The Host

Plot: A US scientist stationed at a South Korean army base instructs his Korean subordinate to dump chemicals down the drain, from where they will float out into Han river. Years later, a mutated monster out of the river kidnaps a girl, whose family comes together to disobey the government and find her.

Hot take: I might be completely wrong here, but here's what I think. The main plot of the movie is completely irrelevant. What is brilliant about it is everything that happens around it. Dr. Bong is making some strong statements about America and its involvement in foreign policies. He took pieces of history (US tactics in Vietnam, Iraq and Korea) and placed them around the shitty plot for people to drink up. So you get your action-horror-monster plot to follow and gasp for, but in the background you see the oppression and struggle of people living through consequences of the men on top. If the people in charge were more focused on figuring out the issue at hand and supporting its victims, most of the problems which the heroes have to face would never surface. He manages to take real things that US has done, colourise them to fit a fantastical plot then taken a single family who is exposed to consequences of all those actions. I personally empathised with them (I watched it with someone who didn't at all) and so had a glimpse of what it feels like to be hopelessly flailed around by the government. To ease off Americans for a sec, the movie also feels a bit like a shout-out to Korea for being a puppet-state for the US so it's not just the baddies that are meant to feel bad.

Good directing, the shots were wonderful and very suspenseful. Bong's movies retain a plastic, fairytale-like quality to them which I don't know whether I like or not. In this case, I think I would argue against it. Let's be real, they're his movies are a bit kitsch.

Scenes to remember: people throwing trash and food at the first sighting; the girl being swooshed away by the tail; the opening scene; the family having a group breakdown as cameras gather around them; protesters lying down and girl filming the scene.

PS kek big COVID vibes throughout all of the movie. Shoutout to BONG for predicting everything 14 years earlier.

Call me by your name

Plot: It's Italy in the 80s and, like every year, a research assistant (Armie Hammer) arrives at the professor's house to perform studies over the summer. During his stay, he forms a deep emotional connection with the professor's son (Timothée Chalamet).



Aga's take: I haven't read any reviews of this movie, but I hope they're great. I think there are many things that can be praised:

• Camerawork capturing the idyllic atmosphere of the scenery and life in a little Italian university town
• Lighting which felt natural for the whole movie
• Acting especially by the lead role, which was very expressive, emotional and real
• Writing and plot which were true to coming of age and captured youth in a non-labelling way
• Music which was integrated into the story, present, memorable
• Moral of the whole story, the simple beauty of it, single monologue scene of the father which captured the greater picture but didn't feel too full of itself but rather like sincere advice given to the viewer. Or maybe more like a painful conclusion about life's realities
• Very subtle background of changes in the political landscape of the story, which remind the viewers that the times the characters are placed in play a significant role

Beyond technicalities, the movie is beautiful. I think the story, although relevant, should be treated as secondary to the actors' play. So many emotions and internal conflicts are presented without any words. Stills from the movie are also P E N G. It's so well acted, so well directed and so aesthetic that I think you can shuffle through the stills and get the whole story and everything that comes with it without watching the movie. And on top of that you get great music and writing?? The longer I think about it, the more I enjoy the memory of this film.



I have a couple of questions that I would like to hear your thoughts to when you watch the movie.

*** SPOILER ZONE ***

Why does the family speak many languages? It would still make sense to have them speak one, it wouldn't take away from their aura of intellect.

Why does the beginning of Elio's relationship with Oliver begin as antagonistic? Is it portrayed that way to show his imatrurity and conflicting feelings or is there more to the way their interactions develop?

Why does Elio play the songs in different styles?

How is the boy's educated background, his love of books and music significant to the story and the way he addresses his feelings / how the environment reacts to his behaviour? 

What does it MEAN that they call each other by their own names?

I have my own thoughts on the above but I would like to hear yours first.

