If you care about the Oscars, you know that the 2023 “Best Leading Actress” category was between Cate Blanchett for this movie and Michelle Yeoh for Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022, my review here). It was Michelle who managed to snatch that Oscar (and deservedly so, in my opinion); however, having now finally watched Tár, I understand why it was close and honestly wouldn’t be mad if it went to Cate, as much as I was happy for Michelle. But Tár relies much more on Cate than Everything Everywhere All at Once on Michelle, as we have several (now Oscar-winning) performances. In Tár, we have some great actors in supporting roles, but as far as making this movie what it was, it was Cate and her alone, not dissimilar to the “isolation” her character feels throughout this movie.

The first thing I noticed about Tár is how cold and detached this movie felt, but the more I delved into it, the more I understood that it was very much on purpose. Cate’s character, Lydia Tár, isn’t the most likeable person to ever exist; she is the exact opposite of that. We quickly sense that something is “up” with her, and the film builds on that feeling. We see her being strict, combative, paranoid, angry, and down, and there might be times we almost feel sorry for her, but the movie never tries to defend her character and everything/anything she did. In this sense, Todd Field‘s direction reminded me of Martin Scorsese, as a few of his movies tiptoe on the fine edge of making you understand an evil character to the point that many people accuse him every once in a while of “glamorising” them. Of course, both Marty and Todd don’t do that whatsoever; you just need to look deeper at those characters and understand the difference between understanding a character doesn’t correlate with sympathising with them.

And Lydia Tár is a brilliant example of this. You might even agree with some things she says throughout this movie, but once you realise what “that thing” is that is haunting her and stopping her from sleeping, I don’t think there will be many who would stand by her. Despite her undisputable talent, she is a flawed person. Many movies here would try to prompt the discussion of whether her talent is what makes her flawed or vice versa (her being a great artist correlates with her having these flaws), but I never got that from this movie. Tár isn’t interested in that because that’s not the point. The point here is for us to understand the fall of this giant and why she had fallen.

As mentioned above, this entire movie rests on Cate’s performance alone. She is in 99% of the scenes, and no matter what she does, you are fascinated, intrigued and maybe a bit scared of her character. Cate portrays her so earnestly and effortlessly that by the end of the movie, you are convinced that Lydia Tár was an actual person (she isn’t) and that Cate was born to play her (she absolutely was). In any other year, she would be the clear frontrunner for the Oscar, but in 2022, Michelle Yeoh ruled supreme.

Besides Cate, the movie has many things to say about our culture, about the state of conversations we seem to be constantly having, like judging historical figures by today’s standards, cancel culture, etc. But it does it in a way I feel it will age well. Plus, Tár is one of those movies that is filled with many “blink and you will miss it” moments; it requires repeating viewings to fully get your head around everything you see, witness and feel. And that is why I can’t give the highest rating because there was something stopping me, and I can’t pinpoint what “it” was. But I strongly believe this movie is one of those that only gets better on repeat viewings, so that should make for a fascinating watch. Plus, due to the epic classical music and Cate Blanchett, it never felt like a chore to watch this film, and it is almost 160 minutes!

Overall, Tár is a fascinating story about a complex character you will google immediately to check for yourself whether or not she is real. The movie convinced me she was real, as everything that happened felt like it could have easily happened. Plus, and I can’t underestimate this, Cate’s performance is one for the books. For most actresses, this would be their career highlight. For Cate, it’s just another year. Tár is a cold, precise movie that will have you question a few things but ultimately will deliver an experience you won’t forget any time soon.

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

Until next time,

Luke

To write a sentence “a controversial film made by Lars von Trier” feels almost redundant, as his last couple of movies have had that attached to them. And yet, The House That Jack Built seemed different, as I still remember reading about many walkouts during its premiere in 2018. When I read why many have walked out, I thought that this might be it; this might be where Lars has gone too far, but removed from all of that by a couple of years, I was intrigued to see it for myself. I had to check it out to see whether it was as uncomfortable as everyone claimed. The short answer is yes.

