First time I’ve watched this movie, I thought it was good, but given Hitchcock’s other movies, I thought this must be one of his “lesser” movies. Well, my girlfriend is really into Grace Kelly right now (can’t really blame her), so I thought I’ll show her this movie and that’d give me a chance to re-watch it, to see whether I might notice something I could have missed the first time.

Truth be told, I don’t think I have noticed anything new, but I did enjoy the movie a bit more the second time around. I don’t remember the cinematography being as stunning my first time watching this movie, so that immediately struck me. The other thing that caught my attention – the age difference between Grace and Cary Grant didn’t bother me as much, as with Rear Window (1954) and the age difference between her and James Stewart in that movie. I don’t know why, maybe Grant (even though he looks significantly older) aged better than Stewart…? But somehow, they worked for me slightly better, as a “couple” and it was more believable for Grace to want Grant, as even in this role, 50 years old, he was still charming.

It’s a bit unfair comparing To Catch a Thief to other Hitchcock movies, as he’s effectively trying to “take a vacation”. What I mean by that, the movie isn’t as serious as the movies that are considered to be his masterpieces, so we shouldn’t put this film next to the likes of Psycho (1960), Vertigo (1958) or The Birds (1963) as they aren’t in the same league, because they were never supposed to be! To Catch a Thief is an enjoyable summer movie about, who can serve almost as a commercial for France and even the greats can take a holiday every once in a while.

What I found a bit hilarious and I guess you could count as “sign of those times” was Brigitte Auber‘s character, Danielle. It wasn’t anything about her or her performance, it was more about everybody around calling her “a kid”, “child” etc., so I had to check my trusted adviser IMDb and not only she wasn’t a kid (which was quite clear from the film) she was full 4 years older than Grace, who was supposed to be “the mature woman”, as a contrast to her character…? I don’t know whether I was more amused than confused, but then again, those were different times…

To Catch a Thief is definitely worth seeing, as it’s nice, “light” entertainment, with great main actors and stunning cinematography. The only thing this movie has going against it, is the man who made it, and the incredibly high bar he set with some of his other movies. But if you judge this movies on its own merits, rather than the director’s reputation, I believe you should enjoy this film. Especially in COVID-19 times, it’s great seeing a nice, sunny beaches, with people on them, not worrying about whether somebody next to them might infect them.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

No matter who we are and what we stand for, I think this is something we can all agree on – there is nothing better than a great “whodunit” movie. Unfortunately, this genre either consists of stories we’ve seen done before (Agatha Christie novels being constantly made and remade) or movies that aren’t that great to begin with and rely only on some sort of twist, that doesn’t necessarily work upon multiple viewings. This is where Knives Out comes out and surpasses all expectations. I can’t even think of any new(ish) movie that would come anywhere near to the quality of this one, in the same genre.

You can think anything you want about Rian Johnson, but he doesn’t like to make predictable, boring movies as he’s always trying to do something slightly new. Sometimes, it doesn’t necessarily work for some people, so he might have created one of the most divisive movies of all time (my review for The Last Jedi can be found here) but some other times it works brilliantly (for almost everybody) and then we get films like this one.

What makes Knives Out unique in its “whodunit” category, is not only the fact the movie tells/shows you early on what has happened, but it’s based on an original story. Which works wonderfully, because even if you know what happened (or do you…?!) you are not quite sure where the rest of the film will lead you, so you follow it. And it might, or might not, surprise you several times along the way. I have seen this movie in the cinemas (oh, cinemas… I miss you so much) and I really, really liked it. But I had a feeling that a second viewing would be where a movie like this can be properly tested – once you have all the details at your disposal, you can be the “detective” and see whether the movie holds up, or whether some scenes and details don’t make sense.

And upon my re-watch, I am happy to report that Knives Out only gets better. The film moves well (it’s over 2 hours long, but you never feel it, it just flies by you) it’s genuinely funny, packed with a stellar cast and the great, original story is just a cherry on top of a delicious… in this case it wouldn’t be a cake, but doughnut. But there is a hole inside of that doughnut. 😉 What makes this movie truly great is the fact it’s half an homage to this “whodunit” genre, half almost a parody of it. But not a mean, spiteful parody, it’s parody done with heart and by somebody, who you can tell loves (and knows!) this genre really well.