I have this thing that follows me around:
I'm not a big fan of touchy movie monologues which are meant to capture the point of the story, but I enjoy returning with my thoughts to the professor's conversation with Elio near the end of the movie (professor is played by Michael Stuhlbarg who I think is THE repression actor haha). He talks about Elio and Oliver having something most people don't have a chance to experience in their lives. He has come close to something similar but there was always something lacking for it to happen.

Firstly, I enjoy the ambigiuity in the monologue. The it is never explicitly named. Has he come close to having a relationship with another man in the past, but he never broke society's expectations to enjoy a relationship? Or does he talk about love in general?
If we take the second interpretation, I think what he says and the way the scene is crafted become more interesting. The professor points out that only a chosen few in the world get to meet someone on this planet that "they can call by their own name". I cannot be sure whether the director has achieved this purposfully to that effect, but I felt the scene was very touching and personal, framed almost as if it was us sitting on the couch next to our dad smoking a cigarette and sharing his reflactions on life. 

Are we just meant to empathise with Elio? Or is he talking to us? But if so, is he reminding us that statistically we are like him not Elio; we will come close but never have this deep connection with another human?

I think by creating this scene to have such an intimate feel, the director contradicts himself. We sit in groups of hundreds in the cinemas, each one recalling a bond in our lives that is so special it's comparable with the one presented in the movie. We empathise with the boy, understand the pain he's feeling and what the hopeless separation is doing to his soul. And then we're told that this bond is one in a million. So either 999,999 of us are dillusional or every bond of love we form, no matter the sex or language, we all get a chance to experience this unique, one-in-a-million feeling. Yada yada the mysterious flows of love and nature, every life is a story untold, blah blah. I don't think the moral itself is a very interesting one, but I think the contradiction of form and substance is an interesting one to think about. Are there any other movies that do that? Do they do it consciously?

Anyway, I enjoyed getting high to this movie. ✌

Assassin's Creed

Plot: The game but in a movie with $$$ actors.
Aga's opinion: Who the fuck let this happen?

Marriage Story (2019)

Plot: Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver are getting a divorce. She wants to move to Los Angeles with their young son, he wants to stay in New York City. She's an actress, he's a theatre director. They love each other, and they hate each other. Everyone hates the lawyers.

My admittedly bleak reflection: Divorce is poisonous, and not many humans are born with the antidote. Divorce gets in your blood and rots you from the inside out. And your children have to watch it all happen; they are poisoned for life, too. The positives? Divorce makes you practice forgiveness (although often you'll fail miserably at this), empathy (because everyone you know will probably get divorced), fortitude (but how long does that last?).

Divorce is an ugly thing, but this isn't such an ugly movie, so maybe divorce isn't such an ugly thing? Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson deliver incredible performances-- I only wish their characters had been more ordinary, rather than highbrow culture types. Otherwise, this is a compelling movie with lots of realistic dialogue-- definitely worth watching! I imagine everyone who watches this brings their own history to it; I don't think the movie has a bleak message or outlook, just many scenes tore me apart for "hitting close to home," shall we say...

Samsara

Plot: There is none. The movie is a collection of visually stunning shots composed with mind-bending music. It contrasts the natural wild world with the deeply cultural remains of ancient civilisations with the overwhelming fast-paced current society. Everything is shot on 70mm film.