The long answer is yes, BUT… The House That Jack Built is not twisted for the sake of it. I am a strong believer that art should make you a bit uncomfortable, and great art is when you can watch something so awful, yet you understand that it’s fine to like it or even love it because that is what art is for. To explore the deepest, darkest places some humans might go. And if you make it surprisingly funny at times (as this film is) and shoot it as well as Lars, you will get a response. Sure, the response for about half of the audience will be disgust and walkouts, but that’s the gambit Lars has been doing for a while, so I am sure he is used to it by now. You don’t make a movie like this “by accident”, as that would be the one and only thing pushing me over the edge and making me “walk out” on this movie too. But in my case, I would have switched the film off as I watched it at home. Luckily, there is a point to this madness and craziness. Crazy right, an artist makes a controversial art to make a point and not just for shits and giggles? Imagine that.

In all seriousness, this film is one of those I “enjoyed” but never want to see again. And yes, it feels weird to write “enjoy” about a movie like this, where we follow a serial killer doing the most horrendous, brutal and insane stuff throughout the entire film. I hope everyone sees the quotation marks around the word enjoy. There are a couple of elements I must discuss, and the first must be the actors.

I don’t think I saw Matt Dillon act as brilliantly as he does in this film. I can’t imagine how tough it must have been for him, as he was not only the lead of this film, he was the antagonist as well. He plays the ungrateful role of an unlikable lead, who we aren’t rooting for, but we should be fascinated by him. But only if he does his job well. And he did. Matt Dillon delivered, and if this film wasn’t as unhinged, I am sure there could have been some award consideration coming Dillon’s way. I loved that Lars got Bruno Ganz as the voice of Verge (most people know him as Hitler from that one “parody YouTube video”; a few might know that video is from another hard-to-watch movie, Downfall (2004). I admired the choice because Bruno’s voice fits in this film just brilliantly. Mainly because, for most of the film, you don’t know who this Verge is or what his role in this “experience” is. And then, when it was revealed… I loved that reveal.

The others are here for a scene or two, and all are great. Uma Thurman portrays one of the most obnoxious and awkward people you will ever see. Jeremy Davies makes an impact in his few scenes, and Riley Keough‘s character “Simple” will first break your heart and then make you ultra uncomfortable. I won’t say she had the harshest scene in this film because there is always the “family hunting scene”, but goddamn, flip a coin between those two. And then, of course, what happens after in the freezer… Okay, there is no one scene that would top them all. The House That Jack Built makes you live through a horrible event/scene, lets you breathe for a minute and then says: “Hold my mug full of blood. I can do even better.” Except that, in this case, the “better” means worse, way fucking worse.

That is the main takeaway from this review; despite my “liking” this movie (again, the quotation marks are working overtime), I can’t say for sure I would ever recommend this movie. Firstly, it’s long. Secondly, it’s uncomfortable. Thirdly, it’s fucking brutal. If you are squeamish, don’t even chance it and go anywhere close to this movie; I beg you. Due to “growing up” on the Internet, I have been desensitized to seeing horrible stuff, but this movie shook even me. The only consolidation for me was knowing that this was just a movie, and no matter how convincingly everything looks, it’s not real. The usual stuff you tell yourself when watching a horror movie. But unlike your slasher horror film, this feels so raw and real, it makes you… I am sorry to keep using this word, but I don’t think there is any better one than ‘uncomfortable’.

But… I couldn’t look away. I don’t want to spoil anything if, for some reason, you decide to give this movie a chance like I did, but there is a “method to the madness”. Lars puts you through hell and back, but once you start to understand this film and what The House That Jack Built is trying to say/do, it is a fascinating watch. I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say that we get a glimpse of what a serial killer’s brain would look like. Matt Dillon is precise, methodical, and insane, but in his insanity lies sanity. What I mean is, in a very twisted way, you start to understand him throughout the film. At no point in this film will you ever be on board with anything he’s done, but to see the world the way a person like his character sees it certainly was a journey.

