Months in Review: September & October films (part I)

It is absolutely incredible to me that we are already in November. It feels as if Summer lasted about a week, Spring no more than 2 days and that Winter was about a month ago.

Per usual, my blog has been more inactive than I would like it to be but after 2-3 years of keeping the same pace, it’s about time I come to accept the infrequency of my blogging.

I have managed to stay within an average of watching at least 10 new films per month, with the goal of hitting at least 120 new films seen in the calendar year (I don’t think I’ve seen more than 10 repeats)

In September I watched 13 films averaging an unusually high 3.5 out of 5 score product of 6 films that hit 4 or 4.5 out of 5. Also an unusually high number.

In October, however, things went back to normalcy. I watched 10 films averaging 3.15, with only two of these getting a 4 out of 5.

To keep the posts manageable, I will divide them into two parts. One dedicated to September, and the other to October. Below my short impressions of each:

GONE BABY GONE (2007) [ 3.5/5 ]

Gone Baby Gone felt like an extended episode of Law & Order featuring a great cast that includes the likes of Morgan Freeman and Casey Affleck.

Set in a gritty, dark and unwelcoming part of Boston, the film tells the story of a private investigator and his partner searching for a missing girl. The characters are, for the most part, excellently conceived, filled with complexity and contradictions.

The moral question at the heart of the movie, which is presented to us in the last act, is one that is difficult to answer, probably splitting audiences in half back when the film was released in 2007.

What doesn’t work as well are the ways in which the film reaches those moral dilemmas, often opting to grab audiences by the hand, and never fully trusting viewers to make their own connections.

Casey Affleck’s performance is especially engaging in a role that has some of the ticks but not quite the range of his well-deserved Oscar-winning turn in Manchester by the Sea.

KONG: SKULL ISLAND (2017) [ 3.5/5 ]

The latest reboot of King Kong is an attempt to bring the big ape to a new generation of filmgoers, giving audiences an origin story that, in all honesty, fails to live up to the long cultural significance of Kong in the big screen.

Aside from a particularly weak premise that sets the events of the film in motion, Kong is packed with well crafted and entertaining set pieces that keep the film from succumbing to its general lack of originality. John C. Reilly’s late cameo is one of the film’s pleasures and the only character I found myself rooting for.

THE PRESTIGE (2006) [ 4/5 ]

The Prestige was very much a precursor to Christopher Nolan’s amazing work in Inception. Like that film, The Prestige is built upon a story that is rich in complexity where every shot and every bit of dialogue serves the film’s ultimate reveal. As with the rest of Nolan’s impressive body of work, The Prestige hides its secrets by limiting our point of view. It works only by placing us in the thick of the story, while leaving a crucial perspective out until the end. As engaging and wildly unpredictably as the plot is, the invisible hand that moves all the gears and fits all the pieces into place seems a bit more conspicuous than usual.

Being so familiar with the director’s work was a bit of a detriment to the experience, expecting the perfectionism and directorial dexterity of Christopher Nolan to sweep us up at the end, cleverly tying in the film’s many loose pieces.

Having said this, The Prestige is one hell of a cinematic experience that is nearly as imaginative and deceptive as the director’s best work.

LEGEND (2015) [ 4/5 ]

A magnificent dual performance by the always surprising Tom Hardy headlines this wild gangster film set in midcentury London. The thespian plays Reggie and Ronnie Cray; one the suave and elegant empresario with a talent for boxing who desires love and success, and the other his psychologically disturbed bloodthirsty twin with a lust for sex, men and, of course, violence.

Most of what the film tries to say isn’t new or particularly inventive, but I did appreciate its take on the weight of family ties and how one rotten apple can sometimes bring a blossoming empire crashing down.

I also appreciated the film’s dark and twisted humor, its rich assortment of characters and the evil pleasure with which it tells what is a rather tragic tale.

One of the most underrated films of 2015.

A MONSTER CALLS (2016) [ 4.5/5 ]

Candidate to the Blog of Big Ideas’ 250 Essential Films

A beautiful film that moved me to tears. A story about loss and grief that I found extremely poetic and engaging. Though it may turn off some people due to its fantastical elements, A Monster Calls is, by no means, a kids’ film; instead, it is a carefully crafted drama of great emotional resonance that uses fantasy to great effect. I shall be posting a full review in the coming days.