Aga's hot take: The whole movie is magical in its simplicity. There are no words, there is no story other than what we project of ourselves onto the pictures. What ties them all together is a haunting beauty that doesn't let you look away. You can't wait for what the next scene will bring but simultaneously you wish this one will last forever.
The word Samsara is the opposite of Nirvana -- or as we may know it: the feeling of something being unbearably buff. So what story do I overlay over the pictures? Besides showing the hypnotising beauty of nature and humanity, I think Samsara shows without telling how we as humans went wrong. It shows that nature will reclaim everything it allows us to use now. It shows that we used to live in agreement with it, creating beauty which we fit into her frame and that's the only beauty that still remains -- everything worth our notice comes from before our times. It shows that now we lead artificial lives that have little connection to those civilisations past and our lack of sensitivity comes from masking our primal behaviours and roots. There is a single scene in the whole movie that was acted. I won't go into detail as I don't think I can do it justice, you have to see it for yourself. I think that scene summarises my read of the movie -- a man hungry for his true, wild, uncaged self, not oppressed by society, technology, money, free to express himself, content with being stripped of all religion and self-respect. Samsara is a sad, unnatural state and that is the state we have put ourselves in.
Everything you see in this movie tickles your brain. It must be insane to watch this high and something great to put on with friends because you can easily talk over it -- if you manage to move yourself out of the hypnosis -- and I imagine it makes for amazing post-movie conversation-food: you get to make the story. 10/10 would recc

Charlie Wilson's War

Plot: This movie, based on a true story, follows Charlie Wilson, a women&liqueur-loving (justifying his choice of secretaries: "you can teach them how to type but you can't teach them how to grow tits") Texan congressman, who gets convinced to visit a refugee camp in Afghanistan during the Soviet-Afghan war. After seeing the atrocities committed by the Russians, he dedicates the next decades of his life to raising funds for the biggest CIA covert operation in history to supply arms to the middle-eastern guerrillas.

My take:  This is Vice before Vice that would wish it was Vice if Vice came before this. The main character, as I imagine the real Charlie is to some extent, is a fascinating person, brilliantly portrayed by Tom Hanks and as we know well: fascinating people make good grounds for fascinating movies and it's even better for us (by us I mean the humble viewers) if Tom Hanks is somehow involved. Ending with a great quote from the real-deal Charlie "These things happened. They were glorious and they changed the world... and then we fucked up the end game." was one of a few moments in the movie when I felt like it wasn't trying to justify and sugar-coat America's involvement in the Middle-East. And this tear between wanting to believe in righteous intentions and facing the realities of US war crimes and atrocities that followed was a constant presence during the whole seance. At first read, I thought the movie is trying to do quite the opposite and it's just because such an intelligent, well-read individual as myself has blessed its makers with my somewhat-divided (by ironing) attention that it stirs such feelings inside me. But upon later thinking, it struck me that it must be the movie's purposeful manipulation of the plot and characters. It's a strong political statement not only on American government actions and the schemes behind them but on the corruption of congress, emotional incompetence of politicians and lack of foresight/ruthlessness in hindsight of anyone with money in Washington DC. Did I watch this movie just because it had the tag "Cerebral" on Netflix? Possibly. Did it live up to its name? Not exactly, but it definitely left me more educated and troubled than any other recent watch -- not from face value but rather the internal discussions that it begins in the viewer. Not sure why the posters try to put a romantic-drama take on it -- my recommendation would be kill it and let it lay. If you don't want to watch it for the plot, watch it for astronomy: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Julia Roberts, Amy Adams, John Slattery, Emily Blunt... I guess DiCaprio and Clooney lost their invites.

1917 (2019)

Plot: Two British soldiers in WWI must cross enemy lines to deliver a message to (a very angry!!! grrr british grrr fuck off mate) Benedict Cumberbatch.

Review: There were too many 'hold your breath' moments to count, stunning camerawork and color palettes throughout, a riveting plot, naturalistic (i.e. peak British British British) acting, and a truly harrowing portrayal of war (there is a lot of stepping over corpses). When this film was at its peak, it reminded me of Dunkirk, which is high praise. However, I thought the few moments of calm were somewhat clunky... I would've preferred two hours of unfiltered adrenaline, but I guess I can settle for an hour and forty minutes worth. I don't think it should win the Oscar for Best Picture (as some critics have suggested), but it probably deserves a nomination.

Bombshell (2019)

Plot: The story of the rampant sexual harassment at Fox News.

