The Devil to Pay

Movies: The Conjuring 2

Three years ago, I went to see James Wan's The Conjuring and it sparked in me a renewed interest in the horror genre of film. Ever since seeing The Ring in theatres when I was in high school (a genuinely terrifying experience), I've had a love/hate relationship with horror movies: I was morbidly curious to watch them, but so afraid of my own fear than I rarely watched any beyond some of the older horror classics like Rosemary's Baby.

The Conjuring got me to face down my fear. The film is a masterpiece of psychological horror and suspense. It's controlled, atmospheric, extremely well-acted, and just...interesting. Whether or not you believe the "facts" behind the case of the Perron family haunting, or whether or not you see ghost hunters Ed and Lorraine Warren as agents of the Catholic Church or masters of hoax, The Conjuring is intellectually stimulating to watch--a rare descriptor for a horror movie.

So I was a little disappointed (though not surprised) that The Conjuring 2 did not live up to the greatness of its predecessor. Don't get me wrong: The Conjuring 2 is scary as hell. Watching the film (especially on the big screen) is like riding a roller coaster for 2 hours--my heart was pounding and I was watching through my fingers. In terms of "scares per minute", The Conjuring 2 bests the original Conjuring.

But the movie itself is not as good. It's not as subtle as the first film, which allowed tension to build for long periods of time, where the sequel just gets right to the point. Additionally, it throws a whole lot of supernatural ghouls and ghosties at the wall to see what sticks, and the whole thing feels over the top, especially considering it's "based on a true story"--the well-documented case of the Enfield poltergeist.

Basically, a family of five (single mom Peggy Hodgson plus two daughters and two sons) were terrorized by a violent entity from 1977-1979. They couldn't just leave their home because they lived in government subsidized housing. This entity appeared to possess Janet Hodgson, the 11 year old daughter of Peggy. The local Church contacted famous ghost hunters and devout Catholics Ed and Lorraine Warren (played by Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson) to simply observe and see if the situation is a demonic possession. The Church didn't want to get caught up in a hoax, so they refused to exorcise the Hodgson's home until they saw concrete proof that it was the real deal.

In the film, Lorraine isn't too hot to become involved after she has a premonition of her husband's death and is convinced that if they keep ghost and demon hunting, he'll be killed. Ed persuades her that they need to help this vulnerable family.

Throughout the film, we encounter ghouls in many forms: a demonic nun haunting Lorraine, a creepy old dead guy who possesses the body of Janet Hodgson, and even a computer animated ghoul known as "the Crooked Man" from a children's song. It's all too much. If the film had stuck to the facts of the case rather than cramming ghosts into every crevice, I think it would have been much scarier and, like the first Conjuring, more interesting. The central mystery of the plot--is Janet (and, indeed, the whole Hodgson family) faking this ghost?--is enough plot to drive the movie. We don't need an entire B plot dedicated to the Warren's marriage and religious beliefs.

I want to spend a minute talking about the very interesting fact that both The Conjuring and The Conjuring 2 are rated R--despite no sex or nudity, no overly gory violence, and very mild language. The films are rated R simply because they're too scary to be PG-13. Isn't that crazy!? In fact, the plots are very family-friendly and religion-friendly, especially the overly sentimental Conjuring 2 in which Ed Warren encourages the kids to think of the ghost as a "bully" and stick up for their possessed sister. If you took out most of the scares, The Conjuring 2 would basically be a PG rated film.

The R rating really says it all about the allure of The Conjuring 2--if you like to be scared out of your wits, it's a thrill ride of a movie. Many of the scares are cheap jump scares, but just as in the original film, there's also a good amount of tension-building and power in NOT showing the ghost right away. But if you're looking for a movie that is of equal film quality to the original Conjuring or other recent films in the arthouse horror genre, such as It Follows, you won't find it here.

Grade: C+

Flopstar

Movies: Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping

This review contains spoilers in the sense that I reveal jokes and plot gags that occur throughout the film. If you want a blank slate, don't read the review. 