I guess that’s where the cookie crumbles; this movie takes you on a long, horrifying, uncomfortable journey, and it’s only up to you whether you will go and are willing to see past the horrifying murders. If you subscribe to the theory of great art making you uncomfortable and getting you thinking about stuff you wouldn’t be thinking about otherwise, then and only then, I would recommend this movie to you. However, if you are happy with not doing that and would rather live your entire life without seeing people get tortured, killed and used as material for this house, don’t feel ashamed to pass. The House That Jack Built is one of those rare movies where no rating will surprise me. If you rate it 5/5* or 0/5*, I would honestly not be surprised by either and would understand you entirely.

Overall, The House That Jack Built is one hell of a movie that will test you in ways I couldn’t imagine. It’s a film that has got Matt Dillon in possibly his best-acted role ever; it’s a well-shot film with a fascinating story once you understand what is happening and where we are going with all this. As mentioned above, I can’t outright recommend this because it’s hard to say: “Hey, do you like murder and torture? You will enjoy this movie then!” What I will say is, if you don’t mind getting uncomfortable, you have a strong stomach and enjoy being challenged by the art you consume, you might “enjoy” this movie. And if you watch it, no matter if you love it or hate it, it will stay with you for a while.

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

Until next time,

Luke

I believe this movie holds the title of being the first 2023 film where most of the audience went: “Holy shit, that’s actually better than we expected!” Because I still remember the trailers for it, and they didn’t inspire confidence. They were not bad, but for a movie about the most famous role-playing game, they seemed to be all over the place tonally. It seemed like it would be one of those “How did this get made?” Hollywood cautionary tales of spending too much money and not understanding the material. Well, how wrong we all were.

A huge disclaimer before proceeding – I have never played any Dungeons & Dragons. I am not into these games; I understand what they are, but they are just not my thing. So, my perspective will be focused solely on this movie and what I heard from people who are fans of these games.

I think the biggest reason, Dungeons & Dragons: Honour Among Thieves succeeded was it never took itself too seriously, but the fans/game was never the butt of any jokes. Also, when I talk about success, I mean at least audience-wise, it seems the movie was a box office flop, earning just over $200 million on a budget of $150 million (that must have hurt). It seems like John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein cracked the formula where they understood how to make jokes from this fantasy world without taking cheap shots at it or at its audience. There is nothing worse than seeing a game adaptation that doesn’t respect the source material or makes a few cheap jokes about its audience, but this movie seemed to be made by people who have affection for the game.

Again, I have never played a single minute of this game. But I understand there are many easter eggs for the most hardcore players. And here’s the thing, I never got lost or thought: “Oh well, this joke probably works for people who have played the game before.” No, everything was explained in the movie, so I could easily follow this story. From a few things I read about this movie after I watched it, many easter eggs are either in the background or used in dialogue, but are not “vital” parts of the story, meaning you can watch this film and understand what’s happening and your friend who’s played this many times is happier than a sailor in a whorehouse because they mentioned this item from the game or this place.

Another (as vital as not mocking the fans or the source material in my eyes) reason I enjoyed this movie was the fact they grounded this fantasy world. Because at the core, surrounded by all this magic, fantasy and adventure, lies a pretty simple story about a dad trying to make amends and get his daughter back. You need something that’s easy to relate to, something “simple” that grounds your fantasy, and this was a great decision. If they went on a quest for the Master Key of Shablong that opens the gates to Frubing land to get the Axe of Winterland, that would seem more generic, and I could see myself losing interest because I wouldn’t be as familiar with any of these. But when you ground your story with some simple yet effective family stuff, it usually works, as long as you have great actors to sell it.

And boy, did they win a jackpot there. Chris Pine continues his quest to be “the best Chris”, and his charisma, charm, and talent shine through this film. He’s effortlessly funny but delivers in many other dramatic scenes and was the perfect cast for this role. I also liked Justice Smith and his dynamic with Sophia Lillis, even though I am not sold about them being a couple. I think the movie suggests that they might hook up at the end, but for me, they worked almost better as this brother/sister duo. Michelle Rodriguez continues her role of “strong woman”, and she is the strongest and most useful out of all our protagonists, at least regarding close combat. Also, her scenes with a surprise cameo actor (I won’t spoil who it is because I didn’t know he was coming) playing her ex-boyfriend Marlamin were the highlight of this movie. Hugh Grant continues his renaissance of playing “charming bastards” and yet again gives us a funny, charming and villainous performance.