Review: An important, contemporary story told in the style of Vice and The Big Short, though, given the subject matter, Bombshell is much less buffoonish and much more sinister than its recent counterparts...In no small part because the women who were harassed signed non-disclosure (somehow, wickedly, actually called 'muzzle') agreements as part of their settlement with Rogier Ailes & co, so it's difficult to know the full extent of the depravity... It was very easy to leave the theater with Matt Schwimmer-levels of disdain for Republicans. To end on a more uplifting note, I thought Charlize Theron's Megyn Kelly was a stand-out performance of the year; Nicole Kidman and Margot Robbie were great as well.

Uncut Gems (2019)

Fig. 1: Bling'd-out furby (second from left) and Adam Sandler (third from left). 

Plot: Adam Sandler plays a part-time diamond dealer, full-time gambling addict with many creditors hungry to collect, a wife eager for a divorce, a girlfriend possibly cheating on him with the Weeknd ("He's good, even though he's Canadian"), and a superstitious NBA star desperate to buy an uncut opal supposedly containing playoff-winning powers. Featuring: a bling'd-out Furby (see Fig. 1).

Review: Watching this movie felt like walking the streets of Manhattan; it's loud and neurotic, but also supercharged and invigorating. The soundtrack and mixing (so much crosstalk!) masterfully contribute to this effect, as well as the frequent (and frequently sinister) use of close-ups. All who self-identify as "high-strung" or "type A" or "stressed" will feel a deep, and perhaps troubling, though largely metaphorical (I hope), connection with Sandler's chainsaw juggling routine of a life. If you want to watch a quintessentially NYC movie, watch this!

Three Films by Director Bong, Three Reviews by Reviewer Scott

I am Director Bong

Three movies, brought to us by the master: Bong Joon-Ho (aka DIRECTOR BONG). All are excellent-- though I would recommend them in the following ranked order:

1. Parasite (2019)

Plot: A poor family cons a rich family in Seoul. (The less you know, the better).

Review: A movie about infiltration that managed to infiltrate my brain; I can't stop thinking about how witty-yet-thrilling, empathetic-yet-ruthless, intelligent-yet-simple it is. I'm reluctant to say much more because I don't want to build up your expectations too high (...or is it already too late?). DEFINITELY SEE IT!


2. Okja (2017)

Plot: A young girl is desperate to rescue her best friend, a superpig named Okja, from ruthless meat industry tycoons, zealous Animal Liberation Front activists, and a batshit Jake Gyllenhaal.

Review: The perfect film for those who drink Billionaire Tears, vindictive vegans, self-loathing meat lovers, or anyone who has ever loved their best friend. I was deeply moved by this movie (*allegedly, Desus & Mero style* tears were shed by the end), but my sister's one-word review was "Weird." Like the impossible burger, this film may be an acquired taste.


3. Snowpiercer (2013)

Plot: After an attempt at climate engineering goes horribly wrong, the planet freezes over and the last of humanity is trapped aboard the Snowpiercer train. For seventeen years, the rich have lived at the front of the train and subjugated the poor to live in squalor at the very back. Our Handsome Revolutionary (Chris Evans) is determined to fight his way to the front of the train, and he's willing to crack all of the 1%er skulls he meets along the way.

Review: As far as action movies go, this one is likely among the most imaginative and class-conscious ever made. So, depending on your tolerance for action movies and/or sympathies with Marx, it's either the tallest mountain or the tallest jockey. I liked it, but, as you know, I'm also a Warren voter who appreciates a nice loud, violent movie.

Coming soon

Movies I've seen recently:

Parasite
Okja
Snowpiercer
Uncut Gems
Bombshell
Jojo Rabbit
Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker
Knives Out
The Godfather
Logan Lucky

Movies coming up on review

I've seen 'em very recently, just need to find time to write something about them so I'll dump the titles over here:

1. Boogie nights
2. Little Miss Sunshine
3. Hidden figures
4. Scent of a woman
5. As good as it gets
6. Midnight in Paris
7. To Rome with love
8. American hustle
9. Blue Jasmine
10. Seven years in Tibet
11. The Laundromat
12. Samsara
13. Tale of Tales

Casablanca

Plot: Ricky runs a bar in Casablanca, a town out of nobody leaves because visas are so hard to get. One day, the love of his life, who broke his heart, shows up... with her dead husband?!?

