There are things I could take issue with in I’m Still Here; the slow pace, its sometimes meandering focus, etc. I believe those issues are present, but at the same time they don’t really hurt the film. When I watch a film I often think of a flaw as something that if changed would make it better, but I don’t necessarily think I’m Still Here would be better if it was shorter or if it was more focused. Its makers want you to live in it, with its characters, to really see them as people, to understand them, more than anything. In that way it succeeds wholeheartedly.
Horror used to have a genre called “Rape-Revenge,” an upsetting but admittedly accurate label for films where a protagonist (almost always female) would be sexually assaulted, then enact violent revenge on their attackers. While we still get a few films like this from time to time, it’s interesting that Companion and other films of its ilk have more or less replaced this genre. Out is the violent assault, in is manipulation and gaslighting. The art evolves along with the abuse it comments on.
Heart Eyes has a self selective audience. If a goofy, gory slasher film themed around Valentine’s day sounds dumb, in poor taste, or just like a bad idea to you, I imagine you’ll find that to be the case with Heart Eyes. If you are like me and you can name the killer from My Bloody Valentine off the top of your head (Harry Warden), then Heart Eyes is for you and I can imagine you’ve probably already seen it. Slasher films thrive and are innovated upon within the indie space, but there’s something about a big budget studio slasher that’s specific and incredible when done right. Heart Eyes embodies that nebulous thing well.
Love Hurts is a tragedy, not because the movie’s sad, but because while you’re watching it you can see a better movie trying to get out of it at every turn. The cast is all giving it their all, the fights are a lot of fun, it looks good, and yet there’s no narrative bones for any of it to rest on. Voice over fills us in on big details and often we get told that characters care about each other without getting a chance to really see that care for ourselves. There’s a feeling that we were robbed of something great if only just a few more things had been planned out or come together better.
The Monkey is about a toy monkey that plays the drums and makes people die horribly. Really, that sentence describes it in totality, as a film of incredible gore and violence, and of extremely silly wit. The film’s advertising has played up the film’s violent side (understandably so, for gore heads in the audience it’s incredible), but what I think makes it really succeed is just how refreshingly sardonic it all is. The film is a dozen Groucho Marx’s sniping at each other for an hour and a half, occasionally interrupted by one or two of them exploding into gore confetti. It’s When Harry Met Sally, but instead of kissing in the end they get hit by a truck. I loved it.
A documentary like No Other Land is really impossible to describe using any kind of qualitative metrics. The point of it isn’t to be “good” (though, despite that, I would still argue it is). The point of it is to show you genuine, actual suffering that is happening right now, that could be not happening if only people cared enough to stop it. I doubt the makers of No Other Land care if you or I “like” it. They just want you to see what they show in it. So go see it.
I think it might be hard to express to someone who hasn’t seen any of the Paddington films why they elicit such a profound sense of joy. It would be sort of like trying to explain why ice cream tastes good or why it’s meaningful to hug a loved one after a long time of not seeing them. To really get it, I think you have to experience it for yourself. And sure, some people might find ice cream too sweet or not really like hugs (and that’s okay), but in my experience most people love ice cream, hugs, and Paddington.