I also appreciated the action shot in a creative way, which seems to be a staple for Daley and Goldstein. After their movie Game Night (2018), they seemed to be carving this niche for themselves of directors who understand action and comedy and can blend them together well. I am on board with that and can’t wait to see what they direct next.

The only reason I am not giving this movie “the full rating” is just my feeling. The film didn’t “hit” me to that level where I would want to rewatch it instantly. And maybe, who knows, when I rewatch it, I will discover that I was a simpleton, and there was no reason to hold off on that “full rating”. But for now, I had a blast; I can’t critique much, just there was something about this film that “prevented” me from fully giving in.

Overall, Dungeons & Dragons: Honour Among Thieves is a nearly excellent film that understood the assignment. Yet again, 2023 seems to be the year when we finally cracked down on game adaptations, and we can hope Hollywood has learned their lessons and, from now on, no more excuses. We have had a couple of excellent ones, and this movie 100% belongs in that conversation, as any normies (such as myself) can enjoy it alongside the hardcore fans who worship this game. I had a great time and would be open to a sequel.

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

Until next time,

Luke

If there ever was a movie I am as far from the target audience as possible, Gran Turismo might be it. I don’t game (that much), if/when I do, I don’t play racing games, and due to the Fast & Furious franchise, I have given up on any racing movies being decent. And, to be perfectly honest, until a few months ago, I didn’t even know this movie existed because it missed me entirely, and it wasn’t until I saw a trailer in the cinema that I became aware of it. I also remember the exact moment I went from “Who is this movie for?” to “Ok, this movie might be for me.” That moment was seeing Neill Blomkamp‘s name. I like all his movies and was disappointed when he couldn’t deliver his version of Alien. His name was enough for me to be cautiously optimistic about this film and to get me into the cinema. Honestly, if it were not for his direction, this would have been a bland, middle-of-the-road film.

When we look back at 2023, one thing is for certain – many (myself included) might label this year “when we managed to get game adaptations right.” The big one is the show The Last of Us (2023 – ?, my review here), and now, Gran Turismo can stand proudly in that category as well. Let me be clear; I am not saying this movie is on par with The Last of Us, of course not. And you can argue that they had a much easier job not fucking this movie up, and I would also agree with that. However, the fact Gran Turismo is as good as it is almost a miracle.

Usually, I tend to begin with the positives, but in this instance, I will start with the biggest negative I have to say about this film. The reason for that is that it is also the only criticism from my side. The predictability of this movie was the only thing I could see as subpar. Yes, the film is based on a true (and frankly unbelievable) story, but that also means we can see everything “mapped out”. There is almost nothing that will surprise you; every story beat this movie hits, you can see coming from miles away. Also, some characters could be more flashed out (like the “girlfriend character” played by Maeve Courtier-Lilley). This is all we know of her; she only exists as a proxy to our main hero. If I were to put my critical hat on, those would be the biggest issues this movie had.

But even those didn’t bother me as much because Gran Turismo moves faster than the cars in the film. The movie is filled with many cliches, but they work within the movie because of the “based on a true story” element, the cast and Neill’s tiny touches. Everything from the freeze frames telling us Jann’s positions throughout different races and the video game noises to those scenes where Jann imagines being in a real car while playing the game was great. Those were the moments that differentiated this movie from any other in its genre. We’ve seen many racing movies (even if we wouldn’t count the Fast franchise), and Neill has managed to shoot this movie in such a way it feels different. The emotional moments work; you are there with Jann during his trials to become a racer to actually racing and having to end up fourth to get his licence; you are in those moments with him.