Aga's opinion: it was exciting, well paced for a knitting and conveyed the atmosphere of Morocco such that I can't wait to go there now. Again, great last line. And I finally have seen the classic!! (and embarrassingly figured out that Casablanca and Casanova are not the same place/person eeek)

North by Northwest

Plot: A man's identity is mistaken which leads him to a whole lot of trouble, danger and pussy.

Aga's opinion: It was fun!! I'm going to watch more of Hitchcock if I find the balls to because I didn't expect this to be as fun as it was. Very good looking people damn. If only everyone still wore suits and pearls every day...

The Women (1939)

Plot: A rumor gets out among a group of women that Mary's (?) husband is cheating on her. She loves him very much and is very torn up about what to do, but eventually instead of listening to her mother leaves and divorces him while she still loves him. (SPOILER) Eventually they get back together because the woman he cheated on her with (and married!!) turned out to do it only for his money. So, all in all, women love assholes, the men cheat on them, then the men want them back and they're just waiting around for them to be scooped back up because they love them so very much and that's what real love is. Aha...

Aga's Opinion: Oh my there was a LOT of screaming and screeching and giggling and very fast talking and high pitched voices in that movie. But that added to its black and white feel. I don't know if it was sexist or feminist but probably it was a real treat at the time to see such a female-lead movie and now the attitudes are just no longer relatable. What's incredible about it is there is not a single male role in the whole movie -- not a single man shows up! though they are mostly the centrepiece of any discussion. Hilarious last line (they really had a thing for last lines back then didn't they) "But what about your pride?" "Pride is a luxury a woman in love simply cannot afford!" *runs into arms of a cheating husband* hahahaha noice It does get pretty silly and funny at moments but I would say it's something to watch at a slumber-party more than for a sit down and big movie watching. So it's up to you really.

A Roman Holiday

Plot: A princess visiting Rome sneaks out of her quarters and falls asleep in the middle of Rome, ends up in a journalist's bed and spends the day with him as he tries to get a story on her without her figuring it out.

Aga's opinion: Great movie for knitting. A bit boring at times, definite old-movie romantic arch where they instantly fall madly in love with each other but that's counter balanced by an ending that makes you want more of that cheesiness. Fun to watch if you're going to visit Rome to then hit up all the right places. Audrey Hebburn is a real life princess wow

Knives out

Plot: Head of a wealthy family empire commits what might seem like a simple suicide questioned by a keen detective to find out what happened, why is there a donut hole in the middle and who hired him.

Aga's opinion: You hyped me up for this movie a little bit too much. I really enjoyed it, it was definitely entertaining and had a whole range of well defined characters. It was meant to be a bit overplayed and it tastefully felt like that (Nazi boy and 150yo grandma were pretty funny). The humor sometimes felt cheap and that's a shame. I was living for Daniel Craig's KFC accent although it felt a bit unnatural but that's just maybe because that's what the accent is like or just because it's Craig. The plot was fun until the burning down of the hospital -- ?? wasn't he trying to be really subtle this whole time? But all in all I would definitely recommend from a visual perspective, very good editing, loads of fun shots and camera movements, great scenography.

Spotlight

Plot: A group of investigative reporters from the Boston Globe follow a lead on child molesting done by local priests to slowly reveal it's all part of a global-scale, embedded issue in the Catholic church.

Aga's opinion: Described on Netflix as "cerebral", Spotlight sure proves I'm a big fan of "cerebral" movies. Shines light on an on-going, perversive issue and has some great acting in it too. Entertaining, relevant and all round just so damn good. Go see it if you haven't.