Let’s talk about the cast for a bit, as a big part of this movie’s appeal is not necessarily the fact most of the actors are proper stars, but the fact they all act against their “stereotypes”. Daniel Craig is playing not so serious, yet brilliant detective with southern accent and you can tell he’s enjoying every second of it. Chris Evans is playing proper douche (complete opposite of Captain America) whose “Eat shit” scene always makes me laugh and Ana de Armas, who’s usually typecast as “the hot girl” in plenty of other movies, is portrayed here as nurse known for her brain/work ethic rather than her looks. These three actors stand out the most out of the entire cast as those were the most surprising “against the type” choices for their respective roles, and that’s a part of what makes this movie great – they all needed to go outside of their comfort zone and try something “new” and it worked. And mainly with Ana, I was slightly disappointed to see her not be at least nominated for the last year’s (or technically this year’s) Oscars, because as much as this movie is an ensemble piece, she carries a lot of it and if her character wouldn’t work, the movie would just fell apart.

It’s already been announced there will be a sequel, and I honestly hope it won’t be a traditional sequel. Rather than, what I could imagine and would be up for, is Daniel Craig’s character solving a new case, someplace else. Just him, as Benoit Blanc with his crazy, over the top southern accent, in a new detective story about something completely unrelated to this film and I’d be on board, 100%. It will be interesting to see where Rian Johnson will go with this and whether we might have something more here. I will be on a lookout and need to admit, I need to checkout more of Rian’s filmography. So far, he hasn’t disappointed me, as Knives Out is definitely one of the best movies of 2019.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

It’s hard to put into words what this movie means and has meant to me for the past more than 15 years now. But I knew starting this blog, that sooner or later I need to review Lost in Translation. The movie, that’s been at the very top of my favourites for more than 15 years now (I believe the first time I’ve seen it was around 2004/2005). On my most recent re-watch I’m happy to say nothing has changed. Which either means this movie is still as close to a perfect movie as possible, or I’ve stopped growing mentally and have peaked when I was 15. For the sake of this review, let’s presume it’s not the latter, and move on. 😉

I still remember my very first time watching this movie, as everything came together nicely – it was one of the very first movie’s I’ve seen with subtitles and not over-dubbed (believe it or not, it’s still not common on Czech TV to have movies or TV shows in their original language, so we dub movies and TV shows, which doesn’t sound that weird when you are born into it, but once you get used to English and other languages, it’s striking how it can change and sometimes ruin a movie), it was just after my birthday, it was just at the time when I was getting into watching not just your “typical” Hollywood movies… One Czech TV had a summer thing, focusing on “indie” cinema, something you wouldn’t find someplace else (again, this was 2004/2005, way before streaming services became a thing) and this was one of the movies they were showing that summer. I remember watching all of them (one movie a week) but no other movie stayed with me for as long as this one. There was something about it I knew I loved, even though I couldn’t precisely pinpoint what is was.

That’s when I’ve started to realise I seriously love movies, as you don’t have to understand every single detail, you don’t have to “get” every single scene, hint, or symbolism, as great movies will let you in and make you live the story. Lost in Translation certainly does that. It drew me in with its almost documentary like cinematography, with its soundtrack, that is still unique but not in some “hipster” way, with the performances of the main stars, the ever so great Bill Murray and really young, but already perfect Scarlett Johansson just before she became THE Scarlett we know today.

I’d like to stop and talk about her, as I don’t think she gets the praise she deserves. People tend to focus on Bill Murray’s character, as he’s the funny, more “relatable” character, but Scarlett is the humanity of this movie. You could make an argument that Bill Murray is the brain, but Scarlett is the heart, potentially the soul of this movie. Before she became the sex-symbol and later the Black Widow, she was Charlotte – the girl next (hotel) door, who if played just a tad differently, would became annoying character, and the movie wouldn’t have worked as well. But Scarlett understood the character so well and knew how to portray her strong, yet vulnerable, confident, yet not sure of what to do, and most importantly, slightly terrified of things to come, doubtful of herself, looking for a purpose. And she plays it so honestly and with no hesitations, it seems like she’s not playing any character, it’s just who she is. Honestly, looking at the different awards and nominations, I can’t help but think Scarlett was snubbed that (Oscar) year big time, she deserved at least a nomination. This is the movie that made Scarlett Johansson into the superstar she is and I am so grateful.