And by him, I mean Archie Madekwe. I don’t think he gave an Oscar-worthy performance, but he is likeable and charismatic enough that I wouldn’t want anybody else in this role. He was perfect because he felt like a regular guy who just loved Gran Turismo (the game) and was great at it. And his chemistry with David Harbour was magical. Gran Turismo is, funnily enough, a movie that finally convinced me of Harbour’s charm. I like him in Stranger Things (2016 – ?), but I haven’t seen a film with him where I would witness that charm “transferred” onto the big screen. But his character was fun, and again, his mentor/”race dad” relationship with Archie’s character made this movie and elevated it. I also loved what they did with Orlando Bloom‘s character. In any other lesser film, he would have ended up being the antagonist, and he has moments where you think that is where his character will end up, but he never fully goes there. His character tip-toes on this fine line between a sleazy corporate guy and a person who actually cares about the sport and is more in-depth than I expected from a movie based on a racing simulator. I also need to give an honourable mention to Djimon Hounsou, whose presence is always appreciated and Geri Horner. Yep, Ginger Spice is in this film, and she is our protagonist’s mum, married to Djimon.

The best example I can give you is this. Do you remember Need for Speed (2014)? Yeah, nobody does either, and there is a reason. If Gran Turismo had been made even five years ago and with somebody else other than Blomkamp, we would have ended up with a film like Need for Speed. That means a totally average, okayish movie you have some fun with during it, but you forget about it days later. And unlike Gran Turismo, I have played one of the Need for Speed games (Underground 2 was my jam), so if anything, I should be biased towards that one. But alas, I am not because it was literally an average, middle-of-the-road movie that brought nothing new. Gran Turismo, on the other hand, embraced its video game origins while telling this incredible story of a young guy who made his dreams come true. It took the genre cliches, used them as guardrails and delivered a fun, exhilarating story that swung past me in no time. It wasn’t until I was home from the cinema and was reading some trivia on IMDb that I realised this film was 135 minutes long! I could have sworn it was just under two hours, and that is probably the best thing I can say about any movie. If I get lost in any film so much, I don’t even know how much time has gone by that is usually a good sign, and it means I must have had a blast watching it.

Overall, Gran Turismo is a blast. If you have ever played the game, the chances are you will love it. If you are like me and have never played it, you may still enjoy yourself because the film embraces its video game origins while telling the true story of one extremely charismatic guy who just wanted to race. Gran Turismo delivers on the adrenaline and the thrill of the sport; it also gives you a great pairing with our titular duo Harbour + Madekwe. Yes, it falls into some cliches and is predictable, but you won’t mind as much, given you will be busy rooting for Jann and be there with him every step of the way. This movie had no right to be as great as it is. Go see it in the cinemas.

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

Until next time,

Luke

What started as Hollywood’s idea to bring this old, almost forgotten TV show from the 1960s back to the public consciousness (the original series ran from 1966 – 1973) became a franchise almost by accident. You could argue that this franchise has two eras – before 2011, where you had two decent movies and one bad one, and after 2011, where we witnessed the new heights these movies could reach and the stunts Tom Cruise can pull off. And from then on, we’ve got three excellent Mission: Impossible films in a row, where people can argue the tiniest details about why fourth, fifth or sixth are their favourites. And Dead Reckoning Part One isn’t a snooze fest by any means; on the contrary. But, there were some tiny details that made this film just shy of calling this one “excellent”.

Let me make it clear. Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One is still a great action movie, and I strongly recommend you watch it in the cinema. Before I delve into some minor nitpicks, I want this fact to be understood, this franchise set its standards so high that it is impossible (quite fitting, isn’t it) to deliver all the time. Or at least at that level. But let’s discuss all the brilliant things this movie did right.

Firstly, the cast. Whether it’s returning characters like Vanessa Kirby and Rebecca Ferguson or the newest additions like Hayley Atwell or Pom Klementieff, you won’t go wrong as everyone is on their A+ game. Especially Hayley finally landed a gig in a mainstream blockbuster and proved she could go toe-to-toe with anybody, and when that “anybody” is megastar Tom Cruise, you know it will work out. Her chemistry with him, that back-and-forth throughout this movie, felt like pure magic, and I hope she will get more recognition. Yes, all the regulars like Ving Rhames or Simon Pegg are still great and work perfectly together, but Hayley brought the youth and energy this franchise can always use. Regarding Pom and Vanessa, they both did well with the screen time they got given and Rebecca… I will get to her later.