As part of the comedy-musical act The Lonely Island, Andy Samberg, Akiva Schaffer, and Jorma Taccone have been successfully creating music that is both hilarious and actually pretty catchy for over a decade. From "Lazy Sunday" to "Dick in a Box" to "I'm On a Boat", The Lonely Island aren't just three goofballs singing about fucking mermaids and getting high--they're talented musicians who understand the rhythms of various subgenres of pop (for example, "Dick in a Box"' is a tribute to 90's era R&B). They create music that both perfectly captures pop while also lovingly mocking it.

So it's fitting that Samberg, Schaffer, and Taccone would be the ones to write and star in the funniest "Rock-mockumentary" since This Is Spinal Tap. That's not to say Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping is *as good as* This Is Spinal Tap, which is undoubtedly an unrivaled classic in both the comedy genre and mockumentary genre, but it's pretty freakin' funny.

In Popstar, Samberg plays Conner 4 Real, a solo act who was once part of boy band The Style Boyz with buddies Lawrence (Schaffer) and Owen (Taccone). After splitting up, Conner's star exploded, with Owen serving as his DJ and sycophant while estranged Lawrence went off the grid to live on a farm and do (very poor) woodworking projects.

The film opens right before Conner's latest album, ConnQuest, drops. Mocking the real life U2 fiasco where the band foolishly decided to foist its 2014 album Songs of Innocence upon everyone with an iTunes account whether they wanted it or not (they didn't), Conner decides to have his album automatically upload to all Aquaspin (a fake company) appliances the day it drops so that people will open their refrigerator doors and be "graced" with Conner's music. Causing mass blackouts across the United States, the album release is an unmitigated failure (a TV screen shows President Obama calling Conner a "dumbfuck").

Additionally, the album is a critical failure, receiving a negative score on Pitchfork and no stars, but simply the shit emoji, in Rolling Stone. 

With ticket sales to his concerts plummeting, Conner's manager Harry (Tim Meadows) suggests touring with an opening act--Hunter the Hungry (Chris Redd), a Tyler, the Creator-esque hip hop artist who ends up battling Conner for dominance when it becomes clear that the only reason people are coming to see Conner's shows is to see Hunter perform.

Combine this with an epic wardrobe malfunction (ironically, too little of Conner's private parts are revealed, prompting tabloids and gossip sites to inquire "Conner 4 Real has no dick?"), a marriage proposal to his girlfriend Ashley (Imogen Poots) gone awry, and miscellaneous drunken shenanigans, and Conner is in danger of becoming a complete has-been.

Meanwhile, Owen is desperately scheming to get The Style Boyz back together by encouraging Conner and Lawrence to end their estrangement and apologize to one another for former wrongs. Owen is convinced that getting the Boyz back together is what the public actually wants and will result in money and acclaim for all of them.

Popstar is filled to the brim with celebrity and musician cameos who are interviewed documentary style about their experiences with The Style Boyz and Conner 4 Real. The film is also interspersed with music videos and performances of Conner's music, which is--no surprise--goddamn hilarious. Conner releases a song called "Equal Rights" (clearly riffing on Macklemore's "Same Love") where he expresses his acceptance for gay marriage while repeating over and over that he himself is not gay. Another song, "Finest Girl (The Bin Laden Song)", which actually premiered in digital short format on Saturday Night Live a week before the movie came out, is about a woman who asks Conner to fuck her like the US military "fucked Bin Laden". The song is incredibly catchy (and profane) and was in my brain for a week after I heard it.

Finally, the Style Boyz release a new song, "Incredible Thoughts", which sounds like a send up of Insane Clown Posse's ridiculous song "Miracles". "Incredible Thoughts" contains lyrical gems such as:

What if a garbage man was actually smart?
A common misconception that we're tearing apart
And to a dog, dog food is just food
And to a sock, a mansion's just a big shoe
A milk dud, sitting in the acid rain
A house cat addicted to the cocaine
No teeth, unlimited floss
These are just a few of our incredible thoughts
 
 Popstar (which was written my Taccone and Schaffer) is full of both dumb humor and smart riffing on the pop music industry. Again, it's not quite at the level of This Is Spinal Tap, but it's a consistently funny and cheerful comedy. Samberg, as always, excels at playing a doofus with a heart of gold. Popstar is an enjoyable summer popcorn flick that will leave you smiling and singing:

She said "Invade my cave with your special unit"
I said "He wasn't in a cave", but there was no stopping
She demanded that I fuck her like we

Fucked Bin Laden
Fuck Bin Laden
Fuck Bin Laden

She wanted to fuck me harder then the US government
Fucked Bin Laden

Grade: B

Jane's Addiction

Movies and Books: Love & Friendship; Eligible

Ah, Jane Austen. Although she never married and had children, her legacy has stayed strong for two centuries. There have been countless adaptations and remediations based on her beloved novels and stories.