The main reason I fell in love with this movie and why I still admire it today, is the beautiful direction by Sofia Coppola. And I am not just talking about shots and composition, no (even though this movie is beautiful to look at!) I am mostly talking about her establishing a relationship between Bill and Scarlett that feels so close, real and beautiful. Any lesser movie would’ve tried to have “something” happen between these two (either a really big fight, or some sort of bullshit romance) whereas this one takes its time to develop a friendship, that feels genuine, where there ups and there are some downs. But because both of them are written like actual people, there is no big fight, or over the top emotional scene, they just acknowledge that “the down” was a bad “move” on both of their parts and move on, almost instantly, but it feels like real life. The same goes for any hint of romance – any lesser filmmaker would’ve gone for something like that, but not Sofia, as it wouldn’t fit and the movie would’ve lost the connection. They were never meant to be together, they might not even see each other again in their lifetime after they both say goodbye, but they will always have that week or so in Tokyo, where they found each other, where each found something in the other person they needed at that very moment, that particular time. I am not sure whether any director would be able to give us something like this, where we have a man and a woman, in a really close relationship, without any hint of romance, sex or sleaziness involved.

As I was saying prior, I was just lucky enough to stumble upon this film at the right time, where I wasn’t sure where my life is going. And to be honest, I still don’t sometimes. But you know what? That’s ok. Just take it one day at the time. And maybe fly to Tokyo, go to a hotel and see if Scarlett Johansson is hanging around… 😉 As the movie tagline says, “Sometimes you have to go halfway around the world to come full circle”.

Lost in Translation is the perfect movie to me. I wouldn’t change a single frame, scene, actor or a song. I can’t see any way this could’ve been improved. Everything, and I mean everything, fits just right. Every time I watch this movie, no matter what stage of my life it is or where I am, for those 102 minutes, everything is alright with the world.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

There are movies that don’t age at all, at least when comes to the story and its themes, and Sunset Blvd. is one of them. You can read this movie in two different ways – on one hand, it’s dealing with stars of the “silent area” not being in the demand anymore, on the other, it’s also dealing with the idea of age (mainly for women) in Hollywood and how one day, you are at the top of hill, just for you to end up down at the bottom the very next day, with little to no warning.

And in 70 years since this movie’s release, not much has changed. We still hear actresses of “certain” age groups complaining, how this system is still very much in place, because in Hollywood, once you hit a certain age, you are no longer commercial, you can’t be sexy, audience knows you so well they are bored with you… at least that’s what they tell you.

Sunset Blvd. is also commentary on a few another things – how women back then (and maybe even now?) needed to have a man in their corner to get something done, even though they might be more talented than the man in their corner. It’s also asking us to consider something, that’s universal – how much is your life/soul worth? Would you “sell” yourself for living in a golden cage, being taken care of, but you’d still be trapped? Is there a price on person’s dignity? These are all universal themes that have been explored numerous times since 1950, but it only shows how much ahead of its time this film truly was.

I really liked that the movie explores the dignity part so well, by showing us two different angles to this – on one hand, we have the young writer, who doesn’t mind the money, but he knows this isn’t for him. On the opposite side we have the butler/ex-husband, who’s devoted his life to his ex (now boss) and who’s trying to make her feel like she’s not forgotten and she’s still in demand, wanting to help her, not realising it’s the worst he can do for her. He’s already “sold” his soul to her, even though he can’t see it.

I’ve forgotten how much “meat” is in this movie, as in today’s pop-culture, Sunset Blvd. is mostly remembered for the body in the pool opening scene, the narration and Gloria Swanson‘s performance and a few iconic lines (“I *am* big. It’s the *pictures* that got small.” or “All right, Mr. DeMille, I’m ready for my close-up.”) But what I don’t hear discussed as much is how much there is to chew on in this film. So many different themes, so many different topics, all covered (especially for that period) really well.