If we put the Entity (aka the sentient AI) aside for a moment, this movie’s primary antagonist is Esai Morales, who I wasn’t familiar with at all. And looking through his bio, he’s been working since the early 1980s! Yes, mostly in many TV shows, but still, that’s impressive. I thought he nailed his role, where he is ominous, menacing and mysterious enough for you to project anything onto him. Every time he was on the screen, you knew something would go down, and he is more than a formidable opponent for our IMF crew.

The action was, as always, spectacular. Albeit, and this is where my first minor gripe comes in, I wish they would put less of the big stunts in the promotional trailers. I cut down on how many trailers I watch, so I was only familiar with the trailers for this movie from the cinema and the second trailer “gives away” the train crash. I understand that you need to market your action movie by showing action scenes, but I can’t lie; the scenes weren’t as impactful, given I had seen them before. Can you imagine seeing the motorcycle jump without knowing it’s coming? That being said, the Rome car chase was funny and terrific, the aforementioned motorcycle jump was pure insanity, and the train crash was… very reminiscent of The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997). It felt like the director (Christopher McQuarrie) really wanted to replicate that and make it ten times more epic and five times as long. And the length of it was my other tiny issue. For some reason, I never was “in” that scene, so it seemed like forever before they managed to escape, and it wasn’t as thrilling for me as I hoped it would be.

My biggest issue with Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One was how they “handled” the character of Ilsa Faust, aka Rebecca Ferguson. I don’t want to spoil anything; therefore, I will choose my words carefully. I apologise for sounding vague for a second. The film makes a choice at the beginning that pretty much telegraphs what will happen to her in this film. Fine. But then, because of that scene, I didn’t care as much (so the complete opposite of what that scene should have made me feel), and when that something finally happened, it felt off. Her character didn’t feel like the one we got to know over the last two films. I understand why they did it, but… Especially with that scene at the beginning, it just felt “off”.

And I think that can sum up my feelings about this movie. I enjoyed myself tremendously; all the critiques I talked about here are minor, but they stop me from giving the “peak” rating. But again, this franchise has been on such a high for so long that even the tiniest of “slip-ups” can be felt more than usual. Think of it this way – in almost any other action franchise of today (except for the John Wick movies), this would be their best movie, hands down. The quality is here, from the performers to the action, stunts, humour, and the villain; everything gels so perfectly here that I almost feel bad for not marking it higher. And yet, if you asked me which Mission: Impossible I want to put on right now, I would have to think about it for a while because I don’t actually have a clear favourite one, but I would definitely pick from either the Ghost Protocol (2011), Rogue Nation (2015) or Fallout (2018). And those are not just the peak of this series, but some of the best action movies of the last 20 years.

Overall, Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One is a nearly excellent film worth seeing in the cinema. The action is almost impeccable, the AI villain is curiously more topical than ever, and Hayley Atwell shined in her role. Despite my tiny gripes, I wonder how this movie will play on future viewings, especially when paired with Mission Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part Two (2024). I can see myself turning around and being in the same boat as many others who consider this film the best one in the Mission: Impossible franchise. I can’t say the same yet, but only time will tell because this is still an enjoyable ride, and quite frankly, you won’t go wrong with watching any Mission: Impossible film past 2011. We are truly spoiled when we can argue about tiny details of which movie is more awesome while acknowledging that they all are superb.