I'm not much of a Janeite myself. Here's how my knowledge of Jane's work stacks up:

I read Pride & Prejudice

I listened to part of Emma and part of Sense & Sensibility on audio, but finished neither.

I've seen screen adaptations of Pride & Prejudice (Colin Firth version and Keira Knightley version), Sense & Sensibility (Emma Thompson version), Persuasion (Ciaran Hinds version...and maybe the Sally Hawkins version?), and Northanger Abbey (Felicity Jones version)...plus Clueless, if that counts.

That's about it. So I'm familiar with her works, but not intimately and extensively so. However, this weekend I was immersed in Austen adaptations--I saw Whit Stillman's Love & Friendship, based on Austen's unfinished novella, Lady Susan; and I finished reading Eligible by (one of my favorite authors) Curtis Sittenfeld--a modern retelling of Pride & Prejudice. Both were delightful.

Love & Friendship

Director Whit Stillman may as well be the modern Austen of filmmaking. His movies focus a lot on manners and social class. I confess I've only seen one of his other movies, Damsels in Distress, but I've heard a lot about Metropolitan, which is based on Austen's Mansfield Park.

In any case, Stillman instinctively understands the witty and subtle language of Austen. In Love & Friendship, the tongue is sharper than the sword and a woman's cunning is her main protection against destitution. The story concerns one Lady Susan Vernon (Kate Beckinsale, lovely and perfectly suited to the role), lately a widow who is seeking a wealthy man to marry her daughter, Frederica (Morfydd Clark, all peaches and cream). Along the way, Lady Susan manages to break up a marriage by tempting Lord Manwaring to go astray from his vow of fidelity to his wife.

Lady Susan is very different than many of Austen's heroines. Like them, she is highly intelligent and witty. Unlike them, she is shows no remorse in her self-serving, narcissistic ways. I suppose Emma Woodhouse is her closest cousin in the Austenverse--but with a touch more sociopathy. She is described as "the most accomplished flirt in England".

Her best friend is American ex-pat Alicia Johnson, played by a sadly miscast Chloe Sevigny (her acting is too modern for this movie). The two scheme together to find both Lady Susan and her daughter suitably rich husbands. Susan believes she's found a match for her daughter in Sir James Martin (Tom Bennett, who steals the show), a complete idiot with incredible wealth. Frederica is horrified at the prospect of marrying a man described as both a "blockhead" and a "pea brain", although her mother insists that he is a kind man who only wishes to make Frederica's life easy. Meanwhile, Susan herself spends her days flirting with Reginald DeCourcy--her sister-in-law's younger brother, which horrifies the entire DeCourcy family, both because of the fact that Lady Susan is about a decade and a half older than Reginald and because she's, you know, a heartless bitch.

The plot is pretty thin, but the jokes fly fast and furious, especially in regards to Sir Martin's idiocy. Although Stillman adapted the story from Austen's unfinished novella, he likely had to write most of the dialogue. Additionally, some of the plot points seem pretty suggestive for Austen (fornication, adultery, etc), so I assume Stillman had a hand in that.

The costumes are lovely, the acting is mostly good (Beckinsale and Bennett especially) and the film feels like a tasty petit four--delicious and sugary, but not all that filling.

Grade: B

***

Eligible

*this review contains spoilers*

I'm a big fan of Curtis Sittenfeld's. I've read her (yes, Curtis is a woman) novels Prep, American Wife, and the less successful and less well known The Man of My Dreams. When I heard she was writing a modern day retelling of Pride & Prejudice where Liz Bennet is a magazine writer in her late 30's, Jane Bennet is a yoga instructor trying to get pregnant using donor sperm, Darcy is an arrogant neurosurgeon, and Bingley is a former contestant of a "Bachelor"-like reality series (titled Eligible), I was like "sign me the fuck up!"

