the cutting room floor. In the telephone call scene with the producer type explaining to the audience the tiring fact, that everyone wants to be Mata Hari or Jeanne d'Arc - that gets underlined with snippets of various movie productions, one of which is "(Lady) Dianas (Republic of) Congo", but with eroticism (and minus the heart :) ), according to the voice over. If you can, source the originals as well, but watching the international version on your first watch will have more impact.

Watchmen (2019)

An absolute travesty.

[1/10 · 31 October 2019]

The sheer guts it too to make Rorschach (in symbolism) the head of a white supremacist terror cell. The sheer nerve it took to make watchmen a hierarchical police unit, lead my a 'cowboy' that holds speeches about terrorists only sleeping, and 'so glad, we already know where they all are'. The sheer *lost for words* to make 'do you believe in squids as interdimensional beings' a 'control question' for - are you a terrorist. But luckily we give them state police them cool tropes from the original - so everyone cheers at the right intervals.

Takes every trope, and all symbolism of the original (highly moral beings, adventure seekers, mathnerds - coming to understand tough decisions within societal processes), flips it on its head. And makes out of it another tale about american patriotism.

Adds 20 cow carcasses just for visual effect and cool factor in the first episode.

Alan Moore must rotate in despair and disbelieve right now. Have you no mercy. Not even with artists? Not even with stories that originated at the edges of society?

Ricky Jay and His 52 Assistants (1996 TV Movie)

More than just magic

[10/10 · 27 December 2010]

I'm 26 and every time I see this it makes me be overcome with nostalgia. Nostalgia, because I feel there will be nothing even remote to this performance I will see in my lifetime. This man is telling a life story of the con-artist, the cheat, the swindler, the impostor, the jester and he tells them in the evening of the trade, he tells the tale of one who would perform for people in theatre for a ticket price three times the yearly wage of a normal worker and he tells the tale of one who would pass around a hat in bars in the darker end of town. He tells tales across centuries, he tells his own. And he performs the best slide of hand you will ever see.

He plays the audience and participants, so charmingly - that they allow themselves to be - played. He excels in providing absolute nonsense alongside the knowledge of generations. Sharper intelligence at work you'll never see. And he does it, never missing a beat, counting cards alongside, masking moves with words and - pauses, crafting a rhythm out of thin air -

When at the heart of this performance, he shows a truth where each profession is...

When he tells of the never to be fulfilled struggle of the plebeians to reach the upper circles he does it in the voice of a plebeian, startling the higher ups, outplaying them in whits, and he tells of what really matters - when "booze and the blowens" have "copped the lot".

No really, it is that multi-layered and more importantly it is that good. If you watch it for the first time, or for the twentieth - it keeps on giving. A true classic.

My Antonio (2009– )

This is it - The culmination of Reality-TV

[10/10 · 2 May 2010]

Wow, how embarrassing is this? After all this guilty pleasure, watching other VH1 Shows just for the kick of it and arguably the social aspect, because at the end of the day, it seems like everybody does - enjoying the hilarity that usually ensues - it took the show with arguably the cheesiest premise to get me to this point...

I'd have to say I went in for the "peace of meat" bravado in the first place, because I found it somewhat refreshing, that "My Antonio" was the proverbial carrot on a stick for each and every female contestant on the show, and they all knew it from the very beginning - But instead of following the premise and "playing the game", like the many before - this guy somehow seemed to try building deep connections, acting to eliminate almost all group effects with a "everyone gets a chance" attitude - which ultimately made for some intensely boring middle episodes, because the decisions at the eliminations were so transparent. But, oh my God - the third act is almost divine...

You get it all - the all to obvious soap analogies in the form of a reenactment challenge, the former wife, the intriguing, but good willing mother, the bunny that gets played - this series culminates in a moment where three of the contestants - who at this point want "Their Antonio" badly, can stand in one room respecting each other, as well as the fact, that he has made out with two of them on the same day, just the day before (if editing didn't tweak time too much... ;)), while he is kissing the third one - just because they believe in the fairness and judgment of one guy...

The emotion in the last episodes is palpable and real, if I ever saw real emotion. I can't watch soaps, because I can't stand emotion that does not come out of the scene, but directly from script - but this made me understand the fascination and attachment, that others could have regarding this medium of entertainment.

This is the quintessential soap. The best Reality TV as a concept has to offer.