reko-latvanen Reviews

Girlhood (2014)

A focused but unengaging hood drama

[6/10 · 3 March 2020]

The film follows the life of a teen growing up in a rough suburb of Paris. The technic on display is solid, creating strong visual motifs that carry and modulate throughout the film. The director likes showing characters in groups, dominating the frame. The film understands the attraction of a posse to a person not fully confident or formed, and communicates it soundly. She contrasts these images with the more personal shots of people alone, lost. These shots are rare, and really work all the better for it. A two-shot is also in use, but also frequent. There is a dissonance, something not fully confident about these shots, showing the heroine's inability to fully be herself and complete with just one person.

While the visual strategy of the film is sound, it also comes off as somewhat simplified. There is only so much you can tell the viewer with a specific shot structure. And one of the things that stays bland is the main character. She never seem to come together as a person, and while thematically it makes perfect sense, it feel frustrating to watch a film that ask you to follow a progression, only to not get to see any kind of payoff. The development is really minimal, with most of the broad changes happening when we're not around.

Overall, the filmmaking kept me interested moment to moment, and the film does take bold turns in order to take the story and character into different places. But the characters leave a lot to be desired and I just never got into the main character arc.

An American Werewolf in London (1981)

A crackpot horror/comedy (not really in that order)

[6/10 · 3 March 2020]

Two Americans travelling in The UK are attacked by a werewolf. One dies and the other survives, only to turn into a creature of the night himself. This 1981 John Landis cult classic starts off on a relatively moody and loose note, but the mood quickly evaporates when the setting changes from the moors to contemporary London and the focus shifts from honoring horror traditions to an unconvincing love story. The loose quality of the film is here to stay, though, and your enjoyment of the experience depends largely on whether you can accept characters acting wacky for the hell of it. For me, the fact that the second act is mostly just this instead of actually advancing the story kinda tanks the whole film.

The film does have its pleasures. The iconic special effects and makeup work are fantastic, working for both gruesome and amusing affect. All the actors seem to be on the right frequency when it comes to balancing conflicting styles and tones. Griffin Dunne really elevates his few scenes with deadpan delivery, even as his undead character's appearance keep getting closer to a meatloaf.

While by no means terrible, I was underwhelmed by this supposed gem. It's more of a time waster than anything, though fairly decent as such.

Under the Skin (I) (2013)

"Under the Skin" (2013): A dissapointingly unoriginal and dull experiance

[5/10 · 1 March 2020]

I was quite exited to watch a much discussed and analyzed art film from less than a decade back, seeing that I mostly consume films that have had longer to build their reputation. Considering this, you can imagine my surprise when instead what I got was an exercise in images seemingly created for an art exhibit rather than to tell a compelling story, paired with a sluggish and repetitive narrative made out of uninteresting conversations, walking/driving around and a lot of the textbook cliches involving an extraterrestrial or a robot unable to fit into a human world.

I find Jonathan Glazer to be an interesting filmmaker, but there is something oddly smug about this and his previous project, "Birth" (2004). His stories feel less mysterious than obscure, like he's trying to get one over on the viewer. Still, I do have high hopes for "Sexy Beast" (2000).

The technical aspects of the film are mostly average, too. There is an intentionally damp, lifeless look to it all, and the Scottish locations are barely utilized. Scarlett Johansson is the only actor with enough screen time or character to make any kind of impression, but she is, frankly, miscast. I consider her to be a talented performer, but within a specific wheelhouse. A role with little charisma, wit, vulnerability or humanity, pun intended, just doesn't utilize any of her gifts.

What I was left with afterwards wasn't much. Best I can say for it is that it's rather harmless. If one is into slow, moody films and doesn't mind that the thematics of gender roles and sexual violence come off as obvious, you might want to check this one out. Otherwise, I'd tell you not to waste your time.