I was not disappointed. Though Eligible is less poignant and serious than Sittenfeld's earlier works (American Wife is her best novel, for my money), it is far more witty. Many of the characters' personalities and motivations remain intact from Austen's classic: Mr. Bennet is wry and dismissive; Mrs. Bennet is politically incorrect to a horrific degree and concerned that none of her daughters is married; Caroline Bingley is an enormous bitch; Lydia and Kitty are shallow (they're obsessed with both Crossfit and texting); and there's even an appearance of Willie Collins--a step-cousin to the Bennet sisters who is a self-centered dork made wealthy from his tech start-up and in want of a wife.


However, Sittenfeld makes some delightful changes from the original text. For example, Kathy De Bourgh is not the imperious meddler she is in Pride & Prejudice; instead, she's a famous feminist (think Gloria Steinem) whom Liz interviews for the magazine she works at. Additionally, the plot twist with Lydia Bennet is significantly different than in the original. It was not at all what I was expecting, and I think it will upset more conservative readers, but I loved it!

Speaking of conservative readers--many will not like various aspects of this book. Liz and Jane have sex lives. Liz, especially, has an active sex life with both the Wickham character (a married man who strings Liz along for years) and Darcy. Yep, Lizzy Bennet fucks Darcy outside of marriage in this version of P&P. You wanted a modern retelling, you got it!

But for people with open minds, Eligible is a delight. It's not the deepest book in the world, but it captures the feeling of Austen's prose perfectly--the witty banter, the (sometimes willful) miscommunications between Liz and Darcy, the realities of how money changes one's life. It, however, is more lackadaisical on issues of social status. While Mrs. Bennet cares just as much as she does in the original about social standing, the Bennet sisters don't care at all. In Eligible, getting married is not the chief concern of any of the sisters--although, certainly, they are affected by romantic love, as we all are.

Eligible is not a Pulitzer Prize winning work of fiction, but it's a delicious treat that is also satisfying.

Grade: B+ 

Animal Magnetism

Movies: The Lobster

Wow. Director Yorgos Lanthimos presents a singular vision with The Lobster, a pitch-pitch-pitch black satire about the pressure for singles to couple up.

The viewer is dropped into a world in which singles have 45 days to find a suitable partner. If they fail, they are transformed into an animal of their choice. The title comes from protagonist David's preferred animal. Lobsters "live for over one hundred years, are blue-blooded like aristocrats, and they stay fertile all their lives" David explains in regards to his choice. Plus, he "likes the sea very much".

Colin Farrell, with a shaggy haircut, an adorably flabby belly, and a pair of unflattering glasses, plays David, whose wife has left him for another man. He is required to check into a hotel, where all his personal belongings are confiscated. He will have 45 days to find a mate. He can earn extra days during "hunts", where he and the other guests use tranquilizer darts to hunt down "loners"--people who have decided to reject this system and live out in the woods.

I liked that we don't get an explanation for why these rules exist in this alternate version of the world. It just is. There are strange rules and customs in the hotel, such as locking a new guest's right hand behind his or her back with handcuffs for one day in order to remind them how easier things are "with two instead of one". Also, masturbation is forbidden among the singles, yet hotel staff are required to sexually arouse the guests everyday without relief--to encourage them in their desire and efforts to find a mate, presumably. It's very dystopic and bizarre, and I loved it!

David makes friends with a man with a limp (Ben Whishaw) and a man with a lisp (John C. Reilly). These characters don't have names, they are listed in the credits by their "distinguishing characteristic". There is a lot of encouragement for singles to find other singles with similar characteristics to pair up with--which leads Whishaw's character to fake nosebleeds in order to successfully court a young woman who also suffers from nosebleeds.

The first half of the film sets up the strange rules of this world and comments (often unsubtly, but always hilariously) on how singles are denigrated in many societies. The singles in the hotel are monitored and treated like naughty children who don't know what's best for them. Couplehood is the only escape--other than, of course, being transformed into a dog or a camel or a peacock.