NEON DEMON (2016) [ 3/5 ]

A slow burning and stylish film from Scandinavian director Nicholas Winding Refn set against flashing cameras and the orange glow of the city of Angels.

Like his film Drive, Refn spends most of the film’s running time enamored by the facile beauty of its movie star: Elle Faning, who plays a character both exasperating and relatable, humble at first sight but fundamentally narcissistic. She is treated both as the muse in distress hunted by jealous competition, and also as a sort of virus that has arrived to disrupt the natural order. Such dichotomy is at the heart of the film and it is ultimately what I found most interesting about it.

Sadly, the film lacks momentum, getting lost in its parsimony, with a script filled with holes that do nothing but serve Winding Refn’s brand of filmmaking which can often overwhelm the storytelling.


A biopic on the rise and fall of rap supergroup NWA that is entertaining without being particularly nuanced or thought-provoking.

Part of the problem lies on a script that is too heavily focused on the highlights of the lives that made NWA a reality. As a result, the film feels more like a made for tv 2-hour special, rather than an engaging study on the group members and what made them such a potent artistic force.

Straight Outta Compton also feels like a film that was tinkered and edited in post-production to take away the focus from weaker actors: O’Shea Jackson Jr. and Corey Hawkins, playing Ice Cube and Dr. Dre respectively; and give the spotlight to the always great Paul Giamatti, playing the sleazy and conniving manager, and actor Jason Mitchell, playing the late rapper Eazy-E with surprising emotional conviction.

DO THE RIGHT THING (1989) [ 3.5/5 ]

Spike Lee has always been one of those directors whose persona has loomed large in my decision to approach his work trepidatiously. His oeuvre is one that I have only recently began to dip my toes in, first with Chi-Raq, and now with what many critics call his masterpiece: Do The Right Thing.

In defense of the modest 3.5/5 score I give the film, I found that Lee’s work in this predominantly African American treatise may be one of those that, in order to be appreciated, both time and successive viewings may be required.

While his most recent work in Chi-Raq is one that attempts to tackle many large subjects through a tight and clear story; Do The Right Thing is the kind of large, expansive, complex and theatrical exposition about racial relations in the United States that I found to be more relevant as a historical document rather than as an artistic piece. My problem with it is that I simply could not make the transition from the almost whimsical African American micro-universe that Spike Lee had created in almost 90 minutes of film to the very violent and tragic last act. It was an abrupt and hard transition that I simply could not get on board with, despite appreciating the boldness behind the choice.

In addition, I found it unfortunate that Spike Lee made the decision to also take on the lead role, often looking flat opposite an excellent cast of actors.

MOTHER! (2017) [ 4/5 ]

A film so intense that I left the theater feeling exhausted. In the days that followed my trip to the theater, my esteem and appreciation for Darren Aronofski’s latest piece grew, and could easily become a favorite in the years to come.

If you’re so inclined, you can find my full review of the film here

TOWER [ 4/5 ] (2016)

I was introduced to this very good documentary courtesy of the best podcast on film out there:

The film is one that deals with a very current subject, mass shootings, but it does so by focusing on the victims, both dead and alive, of a single tragic episode without precedent that occurred at the University of Texas at Austin in 1966.

The documentary, directed by Keith Maitland, is as nuanced an exposition of the horror of such an experience as you’re likely to find. It’s both affecting and engaging, creatively crafted using a style of animation that is both painterly and evocative, capturing the emotional drama, while softening the horrific violence.

A must-watch for cinephiles aspiring to make documentaries on tough and difficult subjects with tact and attention to detail.

THE BIG SICK (2017) [ 4/5 ]

Based on the real circumstances that surrounded the relationship of writers Kumail Nunjiani and Emily V. Gordon, The Big Sick is a breath of fresh air in the romantic comedy genre.

Apart from being genuinely funny from beginning to end, the film was surprisingly touching, giving each one of its characters tangible and credible personalities, with only the occasionally cheesy one-liner.

It helps that the relationship at its center worked, and both Kumail and Zoe Kazan deliver crafty performances that are witty and surprisingly nuanced.

The Big Sick is clearly a labor of love inspired by love. One of the best films of 2017.

THE DEAD ZONE (1983) [ 2.5/5 ]

One of the biggest disappointments of late. The Dead Zone is one of those cult films that has survived the passage of time based solely on the curiosity of cinephiles willing to invest a couple of hours to explore the odd pairing of director David Cronenberg and a rare lead performance by Christopher Walken.

