"Sideways": Outlook is All About Perspective

I often find films about life and human nature to be conflicting and fit into multiple genres.  This film is no exception.


"Sideways" is about two men who travel to California's Wine Country for a week of vacation.  Miles, played by Paul Giamatti, is struggling with a midlife crisis relating to his own mediocrity and dissatisfaction with his own lack of achievements.  There is also Jack, played by Thomas Haden Church, who is about to get married and seems to live his life erratically yet without consequence.


I enjoyed this film for the most part.  It is a bit of a double character study with the plot being extremely realistic and relatable.  Miles is a realist and Jack is more foolish, even though the film doesn't necessarily present Miles' outlook as being a more beneficial one.  There are also many different genres that blend pretty well in this film: drama, comedy, and romance.


"Sideways" comes off as very depressing, which isn't a bad thing.  There is a constant misery surrounding Miles with how he cannot transcend all the unfortunate events going on in his life.  This is often worsened by his foil character, Jack, who has a lot of fun through living a life that has already treated him well.


When this film tries to be funny, the comedy really works.  "Sideways" has a great sense of humor, which helps break up the film's near constant negativity.  Most of my favorite moments come from Jack's dialogue.  A great example of this is when Miles is harshly and intelligently critiquing the wine he is drinking, then Jack tells Miles that he thinks the wine tastes pretty good.


Finally, this film touches on the concept of romance.  There is a lot of pondering about what these characters should do in their relationships.  Honestly, "Sideways" could have gone deeper into these ideas because it seems like the film is more devoted to the basics of why these characters act in the way they do rather than looking into the complexities relating to what these desires say about the characters.


One of this film's best qualities is how quaint and small-scale the story is.  The editing isn't very fancy, and the music is mostly comprised of kitschy, catchy tunes.  However, when there needs to be an emotional punch, "Sideways" delivers unflinching emotion through a more serious film style.


I have a few issues with the ending.  "Sideways" dragged on for about ten minutes too long, then ended in an infuriating place.  The ending angered me because it undercut the emotion that could have been there if it would have taken a more non-traditional route.


"Sideways" ends up drawing a few comparisons to "Adaptation", which comes from the talented filmmaker Spike Jonze and masterful screenwriter Charlie Kaufman.  Both films deal with struggling writers, and there are a lot of self-referential offhand comments that foreshadow where the film's own plot is going.  I think the fact that I perceive "Adaptation" as a much more innovative and enjoyable film makes "Sideways" seem like an inferior experience.


All in all, this is a good movie, but not quite great.  There is a lot of interesting dialogue about how people see the world around them differently, but there is a little bit holding this film back.  I would definitely recommend it if you enjoy funny romance films that contain some depressing moments.

Final Post for Class

Well, this blog has been an experience.


As I wrote in my first post, Exceptional Film Reviews was originally an assignment for a blogging class.  I have thoroughly enjoyed my time writing, and now it feels nice to eliminate the pressure of posting multiple times every week.


I think the experience of blogging seems a bit dated, but I enjoy it.  Writing is one of my favorite parts about school, and this blog allowed me to experiment with how I can convey my thoughts.


I really liked the freedom to express myself in this blog.  I often find it hard to express myself verbally, and I found my descriptions of the films to be better than usual because I am able to check my errors and read everything over multiple times before posting. 


Blogging is almost entirely storytelling, even if it is often informational as well.  Some people may think film reviews are useless, but I find film criticism to be an art.  It takes talent to weave a story about a story while keeping it interesting and not ruining that original story for the audience.


This class was so fun for me.  My posts rarely felt like an assignment because I was so interested in my topic.  I could see this blogging experience being tough for people that lose interest and become uninvested, but I think the freedom this class provides makes it perfect for anyone with a passion to explore something.


I wish I'd prepared some better people to interview before this class.  It is tough to find somebody that wants to talk about movies as much as I do, and a lot of people don't entirely understand why they feel a certain way about a movie.


Finally, I have made the decision to keep Exceptional Film Reviews going.  This blog helps me cement and save my thoughts about the films I watch, which I actually care about.  I also enjoy sharing my thoughts with the world, even if my world is probably about to get about 10 people smaller. 


Unless I somehow acquire a huge following, there will not be much frequency to my posting.  However, I will post at least once a month because I love movies.  I hope you've enjoyed reading my reviews at least half as much as I've enjoyed writing them.

"Full Metal Jacket": Disconnected yet Superior

Even though many people believe war is hell, this film demonstrates how the actual war might not be the worst part of the military experience.