Spoilers-ish--

The second half of the movie focuses on the lives of the loners living out in the woods. When David runs away from the hotel, the loners find him and explain THEIR rules. Yes, living as a loner doesn't mean getting to do whatever you want. Love, sex, and even friendship are discouraged. If two people flirt with one another (or, God forbid, have sex) they are brutally punished. Everyone is expected to dig their own grave and discouraged from helping one another.

This extends the complex metaphor of The Lobster: just like in our world, singleness comes with its own set of stereotypes, obligations, and expectations. David points out that being a loner is great because "we can listen to music whenever we want. We can masturbate whenever we want. We can go on walks whenever we want" which sounds a lot like what I hear about the stereotypical benefits of being single in our world--freedom to do what we want (or who we want) whenever we want it. But we supposedly pay for this freedom with loneliness.

/End Spoilers

I won't go into details about how the film concludes, but I will say that it's all at once hopeful, horrifying, and darkly funny. In fact the whole film can be described with those adjectives. While some people may be put off by the deadpan acting (The Lobster is like a Wes Anderson funhouse mirror: all the mannerisms and blunt ways of speaking are there, but  with a lot more cynicism and violence), fans of quirky, arty films will definitely enjoy The Lobster. If you liked Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Her, this film will be your bailiwick. One warning though: if you don't like movies where animals are killed, DO NOT see this movie.

The Lobster is a truly unique and unusual film. Although the acting is deadpan, real genuine emotion pours out of the leads, particularly from Colin Farrell's sad eyes. I suspect that if you see this movie, you'll have a lot of feelings about it too. And you might want to hug your singleton friends a little closer.

Grade: A+

Circle Jerk

Movies: Circle

I've mentioned on this blog before that my reviews tend to skew positive for the simple reason that I actively seek out movies I think I'll like and avoid ones I think I won't like.

I also like to read up on movies before seeing them--sometimes even going as far as spoiling the ending for myself before seeing it. So it's rare for me to watch a movie that 1) I know nothing about and 2) turns out to be garbage.

Circle is such a movie. Directed by Aaron Hann and Mario Miscione, Circle was released directly to Netflix (at least it never had a theatrical release and has no ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic) in 2015. The premise of the film is that a group of 50 people--all races and ages--wake up in a black chamber. They are standing on lit circles and if they try to step off the circle, a buzzer goes off, they are struck by what seems to be an electrical current, and they die. Additionally, every minute a person is randomly electrocuted and they die.

The group quickly realizes that, in fact, these executions are not random and that they can individually vote on people to die. Whoever gets the most votes is killed. While trying to figure out what's going on, a man suggests that the group buys time by together choosing to kill off all the people in their 70's or older because "they've lived their life". After each death they have about one minute to discuss and strategize.

You can see where all this is going. The message of Circle appears to be that in extreme circumstances, most people will panic and do anything to save themselves and only a valiant few will refuse to let the prospect of death rob them of their ethics and dignity. But this message is so incredibly ham-fisted that the film feels like it was written and directed by college sophomores who have just realized, like, hey man...people, like, make unfair judgements all the time. But you can't claim some lives matter more than others!! 

To illustrate the awkwardness of Circle, here are just a few things that happen in the movie (spoilers...in case you actually want to watch this garbage):

• At one point in the film, a character says "Everyone! Kill the black guy!" And they do.
• After it is revealed that one of the women in the circle is a lesbian, a white man who turns out to be a lawyer and who is wearing a dress shirt and suspenders (dude looks like he stepped right off the set of Wall Street) tries to convince the others to kill her next so that her child can be raised in a normal home.
• A man claims "95% of people believe in God" when an argument about religion breaks out.
• It is assumed from the get-go that the "winner" of the circle will either be the young child or the pregnant woman and the group forms two factions: the "evil" faction that wants to kill the kid and the pregnant lady so they can have a better chance of winning themselves and the "good" faction that aims to protect the kid and pregnant lady.

In other words, Circle is a lazy, obvious, clumsy attempt to make people think about how, like, you can't judge a person by their outward appearance man! Unless they're a child or a pregnant lady--then you totally CAN judge them because, according to this film, they are OBVIOUSLY worth more to society and thus "good" people will protect them and are willing to sacrifice their lives for them.