The actor plays Johnny Smith who, after a 5-year coma, wakes up to find his fiancé has moved on, his job is gone and, more importantly, that he has psychic powers he must suddenly contend with.

Even when there is something of merit to be found in the film’s interesting explorations of the psychological ramifications of wielding such power, Cronenberg’s execution is terribly uneven.

The dramatic scenes feel staged, the performances unnecessarily heightened, the camerawork is sloppy and the major set pieces anticlimactic.

SNATCHED (2017) [ 2.5/5 ]

After the success and unexpected quality of Amy Schumer’s first starring role in a feature film in 2012’s Trainwreck, I half-expected the stand-up comedian to follow it with something catastrophically bad (in what the industry commonly calls the sophomore slump).

What is surprising about this mind-numbing slapstick comedy is that there is enough comedic chemistry between Goldie Hawn and Schumer as mother and daughter to make the film bearable.

Having said that, I still wish Schumer and Hawn could have done something a lot more worthwhile.

Film Review: Mother! (2017)

Mother! is a long nightmare filled with paranoia, jealousy, anger and lovelessness. It is, as anticipated by film festival goers, a divisive film. While audiences have given it on average an F according to Cinemascore, critics have been a bit more receptive to Aronofsky’s latest cinematic experiment.

The film’s detractors speak about its overindulgence, lack of restrain and penchant for melodrama. While the film’s admirers will point to its value as a deeply metaphorical cinematic statement that commits to large and small ideas alike.

My feelings about the film, almost a week after I first watched it, are still wavering somewhat, not knowing if I fall in with those who already awash the film with praise, or those that appreciate its ambition and vision while questioning its choices.

By no means a perfect or pretty film, one thing that cannot be said about Mother! is that it is boring or unimaginative.

Like much of Aronofsky’s work before, Mother! is the kind of film that, instead of escapism, offers no respite and no time to catch our collective breath. It is a film that finds its emotional center in unrequited love, but that eventually reveals itself to be about many more things. Mother! is the kind of experimental cinema that escapes categorization. It is scary, exhilarating, melodramatic, satirical and occasionally funny. It is also Hitchcockian in the sense that it loves to manipulate and tease the audience, hinting at possible resolutions that are nothing more than cinematic instruments of deception that rely on horror lore to deceive us.

At the center of the film are Javier Bardem and the much younger Jennifer Lawrence (a detail that does not escape Aronofsky). We begin the film with a woman burning, her flesh consumed by fire. Moments later, Bardem who plays “Him” (per the film’s end credits), picks up what appears to be a crystal from the ashes. As he places it on a kind of altar, the house around him begins to set itself anew, replacing the burned wood for painted walls and beautiful woodwork. As the renewal gets to a bed, a woman, Jennifer Lawrence, rolls toward the camera and away from the sheets.

At first, we presume the sequence is nothing else that the passage of time and that the woman burning in the fire was perhaps a previous partner, but soon enough, the movie goes back to that rock, which Bardem’s “Him”, an acclaimed poet, zealously protects as he struggles to find a way out from writer’s block. While he struggles to find inspiration, his companion labors to bring the house they both share to its former glory. Lawrence’s performance for most of the film’s running time is physical, walking around the house, washing dishes, cleaning, priming and painting. When we meet them, there are only passing conversations between the two. He is too consumed by his work, while she fulfills the role of a housewife fighting to keep the relationship alive.

One of the interesting things about Mother! is that Aronofsky ultimately uses these characters to build a story that points to larger ideas. There is, for instance, something to be said about the relationship between a great artist and his muse that perhaps echoes Aronofsky’s own personal experiences (the director divorced his actress wife Rachel Weisz in 2010 after nine years of marriage). It also becomes increasingly obvious that, among other things, the film is imbued with biblical parallelisms, which is an aspect of the film that may be entirely lost on those with a limited knowledge of theology.

Beyond the metaphors tucked in between the lines, what I found most interesting was Aronofsky’s direction. It is frenetic, claustrophobic and, at times, disorienting, staying very close to its characters, following Jennifer Lawrence through nearly every bit of film. As told by Aronofsky himself in recent interviews, the script and context for Mother! poured out of him all at once, over the course of a few days at a frustrating and angry time in his life. Unsurprisingly, the anger he felt when writing, translated not only to a story that revels in paranoia and a sense of helplessness, but also to the way the film is shot. It is filmmaking of the highest caliber, adding to the story and giving it some resonance, rather than hampering it or distracting us.