"Full Metal Jacket" is probably one of Stanley Kubrick's more lackluster films, but it's still pretty great.  The first part of the film follows the happenings of a military training camp with a brutal drill instructor.  The second part focuses on the Vietnam War, with two journalists doing reporting on a squad fighting in the war.

The themes are very interesting because the film suggests the military boot camp can cause just as much trauma as the actual war.  Many of the soldiers act like savages, which the film presents as a possible result of their rigorous training.

"I think the trauma would come from the actual war...," said Ben Wheaton.  "I don't think anything can prepare you for seeing your buddy getting shot."

The cinematography and camera movement are incredible, of course.  Kubrick does a great job with the longer shots because he makes nearly everything about the filmmaking have a purpose within the story.  

There are a lot of symmetrical and orderly shots in the first half, then some really nice-looking ones towards the end.  Especially in the beginning, the monotony of the shots and landscape becomes somewhat intoxicating, drawing the viewer in through the sheer repetition of everything.  Towards the second half, "Full Metal Jacket" begins to look a bit more cinematic, with shots of the war landscape as well as the nature of Vietnam.

The dialogue is good, for the most part.  There are a few character development scenes that come off as a little too exaggerated, but the outstanding scenes outnumber the mediocre ones.

There are two stand-out performances in this film, the first being R. Lee Ermey as the drill instructor.  He was actually a part of the marine corps brought on to be a consultant for the film, but he put together a video of him going on a verbal tirade that was made up completely on the spot.  Ermey played the role so well that Kubrick gave him the role.

The second performance is from Vincent D'Onofrio, which doesn't get as much respect as it deserves.  This performance is much more subdued from the others, but the transformation of this character is by far the most powerful aspect about this movie.  

"I thought it was interesting that the guy went crazy at the beginning of the movie," said Chris Exsted, my father.

I find this film difficult to categorize because it is divided into two halves.  The first half of the film is pretty much separate from the story told at the second half, and the actual ending pales in comparison to the incredible halfway point of the film.

Comedians never start out with their funniest joke because they risk everything coming after being perceived as unfunny.  This is my main issue with the film.  Nearly everything about the first half is performed better and more subtly than the second.  

After an emotional buildup and release around halfway through the film, it becomes a generic war film.  The major problem with this is that the audience is most likely still thinking about the powerful first part, and I feel the second part doesn't add much substance to the messages brought forth in the beginning.  

The best films are not the films that are necessarily packed with the best content, they are the ones that flow the best and feel like they're going somewhere.  I want to walk out of a film feeling satisfied because of how well the whole was structured and worked together perfectly to create a piece of art.  

That being said, the second part is still good.  I enjoy the journalist's perspective and the satirical tone, even if it does become a little grating at how obvious everything is.  The last scene of the film is also pretty great; it's not overtly political, but it creates a conflicting atmosphere that is very fitting for this film.

I'd recommend seeing "Full Metal Jacket" on Netflix if you enjoy war films with an anti-political tone.  Just be aware that this film feels more like two movies rather than one huge political statement.

"Paris is Burning": The Fetishization of Normalcy

Everybody wants to be accepted by society, so these people made their own society.


"Paris is Burning" is a documentary about transgender and queer people living in Harlem during the late 1980s.  More specifically, this movie follows the fashion shows, called balls, that the LGBTQ community competed in to showcase their fashion sense.  This film is very obscure yet well-received by critics, winning an award at Sundance in 1991.


I find that this film is less about sexuality and more about being comfortable enacting one's fantasies.  Not many people are capable of living out their true fantasies while feeling accepted, and these competitions are so powerful because they make the people feel normal being themselves.


All these people want is to be taken seriously for who they are.  The people that dress like women at the ball want to be seen as real women, the people that dress like businessmen want to be seen as prosperous and so on.  The realness that the participants strive for is all about feeling accepted and being successful despite having a non-traditional sexual orientation or preference.


All the terminology the children use is very intriguing.  At these balls, there are different ways that the people talk and interact, some of which has become a part of mainstream culture today.  It's like these people were rejected by the world, so they came together and formed their own secret culture.


I would strongly recommend this documentary because it is fascinating and powerful.  There are so many interesting perspectives being brought to the table, and the clips from the balls are all very dazzling.  If you are at all interested, "Paris is Burning" is available on Netflix.

Pick My Next Review

I am stuck on which films to review this week, so I thought I'd leave that decision up to you.


I know my classmates have already made a few recommendations, but I'm giving all of you complete authority for these posts.  Some films being screened at a theater near me include "Solo: A Star Wars Story", "Tag", "Superfly", "Incredibles 2", "Ocean's 8", "Hotel Artemis" and "Hearts Beat Loud".  You could also recommend a different film to check out, but I'm not going to promise anything unless it's on Netflix.


I will most likely see these films around Tuesday the 19th, so please let me know in the comment section before that date if you are interested in participating.  Thanks everybody, it's been a fun semester.

"Hereditary": Emotionally Unrelenting

I often find myself immune to most scary movies, but I think this one actually lives up to the hype.

This review is going to be a little messy because this film is kind of insane.  It constantly shifts from being melodramatic to horrifying, peculiar to depressing, and almost every miserable and irritating feeling in between.


"Hereditary" comes from the mind of Ari Aster.  Not only did he write this film, but it is also his feature-length directorial debut.  I have to say that this is an extraordinary first film not only because of how competent the filmmaking is but also because of how bizarre the content is.


The film is about loss, familial ties, rebirth, coping with the fact that you're losing your own sanity and regret.  "Hereditary" follows a grieving family in a situation that just gets worse and more awful as the film goes on.


The theater I saw this film in was packed, and I was so surprised that an A24 film got a mainstream release in the summer because this studio often produces smaller indie films that get nominated for Oscars.  I did review another A24 theatrical release recently, but that film was being screened as a limited release.  My confusion only mounted as "Hereditary" became weirder and more grotesque, which made the audience surrounding me feel more and more uncomfortable.


From the first shot of this film, everything feels a little off-kilter.  Something about a slow pan into a doll house makes the shot feel so artistic and cinematic that it comes off as disturbing.  The camera movement is always very precise and sedate, which showcases the aesthetically pleasing shots shown throughout the film.


The beginning of this film didn't feel like it was leading up to anything, which was annoying.  I also think the film peaks too early, even though it pretty much starts the actual plot of the movie.  The middle of the film does get a little cliché, but the impeccable execution along with weirdness of the plot content keeps the film so tense and unpredictable.


The score of this film is one of the most unique ones I have heard in a while.  The sounds are constantly evolving but every bit of non-diegetic sound creates a certain otherworldly and anxious mood.  The music is all done by Colin Stetson, a saxophonist who has worked with Bon Iver and Arcade Fire.


Most of this film is drenched in sorrow, hatred and sour feelings.  Even though I could tell this was a great movie, the theater experience was dismal.  "Hereditary" may be creepy, but it is definitely not a fun horror movie.


What really holds this film together is the consistently great performance by Toni Collette as the mother.  There are a lot of clashes between family members here, but she is by far the loudest performance.  Some people might think there is a bit of overacting in this film, but I thought it fit perfectly because of how outlandish the plot is.


Another reason why this film worked so well was because of the logic.  Even when some supernatural aspects came into play, the film seemed to adhere to a certain set of rules that made the film seem plausible.


Towards the second half, "Hereditary" gets really scary.  The fear that I experienced in this film is like no other because it becomes unrelenting.  The next scene is constantly outdoing the last in how the characters become more tormented and broken.


This film does mention mental illness in the family of the main characters, but I don't think there are really any themes or symbolism to look into here.  Even though this film works extremely well for what it is going for, I don't see any real message audiences could take away.


Immediately after my first viewing, I thought the ending ruined this film for me.  As I have previously stated in my review of "Hush", the explanation is never as satisfying as the mystery a horror film creates.  In my opinion, this ending took away from the suspense by giving a definitive answer to what was happening the whole time.


The more that I think about it, the more I am accepting of this conclusion.  To be honest, the film was subtly hinting at what happens from the start and the concept is very interesting.  However, nobody in the theater knew how to feel when the credits rolled, and I almost started laughing.


In many ways, I find this film to be quite similar to "It Comes at Night", which is another A24 film I reviewed right before this one.  I think the approach to filmmaking is very similar, but the content of "It Comes at Night" is much more traditional and doesn't overcomplicate the story.  "Hereditary" has so much going on to the point where it feels like multiple different movies and tones get squished together into one franken-film, which yields some incredibly impressive results and a few inconsistent moments.


Overall, I think "Hereditary" is an incredibly solid film experience.  This film did an amazing job of translating the fear and loss that these characters experience to the audience.  I was really feeling the emotions throughout, and I am very pleased with my choice to review this film.


I don't think I can recommend this film to a general audience, though.  It is just too bizarre and emotionally heartbreaking throughout.  The only reason I could give people to see this is the terror-inducing second half, which is a lot more conventional.


If you want to support something original and filled with talented filmmaking, buy a ticket and let the studios know that you want to see more films like this.  Just go in knowing that appreciating a film is much different than enjoying it.

"It Comes at Night": A Literal Nightmare

You probably didn't see this movie, and if you did, then you probably hated it.


"It Comes at Night" is the definition of a slow burn.  The film is about a family trapped in a world that has been ravaged by some kind of contagious pathogen.  Nobody is safe, and nobody can know who to trust.


I am not going to spoil this film because it embraces horror in a much different way than most horror films.  This movie isn't necessarily all that scary, but it is appalling and shocking.  All the performances are so effective, which leads to a powerful conclusion that contains a strong message about the nature of human beings.


The reason this film works so well is the grandiose cinematography.  There are long periods of time where not much is happening, but the gorgeous shots kept me invested.  The film constantly feels like it's building up to something, which enhances the tension tremendously.


This film is the embodiment of a bad dream.  "It Comes at Night" includes a few dream sequences, which normally bothers me in horror films.  It works really well in this film combined with changing aspect ratios, which creates a dark, psychotic and occasionally psychedelic atmosphere.


My main problem with this film is that it wasn't marketed correctly.  The trailer made this movie seem like a generic monster movie when that is so far from the case.  When I saw this in the theater, a group of teenagers walked out at the end while talking about how this was the worst film they had ever seen.


This movie made me want to vomit, and it wasn't because there was something gross being shown on-screen.  I think that's the most accurate endorsement I can give this incredible film.

"Scott Pilgrim vs. the World": Atypically Incredible

"Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" is both the most spectacular and most relatable romance movie I have ever seen.


This film is helmed by Edgar Wright, one of the most talented visual directors in the industry.  The story follows Scott Pilgrim, played by Michael Cera, in his quest to become Ramona Flowers' boyfriend.  However, once their relationship begins, Scott finds that he has to defeat Ramona's seven evil exes in order to win her over.


"Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" is a comedy-filled, action-packed adventure with a style that more closely resembles a video game or a comic book than a traditional movie.  There are lots of rapid-paced action sequences, as Scott must literally fight all of Ramona's ex-lovers, with some quirky humor and loud rock music in between the mayhem.


Despite its goofy and energetic tone, this film has a huge heart.  All the craziness portrayed on-screen represents how difficult it is to start and maintain a relationship.  Even though some of the characters act deplorably, they still have to live with their decisions, which is very engaging.


Probably the most fascinating part of this film is how it blurs the line between Hollywood blockbuster and arthouse film.  While "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" is structured in a way that follows a traditional plot, the world constructed around these characters is surreal and somewhat experimental.  Not only that, but the oddly playful editing combined with the vivid cinematography creates an experience like no other.


Sadly, this film bombed at the box office, most likely because it came from widely unknown source material and is a bit weird.  "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" lives on as a cult classic because of its incredibly unique visual style and multifaceted approach to filmmaking.


In theory, I think this film is the most ideal Hollywood blockbuster because of how effectively it combines different genres while still having something new to say.  Even though it may not work for everybody in practice, I find "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" to be a near perfect film.

"First Reformed": Nihilism Versus Religion

Sometimes the best movies are the ones that you don't totally agree with.

"First Reformed" is directed and written by Paul Schrader, who also wrote "Taxi Driver".  This film is about a depressed priest who has to cope with the death of his son, then grows more troubled as the film continues.  However, the film is more focused on symbolism and the thought-provoking implications of the character's actions. 


The performances are all great.  Ethan Hawke, Cedric the Entertainer and Amanda Seyfried are all celebrities that I recognize yet fall so deep into their roles I forget they are playing a character.  The direction and cinematography is simple, open yet confined and incredibly effective.


"First Reformed" deals with so many complicated themes.  It shows how the old, traditional pastor has to deal with a world changing both in mentality and physicality.  One of the most important motifs throughout the film is about climate change and the destruction of our planet, questioning if God can forgive us for what we have done to his creation.


There are questions of faith, indulgence, remorse and spirituality throughout.  This film is less about discussing the existence of God as much as it is exploring the purpose and consequences of religion.  I am going to refrain from giving my own personal interpretation in this post because I feel like this film is one that everyone should experience through their own perspective.


"First Reformed" is a slow, thought-provoking experience that is very hard to forget, but it is not a film for everybody.  It is dark and twisted in a way that could turn people off and possibly even change their thoughts for the worse.  However, it is the most powerful and emotionally gripping film I have seen in a very long time.

Multiple Perspective Review: "Adrift"

As it turns out, going into a hurricane is not the best destination for a couple's retreat.


"Adrift" is a true story about a couple that gets stranded in the middle of the ocean after a hurricane wrecks their boat.  The two have to make it back to land on their shipwreck before running out of food and water.  At the same time, the film cuts to flashbacks showing how the two characters fell in love.


I went to see this film with a some members of my family, so I was able to get a few different perspectives and opinions on the film.  As a general consensus, "Adrift" was good but not great.


My younger brother and sister both said they enjoyed the film.  I think my sister liked "Adrift" a bit more, but my brother said he liked how it was different and based on a true story.


"I think the movie was very romantic and touching," said Isabelle Exsted, my 15-year-old sister.  "I think it was inspiring to people and entertaining."


My grandma said the movie was okay.  She seemed to enjoy most of it, but she did say that the beginning seemed more like a Lifetime television movie.


"It dragged along in certain places," said Suzanne Hansen, my grandmother.  "I'd compare it to 'Cast Away.'"


My grandfather said he didn't like "Adrift".  He said the flashbacks bothered him because the constant back and forth messed up the chronology of the film, which is a very important element when presenting a true story.


My main complaint was with the flashbacks as well.  The film constantly shifts from present to past without any warning, which made the film tonally inconsistent.  Worst of all, this structure served no purpose to the plot.


I thought the cinematography was good in this film, for the most part.  The most impressive aspect of the filmmaking is the on-location filming, meaning they went out into the middle of the ocean to film a majority of the scenes.  "Adrift" had some extremely creative shots at the beginning, but it felt like the directing got worse as the film went on.


The score was very mediocre and bland.  I can hardly remember what the music sounded like, but it was particularly forgettable and uninspired.


Shailene Woodley did a good job with her performance as Tami.  I believe that this is an empowering role for women because it is a tale about a woman finding the will to keep fighting without any assistance from her injured boyfriend.  I was somewhat nervous early on because she was overacting a bit, but she definitely became more engrossed in her role as the film went on.


It is a sad, melodramatic film based on a true story about love and survival.  If you are interested in any of those traits, I'd suggest seeing "Adrift".  I thought this film did some things well, but it was a very average movie-going experience overall.

***SPOILERS***

There was a twist ending that I thought made the film a lot worse.  The film revealed that Tami was just hallucinating her injured boyfriend on the boat, which means he died in the hurricane.  The filmmakers do foreshadow this a bit, but it is a bit disrespectful and unnecessary.

I understand that this is supposed to be symbolic for not being alone and surviving to preserve his memory, but this really bothered me because he is a key element of the plot.  Not only did this not happen in real life, but it undermines the bond of the two characters because half of their story feels like a waste.  It seems like this was kept in the script because the two characters together made the film less boring rather than expanding the emotional bond that Tami and Richard shared.

"It's not as exciting of a movie if it was just her," said Max Exsted, my 11-year-old brother.


I think this detracted from the overall film experience for everybody I saw the film with.  The filmmakers might have thought this was clever, but it ended up being bothersome and confusing.

"Hush": Simple Done Spectacularly

This film is yet another example of less being more in the horror genre. 

"Hush" is a Netflix original film about a deaf writer who finds herself being hunted by a psychotic killer. It is a contained story with a focus on visual storytelling, which makes "Hush" feel more like a short film. Even though this film is only 87 minutes long, it is filled with constant tension. 

The cinematography in this film is very well executed. The contrast between light and dark provides some nice-looking shots, and the filmmakers did a great job of creating interesting camera movement. The film also feels very claustrophobic, with the killer getting closer and closer to his target as the film goes on. 

Probably the most interesting aspect of this film is the interaction between the two main characters. The plot is like a chess game, with both characters thinking about their actions before doing them. The protagonist makes a lot of smart decisions in the film, which is a welcome change in this genre. 

"Hush" also leaves a lot up to interpretation, which I find refreshing. The motives of the killer are, for the most part, left to the imagination. As director Mike Flanagan explained in an interview, the reasoning that the audience creates is scarier than anything the writers could put into the script.


I do have a few complaints with this film. I didn't care for the lackluster background music because it got distracting, especially for a film so engrossed in silence. Also, this movie doesn't have much rewatchability because of how straightforward the plot is.


All in all, this film is a very fun albeit somewhat forgettable time. "Hush" is on Netflix if you want to check it out.