Circle is sophomoric and subpar as a film in almost every way. The dialogue is like someone on a megadose of valium trying to hit you with a baseball bat: it's clearly offensive, but in such a clumsy way that it's more hilarious than hurtful. The characters are incredibly two-dimensional, which is kind of the point, but it's hard to take a film where there are characters named "The Atheist", "The Soldier", "The Pregnant Girl" (side note: pregnant girl?? She's clearly in her 20's), and "The Lesbian" seriously.

I don't even get what the point is. Is the point that we're supposed to look beyond simple stereotypes when we judge other people? Or is it that people DON'T look beyond stereotypes and never will, so why bother trying?

I'm going to spoil the ending and you should go ahead and read it because if you watch this movie of your own volition after reading this review, you have no one to blame but yourself.

Ok, so a random white dude "wins" the circle because he was trifling the whole time--trying to act like he was a good guy and wanting to protect the poor little girl and poor pregnant lady from dying. But actually, this sneaky bastard, he waits until they are the only two left and then tells them "One of you will have to sacrifice yourself for the other" and when the little girl, sobbing, agrees to sacrifice herself and steps off her circle (and thus dies), this sneaky SOB votes for the pregnant lady, killing her.

BUT IT'S NOT OVER YET. Whenever there is a tie--i.e. two people get the same number of votes--a shaft of light hovers over the people who have tied and everyone has to vote for one or the other. So after this guy kills the pregnant lady, I fucking shit you not, a shaft of light hovers over him---AND THE LADY'S FUCKING BELLY. GET IT??? IT'S THE FETUS!!!! MIND BLOWN!!!

So then he votes against the fetus and kills it, which, ohmigod, shows how evil he is because unborn babies are people too (according to this film, very likely MORE worthy of living than the vessel woman carrying them).

BUT IT'S STILL NOT OVER. Once this douchebag "wins" the contest or experiment or whatever the fuck it was, he's magically transported to what looks like Los Angeles--he's outside in a big city with a bunch of other people (circle winners, presumably, given that like half of them are pregnant ladies). And there's a giant UFO circling overhead.

Yes, viewers. The mystery of the circle was...

And then the movie ends. Because why explore the real questions of this film (why aliens? why the experiment? what happens next?) when you could be devoting time to people yelling "Everyone! Kill the black guy!"

Grade: F+

Shirts vs. Skinheads

Movies: Green Room

Green Room is a rare film that offers gory grind house thrills, but with intelligence, clever twists, and great acting.

Directed by Jeremy Saulnier, whose previous film, Blue Ruin, was a critical success, Green Room follows punk band The Ain't Rights as they scrounge for enough money to make it from the Pacific Northwest back home to Arlington, VA. The band is flat broke, reduced to siphoning gas from other cars since they can't afford to buy it themselves. A friend of theirs who is also a local radio show host sets them up with a gig at a backwoods bar outside of Portland.

The only catch is...it's a skinhead bar.

The Ain't Rights foolishly, and befittingly punk-y, open their set with a cover of the Dead Kennedy's "Nazi Punks Fuck Off", which pisses off the crowd. However, the rest of their show goes well and it seems that they're going to make it out unscathed and a few dollars richer. But as they head out, one of the band members, Pat (Anton Yelchin), runs back to the green room to grab fellow band member Sam's (Alia Shawkat) cell phone...only to stumble onto the scene of a murder.

The situation quickly descends into chaos, with the bouncers forcing the band back into the room and calling club owner Darcy (a chilling Patrick Stewart) to figure out what to do. The Ain't Rights aren't naive--they know that the neo-Nazis who run this club aren't just going to let them go after they've witnessed a murder.

And so Green Room becomes a taut, breathless stand-off between the very disadvantaged band, plus Amber, a friend of the girl who was killed, and the skinheads who are armed to the teeth. The band has no weapons and are outnumbered. The skinheads have guns, knives, attack dogs, and "true believers"--young men willing to both kill and die for the Brotherhood. The fact that they're neo-Nazis is almost beside the point--they could just be any old group of violent goons--but it does raise the stakes since the bad guys are blindly invested in a violent, hierarchical lifestyle ("This isn't a party---it's a movement" says Darcy at one point, getting applause from the crowd).