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

Until next time,

Luke

Unless you are living literally under a rock, you must have heard about Barbie. Whether it’s the doll or this film, or maybe you have heard or even participated in the Barbenheimer (the event where you watched both this film and Oppenheimer (2023, my review here), the same day/weekend they came out), it was impossible to escape the campaign behind this film. And, based on it crossing one billion dollars (at least by Monday, 7th of August when this review comes out), it worked. And you might have even heard many different opinions from most young people saying this is a masterpiece to a surprising (?) amount of mainly older men complaining about how “woke” this film is. Is it really that woke? And what is woke anyway? We don’t use this word in this mojo dojo casa house blog. 😉

The truth is, Barbie is a clever film that knows precisely what it wants to say, says it and lets you decide whether you like it. Greta Gerwig delivered and made a movie that’s the best possible outcome for a film about the best-selling doll in the world. She showcased her cinephile side with references to a plethora of movies from 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), The Matrix (1999) or Grease (1978), and they all make sense within the film without feeling forced or out of place. I also loved how everything in Barbieland felt over-the-top and plastic-like, and then we went to the real world, which felt so mundane compared to it. That seems like an obvious detail, but when we learn how the Barbieland works and why it looks the way it does, it makes even more sense, and it’s those little things that make this world come to life. Nothing in this movie is “just because”. Everything, every prop, every set, has its purpose. It would have been so easy to put things together “because that’s what we associate with Barbie” and for no other reason, but no. This movie not only justifies everything; it gives us brief history lessons on many items and other dolls many have forgotten about. Like Allan. Poor guy.

Despite its star-studded cast, this movie is never overtaken by any side character (not even Allan, even though his scenes were hilarious and Michael Cera was born to play him), and both leads shine. Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling are both perfect in their respective roles and what’s better is that they are perfect for entirely different reasons.

Margot plays her Barbie with sincerity and earnestness and is so naturally funny that it’s impossible for you not to fall in love with her even more. I presume we are all Margot Robbie fans? Yes, great, that’s good. Anyway, talk about a delicate balance between being sincere and overacting, especially when playing a doll. But Margot nailed it; she found “the line” where she never once overacts or overreacts; she… is Barbie. And her vulnerability towards the end… I will address it soon, but that’s why you had to have somebody with her acting chops in this role. Bravo.

Ryan Gosling understood the assignment. His Ken is not just “kenough”; he is way more than that. His Ken goes from this delusional “puppy” to the other extreme, which is patriarchal macho bro dude. Funny how that in no way, shape or form mimics the real world and addresses actual issues; nah, it’s just a doll movie. Nothing to see in this performance, so let’s move along. Except, of course, we won’t because on top of him being effortlessly funny, he gives this performance everything, and then some, we could sympathize with Ken, even when he acts like a douche. I know the Academy hates giving nominations for comedic roles (for whatever reason), so I, unfortunately, don’t expect either Ryan or Margot to get nominated, but they would both deserve it. And that’s something I didn’t expect to write about Barbie.

For the majority of the film, I was unsure of my rating. I knew I liked the movie, don’t get me wrong, but I wasn’t sure where I would ultimately land, and that was true until the last 10/15 minutes of the film. Then the film hit me “in the feels” just right, where we see how much of a love letter this movie is to all women everywhere. Margot gives it her all and sells you everything that ending needs and then some. But, and this is a major but – the ending doesn’t omit man, on the contrary. I have noticed this “trend” where mainly people on the right side of political view believe this movie is heavily feminist and hates men. To all those people, I just have one simple question. Did you even finish the film? Without going into spoilers, the movie is quite clear about the treatment of all the Kens, and I didn’t think it was disrespectful at all. Oh yeah, and the treatment of Allan, can’t forget about him, poor guy.

I also loved the America Ferrera storyline involving her daughter, Ariana Greenblatt. Not only did they have a believable mother/daughter dynamic on the screen but their story was a vital part of this film and the overall end. I am also simply happy to see America Ferrera succeed; she has been “just famous enough” for ages now, and with Barbie‘s success, I hope this will help her become a household name. She has the acting chops and seems like a good person overall, so I wouldn’t mind if she had more power in Hollywood.