As I said at the beginning, Mother! is by no means a perfect specimen. It has the feel and the quality of an cinematic experiment, rather than that of a carefully calibrated and finished product. Like the house it confines us too, it has a kind of rawness that is not bulletproof when analyzed and dissected. More than a perfectly realized story, Mother! is about the larger statement and about the feelings it manages to bring to the fore.

Did it need to make all of the weird choices it did? Maybe it did not. On the one hand, it is prone to exaggerate, always opting for larger, louder and more shocking, making it one of the least accessible films you’ll see this year. On the other, it is a deeply personal endeavor that is consistent when seen as a larger whole or as part of a larger body of work.

This is Aronofsky near his very best.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Month in review: films of August

The month of August was a bit more productive in terms of film watching than the previous 3 or 4. Life has slowed down a little, even if this seems to be more like the typical calm before the storm.

In August I watched a total of 11 films for an average score of 3 out of 5 that could have been higher had I not watched the woeful “The Circle”on the last day of the month.

Without a doubt, the best film of the month was the Korean-American film Okja, bought by Netflix and directed by Bong Joon-Ho. Other worthy watches were The Founder, a biopic on the rise of Ray Kroc, the mastermind behind the McDonald’s empire; and The Rainmaker, a modest adaptation of John Grisham’s novel directed by the great Francis Ford Coppola.

OKJA (2017) [ 4/5 ]

Okja has it all: visual splendor, a thought-provoking storyline that says more than meets the eye, a handful of entertaining action sequences, some wonderful characters and the kind of over-the-top comedic performances that keep things light even when the film gets dark.

For director Bong Joon-ho, Okja is yet another statement piece against the ills and excess of mankind. The Host (2006) was a larger statement about man’s effect on the environment. Snowpiercer (2013) offered a post-apocalyptic view of a future where mankind had all but extinguished in a planet that had reclaimed itself after so much abuse. In Okja, the director tackle the indiscriminate practices of the food industry which, the majority of us, would rather ignore.

To do so, the film creates a wonderfully loveable CGI creature named Okja which is described as a super pig that was created in a lab by the same corporation that is now preparing to sell the meat en masse after a long PR campaign.The ultimate success of the piece is that it makes you root for the relationship at its center, that between a teenage girl named Mija (Seo-Hyeon Ahn) and her pet. In doing so, we might be tempted to advocate for better animal treatment, or turn ourselves into devout vegetarians. 

JOHN WICK 2 (2017) [ 3/5 ]

The first time Keanu Reeves’ embodied John Wick he was driven by revenge. His impetus that of a man with nothing to lose.

As far as sequels go, John Wick 2 starts with the wrong footing. No longer is there an emotional motivation for revenge beyond a mere desire to stay alive. So, from the beginning, John Wick lacks that kind of kamikaze attitude that made the original so wonderfully intense.

The film does have its share of pleasures, but most are expansions of ideas and characters that were already in place on the first installment.

As it was the case before, the fighting choreography is fantastic, even if it suffers from repetitiveness, and Keanu Reeves, channeling his brooding and hyper masculine alter ego, continues to be an effective action hero well past his Matrix days.

THE FOUNDER (2017) [ 3.5/5 ]

After Spotlight and Birdman, this is now the third film in a short period of time that marks the triumphant return of Michael Keaton to the front and center of some of Hollywood’s A-list projects. This time, Keaton plays Ray Kroc, the famed businessman responsible for turning McDonald’s into a global brand. From beginning to end, this is Keaton’s film, inhabiting nearly every scene as a man so tired of failure that, when he finally encounters success, commits to stop at nothing to reach ever-greater heights. In many respects, The Founder is also the story of the modern American enterprise: a sort of modern Wild West where unimaginable riches can be attained as long as you’re willing to stomp on those whose values are at odds with unrestrained capitalism.

The Founder is a profoundly American film where money and access are the thing that dreams are made of. Keaton’s Ray Kroc is a nearly perfect representation of that ideal in an always entertaining and larger-than-life performance that effectively makes the man at its center both a villain and a hero.

ABOUT ALEX [ 3/5 ]

The moment a character walks in to his or her cheating partner is usually the moment a film runs out of ideas. Such is the case in About Alex, a film filled with half-baked storylines and half-built characters that seem to have come together, despite one’s attempted suicide, by little more than loyalty to a past spent together in college. About Alex is a film that resists its potential, taking shortcuts when the story asks for greater nuance and depth. On occasion we get moments of emotional resonance that fade away as quickly as they appeared, either by fault of the script, or by the uneven quality of the performances.

Having said that, the film does pick up towards the end, once the masks between these friends begin to fall, offering us some touching moments that get at the heart of the complicated relationships between these characters.

SILENCE (2016) [ 3/5 ]

It may come as a revelation to some that Martin Scorsese is a man of faith. In a career spanning decades that has seen the Italian American director at the helm of modern American classics like Raging Bull or Casino, there has not been much room for faith in his oeuvre beyond 1988’s The Last Temptation of Christ.

Silence is Scorsese’s longest running passion project, a film deeply rooted in Catholicism, but not as an exclamation of its goodness, but rather as an exploration about the practical and human limits of faith.

Silence, like so many other Catholic-centric films, focuses on the nearly inexplicable devotion many people have towards the Bible’s teachings. Such blind abnegation, the film argues, almost capable to withstand inexcusable persecution, violence and torture.

Thematically, Silence is rich and thought-provoking but, sadly, it is also an overlong, tedious and repetitive two and a half hour affair that is filled with suffering, death, violence and unimaginable cruelty. Fortunately, the suffering pays off at the end, not by giving us a neatly wrapped happy ending, but by giving room to the other side of the coin, offering the Buddhist perspective in awesome scenes between Liam Neeson’s father Ferreira and Andrew Garfield’s father Rodriguez.


The latest film set in the magical universe of J.K. Rowling follows Newt Scamander, a “magizoologist” and former Hogwarts student that finds himself in the midst of a crisis when he travels to New York City.

As apparent as its connection is to the Harry Potter franchise, the film relies too heavily on that thread, thinking it can make characters we can empathize with without giving them substance. It is a shame that Eddy Redmayne, who is supposed to be the focus of the film, ends up being the least interesting of the bunch.

It’s also remarkable that such a big-ticket Hollywood production can also “boast” special effects that are far less convincing than those found in an episode of Game of Thrones.

THE RAINMAKER (1997) [ 3.5/5 ]

A procedural courtroom drama with the rather simple story of a well-meaning and noble young lawyer fighting for justice against a rotten and corrupt system.

Based on a book by the best selling author John Grisham, this Francis Ford Coppola directed film excels in making us empathize with these characters, even if the story moves forward predictably and it is all too neatly resolved when the end credits begin to roll. A young Matt Damon, fresh off his success in Good Will Hunting delivers a nuanced performance that is both intense and soft, finding a balance between a decisive and confident adult and one that is just beginning to find his own voice.

CLOUDS OF SILS MARIA (2014) [ 3/5 ]

There are two parallel themes at work in the film. The first is about the psychological toll that an actress endures when her youth and the spotlight have been left behind. The second is about the connection that exists, purposefully or not, between a play she is preparing to participate in and her personal life.

Of the two, the second one is, by far, the more interesting and uncomfortable to watch, even if it becomes readily apparent what the film is trying to suggest.

As it often happens, characters who are emotionally hermetic, unable to speak truth about their inner tribulations, deny us the satisfaction of cinematic release. Thus making the film feel rather stale and impenetrable. Another problem is that Clouds of Sils Maria gives little voice to characters who seem to be important to the central story, teasing with depth that remains at an arm’s length.

The saving grace is that both Kristen Stewart and Juliet Binoche both deliver interestingly ambiguous performances that are open to interpretation.

CAMP X-RAY (201X) [ 3/5 ]

There is a good and a bad Kristen Stewart. As a soldier in Peter Sattler’s Camp X-Ray we see some of both. At times, Kristen is irresistibly natural, an extension of our awkward and most informal selves. At other moments Kristen is frustrating in that she never ceases to be that kind of actress, even if some scenes demand something a little bit different.

As valiant an effort as Camp X-Ray can be for exploring the subject of the military’s role in human rights violations at GITMO, there is a better film hidden underneath; the one that could have dared to go a step further and give Peyman Moaadi’s detainee a violent past, and not one that hints at innocence in a case of mistaken identity.

Perhaps it would have been a step too far to explore a friendship between an American soldier and a former terrorist, but it could have given the film the kind of daring reformist statement that I believe it needed.


For the first time in the short history of this blog, I will give a passing grade to an absolutely terrible film. A production that lacks the kind depth, consistency and finesse that is needed in any film to have some semblance of artistry.

However, The Angriest Man in Brooklyn saves itself from total mediocrity by making Robin Williams flex his acting muscles one last time in order to sell us a rather unlikeable and angry middle-aged man who must confront his own mortality and take a look at all the bad choices he has made in his recent past.

It is, by no means, one of Robin Williams most nuanced or controlled performances, like we saw, for instance, in movies like Good Will Hunting and The Fisher King. Instead, it is perhaps Williams’ most indelible and harrowing performance given his untimely death by suicide shortly after the film’s release. I couldn’t help but see Williams’ incredibly sad eyes that, despite a wide smile and a lot of anger, could not be dismissed, even during moments of quiet happiness and cheerful introspection.

I miss his genius.

THE CIRCLE (2017) [ 1.5/5 ]

Not to be outdone by The Angriest Man in Brooklyn in terms of wasting talent, The Circle is the kind of mind-numbing exploration of science and its dangers that can make even Tom Hanks seem ridiculously unfit as an actor.

The Circle doesn’t surprise despite its every attempt to do so. The script is a mess of disparate ideas that are not explored sufficiently and with enough nuance. The parallels with Apple don’t exactly help it either because it is neither a direct imitation, nor a satire; instead, The Circle is this kind of uncomfortable in-between that does nothing but distract.

Emma Watson, who is often good, is absolutely terrible here, incapable of selling us her character’s arc, never quite providing enough insight to truly understand her motivations beyond merely superficial and obvious ones.

Months in Review: May, June & July films (part 2)

This is a continuation on the previous post. For all the reviews of the films watched in May read Part 1.


WONDER WOMAN (2017) [ 4/5 ]

A beautifully crafted big-budget Hollywood blockbuster that manages to excel at the little things. Surely some of the source material seems at odds with the more mature theme of female empowerment but, at its conclusion, the latest DC Comics venture comes off as more than the sum of its parts. It helps that Gal Gadot is an excellent choice to play Wonder Woman.

Continue reading Months in Review: May, June & July films (part 2)

Months in Review: May, June & July films (part I)

It’s been a while once again. Between family visits, test studying, work demands and a new romance in the air; life gets the best of this blog of mine.
Apart from my writing, my film watching has also decreased, but not as sharply as my visits to the blogosphere. In the last three months of  online inactivity, I managed to watch 28 films, with an average score of 3.3. There were, per usual, highlights and disappointments. On the one hand I marveled at Jordan Peele’s confident directorial debut with  Get Out and Christopher Nolan’s breathtaking Dunkirk, while on the other I watched in confusion how Luc Besson managed to waste over 150 million dollars making his latest passion project, or how Brad Pitt continued his bad streak with the ill-conceived War Machine, which he produced and starred in.
Without further ado, I share with you a list of quick reviews for all the films that were watched in the order in which they were seen. Being that it is quite a number of them for one single post, I will be splitting these up into two parts.

Continue reading Months in Review: May, June & July films (part I)

A fan reviews Alien: Covenant

Covenant 1

As a big fan of the Alien franchise, it has always been difficult for me to write or even think about reviews of the films and remain unbiased. As a child, I played with a six inch tall action figure (that I still have) of the Xenomorph, the frightening and brilliant monster at the center of the franchise. It was, as everyone that knew me would tell you, my favorite toy, by a long shot.

I watched the original 1979 film sometime between 1990 and 1992, when I was between 6 to 8 years old. Soon after, I also managed to watch Aliens, James Cameron’s fantastic action packed sequel, and I was forever captivated.

Continue reading A fan reviews Alien: Covenant

20th Anniversary Film Review: The Fifth Element

Author’s note: I rewatched the 4k restauration of the original 1997 film “The Fifth Element” in a local theater. This review is meant as a revision and appreciation of the film, having had the benefit of time to inform the impact and cultural significance of the piece in the cinematic landscape. 

Very few films in the history of Hollywood offer as much popcorn-friendly entertainment with as much artistic flamboyance as The Fifth Element. Written and directed by Luc Besson, the film is, per the director’s own analysis, an European interpretation of an American sci-fi blockbuster: colorful, playful, effortlessly cool, and sometimes nonsensical yet always fun to watch.

Continue reading 20th Anniversary Film Review: The Fifth Element