When the violence begins it is incredibly gruesome, though never gratuitous. Unlike the cartoonish grindhouse violence of a Tarantino film, or the stomach-churning endless torture of the Hostel and Saw series, Green Room holds back to a degree, relying more on suspense mixed with brief bursts of realistic violence. That said, I wouldn't recommend this film to those with weak stomachs.

Green Room also has intelligent writing and plot twists. It shows, rather than tells. For example, Darcy tells his goons to only let people "with red laces" into the room where the murder happened. The film doesn't explain what he means by this, but the viewer figures out that red shoe laces indicate someone who is a "true believer" in Nazism and has proven their loyalty to Darcy. There were indeed a few times where I got a bit confused about the plot--particularly around the identity of the murdered girl and why she was murdered--but I was ultimately able to figure everything out and I appreciated that the film didn't rely on heavy exposition.

All this in addition to Patrick Stewart's excellent performance as the calculating, calm Darcy--who, against all reason, seems "safe" because of his British accent and genteel manners, even when he's ordering his goons to kill the band. It's a pleasure to watch Stewart play such an evil, charming character.

As I said at the beginning of the review, Green Room promises--and delivers--violent gore and Naziploitation. But it does so in a masterful, intelligent way that transcends the horror/suspense/grindhouse genres. To use an analogy, it's like going to a burger joint and realizing they serve prime cuts of grass-fed beef along with house-made dipping sauces. You thought you were getting the standard, greasy junk food, but actually you got a carefully cultivated meal. Saulnier's Green Room is a heart-pounding, delicious treat of a film.

Grade: A 

Update: I have been sooooo lazy

Movies, TV: Venus in Fur, Creep, Game Change, Broadchurch

Y'all, I've gotten so behind in my reviewing! Luckily, I actually haven't seen many new films lately as I've been quite busy in my personal life. But I'm finally going to give you some fun size reviews of a few movies (and a TV show) I've watched over the past month. Enjoy!


Venus in Fur

Based on the 2010 play by American playwright David Ives, director Roman Polanski moves the action in this funny and sexually tense story to Paris. Perhaps because Polanski raped a young girl in 1977 and then fled the United States rather than face punishment and can't re-enter? Or perhaps because Par-ee is the City of Love? In either case, I saw a stage play version of Venus in Fur and absolutely loved it so I was excited to see that the film version was floating around in my Netflix queue...and then I saw who directed it. Womp. I do try to avoid watching the films of directors whose personal lives are not just quirky, but outright criminal. I'm really hoping in this case very few of my $$ are actually making their way into Polanski's hands...

Anyway, I digress. The film is about a playwright, Thomas, casting the leading lady for his play Venus in Fur, which is based on the titillating 1870 Austrian novella about female dominance and male submission by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch. Thomas is looking for an actress who can play the elegant, formidable Vanda von Dunajew. After a disappointing day of watching vacuous actresses butcher his script, Thomas is ready to give up. That is, until Vanda walks in. Yes, an actress who is convinced she is right for the part--she shares the same name as the female lead, after all!

Vanda convinces Thomas to let her read--while he reads that part of Severin von Kusiemski, a man desperate to become a woman's slave. As the two work their way through the play, they indulge in subtle power games. Vanda the actress seems a little silly and unassuming at first, but as she nudges Thomas--via his reading of the part of Severin--towards his own desire to submit to her, it's clear who really has the power in the room.

Venus in Fur is a very sexy movie in which there is no sex. Hell, there's no kissing and very little touching. All of Vanda and Thomas' power games are intellectual, and the build up of sexual tension is so strong that by the time Vanda takes off the leather collar she wears to the interview and buckles it around Thomas' neck, you'll barely be able to breathe. I admit that I found the stage version I watched to be even better than this film version, especially the ending, but overall Venus in Fur is a fun, sexy movie.

Grade: B+

***

Creep

Creep, directed by Patrick Brice, effectively uses the concept of the "found footage" film and twists it in unexpected way. Brice also stars in the movie as Aaron, a videographer who answers a Craigslist ad to spend a day filming a man, Josef (played by Mark Duplass). Josef explains that he is dying of cancer and his wife is pregnant, so he wants to make a sort of "day in the life" type video for his unborn son. Very quickly though, Josef starts acting in bizarre ways that, well, creep Aaron out.

I can't say too much without giving away the various twists and turns of Creep, but I can say that Creep is very entertaining and keeps you guessing--despite not being the scariest movie out there. So much of the film rests in Mark Duplass' hands as the "creep" of the title. Duplass is an interesting casting choice, but it makes sense. He's really good at playing the nice, dorky guy--and he uses this persona to disarm Aaron. After all, Mark Duplass doesn't *look* like man who would hurt anyone, right? But appearances can be deceiving.

Creep is Patrick Brice's first full-length film and it's quite good for a first time out. He went on to direct The Overnight in 2015 which I reviewed in late January and enjoyed immensely. Given that he has a knack for creating interesting storylines that don't always play out how you think they're going to, I'm excited to see what he does next.

Grade: B

***

Game Change

I'm a little late to the party on this one, but Game Change, based on the book by Mark Halperin, was really good and actually made me a little nostalgic for an era not too long ago when the Republican party wasn't completely full of psychopaths.

Game Change explores the question "what the fuck happened?" in regards to John McCain choosing Sarah Palin to be his running mate during the 2008 election. Director Jay Roach could have easily been very mean spirited in his portrayal of all the major players, especially Palin, but he restrains himself and paints what I assume to be a fair picture. According to the film (I haven't read the book), McCain was encouraged to choose Palin as his running mate by political strategist Steve Schmidt (played by Woody Harrelson), who realized that for McCain to beat superstar Barack Obama, he would need a "game changer" on the ticket. Palin, a dyed-in-the-wool conservative who also happened to be a woman (not just another old white guy) seemed to make sense and appeal to a wide demographic of Republican voters.

However, Palin was not properly vetted and was clearly in over her head. The film suggests that Palin wasn't a dummy. In fact, she was quite sly. After failing to do her research and consequently looking foolish in interviews, she makes the choice to go off script and pretty much say whatever she wants. You'll remember the media saying that Palin was "going rogue". Schmidt, a fiercely intelligent and dignified man, finds himself butting heads with Palin at every turn while McCain distances himself from the whole mess. "She might go after me!" is McCain's excuse when Schmidt asks him to get Palin in line.

Well, we all know how the story turned out. Palin was essentially accused of sinking McCain's campaign, despite the fact that she was incredibly beloved by the most conservative members of the GOP's base. She therefore became a convenient scapegoat for the more intellectual, old school Republicans and the symbol of the beginning of that godforsaken Tea Party. Julianne Moore gives a beautifully crafted turn as Palin. Transcending parody, Moore taps into Palin's bewildering arrogance and self-importance in addition to her infamous ditziness and Suburban Mom appeal. Likewise, Ed Harris and Woody Harrelson give great performance as McCain and Schmidt.

But just as Palin owned the spotlight during the 2008 election, Game Change is Moore's film, hands down.

Grade: A

***

Broadchurch

After I finished Jessica Jones, I found myself hankering for some more sweet, sweet David Tennant. Luckily, Tennant stars in two seasons of the British drama Broadchurch, which revolves around the aftermath of the murder of a 12 year old boy in a small town.

Let me tell you this: Broadchurch is a devastating series. This ain't no cozy Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries. Shit gets real on Broadchurch. And that's because the series isn't so much about solving a murder as it is about the impact an act of terrible violence has on a community.

Tennant plays Alec Hardy, a detective called in to lead the investigation of the death of Danny Latimer. This is much to the chagrin of Detective Ellie Miller (Olivia Coleman), who is a local detective and thought she would be put in charge of the case. Instead, she's to serve as Hardy's second in command. The fact that Hardy botched his last assignment gives no one involved any comfort, and Hardy must prove that he isn't a total fuck up while under the watchful eye of the community.

As the mismatched pair interview persons of interest and find physical evidence of murder, the community of Broadchurch crumbles. Neighbors start to mistrust one another. Families, including the murdered boy's family, start to tear apart from both grief and suspicion. It seems like everyone in the town has a motive to murder a young boy.

Personally, I would recommend at stopping at the end of season 1 of Broadchurch (the killer is revealed by the end of the first season). The second season kind of goes off the rails and ends on a highly unsatisfactory note. Stick with the first season and you'll be good.

Grade: (first season only): A