The one tiny negative I had with this film (and this is purely “me problem” that might go away on repeat viewings) – I expected it to be funnier. Many people praised this film for being hilarious, and while yes, there are some great moments. But more often than not, I found the jokes just “ok”. I think I truly laughed maybe three to four times. The highlight was that I was the only one in my cinema who laughed at the “Zack Snyder cut of Justice League” joke. But again, this is only a minor gripe; my sense of humour is just different, so I can’t blame the film for that. I would much rather praise this film for what it is – a love letter to all women, a movie with a great message of tolerance. It is also about staying true to yourself and how your identity shouldn’t be defined by others. And, of course, about Allan! That poor guy.

Overall, Barbie delivered on the massive hype surrounding it, and I had a blast with it. I still don’t know how it became such a success, but I honestly don’t care because I am happy for Greta, Margot, Ryan, America… the list goes on and on. It’s a clever movie with a few funny jokes here and there, but most importantly, it’s a film that might touch you (appropriately). I wonder how much this will be remembered during next year’s Oscars, especially for both our leads; it would be a cherry on top of this pink cake. That’s the ultimate sign of how great this movie is, that fans discuss (in all honesty) whether or not the leads could get nominated for the Oscar… for a film about a doll! Greta truly worked her magic and showed us we are all “kenough”, even Allan.

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

Until next time,

Luke

I need to start this review by clarifying something – the first Mamma Mia! (2008) is my happy place. It was one of those feel-good movies we would have on many times because my mum absolutely loved it back when I called the Czech Republic my home. I must have seen that movie at least ten times, and that is a conservative guess. But for whatever reason, it took me until now to watch the sequel; I think the biggest issue was it was available to stream briefly, and then it got taken down, and it wasn’t until recently I noticed it on UK’s Netflix. So I finally “corrected” this mistake and watched it.

To my genuine surprise, this sequel was excellent. Sure, it is yet again all sugary, cotton candy equivalent of filmmaking, where all you need are some ABBA songs, and all your worries will disappear. But I must say, I thought the camera work ruled here. Robert D. Yeoman not only (who shot most of Wes Anderson’s movies) made this film feel dynamic, but his shot transitions (like the phone call between Amanda Seyfried and Dominic Cooper) were inventive. I appreciated that extra mile, where you could have just shot something “traditionally”, but he and the director Ol Parker decided to put that extra sparkle on this musical, and it fit beautifully.

My main hang-up was not having Meryl Streep back (I don’t think that’s a spoiler as that’s been shown in trailers too). I had to get used to these two timelines, one where we follow Sophie and her efforts to open the hotel and the other where we see young Donna (Lily James) and her journey and how she ended up in Greece. But honestly, it didn’t take me that long to get back into this world where people break into ABBA songs spontaneously, and it makes sense. And a big part of it was Lily James.

I am so happy she is getting more traction now, in the last couple of years, as I believe she is one of the most talented actresses of her generation and one that could become an Oscar winner. For example, she convinced me that she could have been young Meryl, not just because she resembled her, but because she perfected her mannerisms from the first film with no hesitation. She also radiates this energy and her smile… One of the characters in the movie tells her something like: “Your smile radiates every room you enter.” And I honestly couldn’t agree more. I thought she carried this movie and was perfect in this role.

As for the movie itself, you get precisely what you expect from a movie called Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again! The silliness is back, the bright colours and the big dance numbers all set to ABBA songs, many of which are engraved forever in our pop culture. And as with the previous film, it can be too much positivity; too much “cotton candy” for many to digest at once. Both of these movies are the rare ones where I understand people on both sides. It’s easy to love it for it is or absolutely despise it because it’s just too much of… well, everything. But I am firmly in the first camp. And I can say that this sequel surprised me with how much they hit everything they should have, and when the final dance number began, and we watched all the actors from the different timelines jamming it together and being silly, it was hard not feeling happy.

Overall, Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again! is a movie that surprised me on several fronts. From the clever camera work and editing to Lily James effortlessly leading this film to the touching tribute to Meryl’s character, I have really enjoyed myself. And I can see this one day; when I have a Mamma Mia double feature, my rating may climb even higher. Yes, this is the movie equivalent of visiting a candy factory for a day and eating nothing else but candy, but sometimes, that’s exactly what you need.

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

Until next time,

Luke