If you haven’t seen this in a while, I’d highly recommend a re-watch and I think you’ll find that the movie aged really well and even though it’s been 70 years since its original release, it’s as relevant now as it was back then. There are still people who are more than willing to be trapped in a golden cage, so they don’t have to work day in their lives and there are still people, who overestimate, how famous (or how much influence) they actually have.

That’s for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (2017) was a late and (to many) surprise of hit of 2017 (and when I say hit, I mean “almost made a billion dollars” hit) where the movie was just a mindless fun, but it was fun nonetheless. Plus the main characters lead by Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson were really fun to watch, especially him (a nerd in The Rock’s body) and Jack Black (teenage girl controlling Jack Black’s body) made for a few decent laughs, so when the movie ended, you had a good time watching it.

So, what do you do when your movie makes almost a billion worldwide? You make a sequel as soon as possible, where you try to change things up a bit, but not too much, as that’s what people really want, right? Well, kind of… Sequels, especially the comedy ones, are always hard to do, because plenty of times the reasons for the first movie working so well aren’t that simple, they can’t be calculated, or predicted – the movie landed perfectly, there was nothing like it playing in the cinemas (the first movie went against The Last Jedi, my review here, one of the most divisive films ever made, so people who didn’t want to go and see that went to see the first Jumanji instead), it was during Christmas, so this was THE family movie to see… I am pretty sure even the executives of the first Jumanji didn’t predict for it to do THAT well. I am circling around the point, but the main thing about sequels (nowadays) is simple – it’s not really about the quality, but money, the box office numbers. And with Jumanji: The Next Level, that’s unfortunately the case.

This movie is a bit bizarre. The first 20 minutes or so before we go back, are the “necessary evil”, where we need to establish why we are going back to the game, and it doesn’t feel as natural as the first film. But once we are in, we have a twist, where Danny DeVito is inside The Rock’s body and Danny Glover “controls” Kevin Hart, and that was surprisingly great. I really need to take the time to compliment Kevin Hart – I don’t mind him, I even kind of like him, but I never understood why people LOVE him, as he’s always Kevin Hart in every single movie. Which is not bad, it just gets old quite quickly. But in this film, given he had to play/mimic Danny Glover, that forced him to try something completely new and it worked, dare I say this was his best performance I’ve seen. He was, by far, the highlight of this movie. I only wish he’d step out of “himself” more often, tone it down a bit and he might become someone, who I would follow more closely.

Beware, MINOR SPOILERS are coming!

But then, since we NEED to get the characters back exactly in the way they were in the first movie (remember how much fun were you having with that?!) there is a magic switching river, where everybody switches bodies and plays the same characters as before. That’s where the movie lost me a bit. If we were to introduce this “switch”, why not try something else? Why did we have to go back to the same formula as the first movie? Wouldn’t it be more intriguing to see different interpretations of different characters by the main actors? From that point on, it feels like the movie is in “neutral” gear, where it hits all the places it must to “land” safely, but safe is pretty boring. I guess Awkwafina was also funny, but it wasn’t enough and it felt like she didn’t have anybody interesting around to compliment her character in most of her scenes. And this movie’s villain, played by Rory McCann from Game of Thrones is not really necessary for the movie, as he barely does anything…?

Jumanji: The Next Level feels like a movie that was based on half of a great idea, that was rushed through everybody, so the studios can make the quick cash, as soon as, possibly yesterday. Most of the movie feels half baked, and that’s shame as overall, it’s not a bad movie by any means, mainly the first hour. I just can’t shake the feeling that if this film came out later, giving the screenwriters time to work on the story, jokes, and the concept of this movie as a whole, it could’ve been way better than just “ok”. Which is what this movie is – a perfectly ok movie, where Kevin Hart finally proves he can be more than just Kevin Hart. I am really hopping if there ever was to be a third movie (the setup is quite obvious that there should be at least one more movie after this) they will take a more time to work on the story and try to experiment with the game elements.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke