To be honest, after watching Kevin Macdonald’s solid documentary, I don’t think I really needed to watch another movie about Whitney Houston but, since this one was directed by Kasi Lemmons, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, first of all, even though Naomi Ackie was/still is quite gorgeous, I thought she was rather miscast here. I mean, she did give a solid performance but, I’m sorry, she didn’t look like Whitney Houston at all. Yaya DaCosta, who was cast in the really poorly received Lifetime movie ‘Whitney’, did seem to be a better choice. Considering the movie itself, they really wanted to show like everything including all the highlights and lows during her career, resulting in a whopping running time of around 2.5 hrs. It wasn’t necessarily a bad idea but, unfortunately, the end-result did feel really scattered after all. The most surprising thing was how much time and attention they gave to her relationship with Robyn Crawford. Indeed, Houston was or might have been a lesbian or bisexual which was something I didn’t really know at all. However, the way this relationship was handled was rather clunky after all. I mean, at first, she seemed to be madly in love with Robyn who then became jealous because Houston was involved romantically with some men. Then, it seemed to become an open relationship and, then, suddenly, the whole lesbian angle was completely dropped once she met Bobby Brown, even if Robyn was still an important part of her life many years after that. Basically, they went for the long rumour about Whitney Houston being a closet lesbian which was interesting but their approach was just really awkward and it actually never really worked. And that was just one specific aspect of her life which was rather poorly developed. Indeed, they also threw in the mix pretty much anything which might have had a negative influence on her life like her mother, her father, her religious upbringing, the fact that she was considered to be too ‘white’, her relationship with Bobby Brown and, of course, the drugs. However, it felt all over the map and none of it was really properly developed. At the end of the day, the conclusion was that, even though Whitney Houston was quite gorgeous and apparently extremely talented, she seemed to be yet another super star who never really managed to handle this kind of life. To be honest, even though she might have been one of the best singers ever, after watching this documentary and this movie, she didn’t seem to be a really interesting person after all. Anyway, in spite these flaws, it was still a decent watch though. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but, since it was included in the ‘1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die’ list, I was quite eager to check it out. It’s only afterwards that I discovered that this movie had such an abysmal IMDb score (2.9). On the other hand, I can’t say I was really surprised since the damned thing was rather unpleasant to watch. In fact, it was probably one the most unsettling movies I have seen, no less than that. It’s not that it was violent, sexually explicit or that the content was really shocking. It was more how chaotic, dark and disorienting it was. For example, it was shot in a way that I had no sense of space, there were many close-ups and never one establishing wide shot where we were actually able to see where we were. There was no narrative structure, with obviously no plot but also no real beginning (at least, they gave us the title card) and no end either. Most of the running time was basically about Jack Smith (who was also an experimental filmmaker) doing pretty much whatever and sometimes some really weird stuff. The fact that Smith kept saying/shouting/singing some random stuff constantly and unrelated to what he saw on the screen made the whole thing even more disorienting. I think that it was also what bothered many viewers, the fact that it all looked like some random video that some guys shot during some party or whatever. I have to admit that I was myself not really convinced but I was not so dismissive and I wouldn’t consider it some real garbage. Indeed, I always believed that, even if you don’t understand a piece of Art, you still don’t have to like it but you shouldn’t outright dismiss it (at least, you should try). In this case, the whole unpleasant aspect was actually obviously a ‘feature’. It was some really anarchist filmmaking, basically the birth of trash, and it was not surprising that it had been a major influence on John Waters. Anyway, to conclude, even though I’m not sure if I should recommend this movie, considering how unpopular it seems to be, I thought it was still a decent watch, even if I was glad that it was fairly short. 

Since I was a huge fan of ‘Free Solo’, of course, I had to watch this movie/event at some point but there was no way I would watch it live though. I guess it didn’t matter one way or another for Alex Honnold but, for me, even though I absolutely love to watch him climbing, I didn’t want to wonder the whole time if he would make it or not. He obviously did and, with this knowledge, I didn’t think it made watching this movie less valuable. Indeed, it was just so awesome to see him climbing, it was just spellbinding to behold. That’s the upside about free soloing. Of course, it is extremely dangerous, even most climbers would never do it, but, to be able to do it, you have to be in full command of your body and it was is the level of perfection Honnold had achieved. To be honest, I had the feeling that it was actually fairly easy for him. Indeed, even though it must have been physically really tough, there is a predictability about climbing such a building compared to climbing some wild mountain. It was also slightly disappointing that he did have to use a ladder at some point because it was apparently impossible to actually climb this segment. I mean, they kept hammering the fact that he wasn’t using any ropes but, well, he did use a ladder after all. Anyway, when the movie was only focusing on him doing his thing, it was just so mesmerizing though. Unfortunately, as pointed out by many already, the comments were some pure garbage and had like zero added value. I understand that it was promoted/considered as a sport event so, as such, you would expect such comments but I wish they would have released another cut after the live-event without all these comments so you could have the choice to watch it without it. It gave me the feeling that his endeavour might be too boring or maybe too repetitive for the average viewer so they added all this stuff but I certainly didn’t care about it at all. I can’t imagine watching it live with all this people constantly commenting that they were scared sh*tless every 5 mins. And, yet, in spite of this poor presentation, the guy is such a pure artist and it was just amazing to see him doing his thing on one of the tallest buildings in the world. 

I have to admit that I didn’t know much/anything about Anthony Bourdain so I thought it would be pretty cool to discover him before his career actually started. Well, even though it did look pretty neat, to be honest, I actually struggled to care about the damned thing after all. I mean, the movie itself was well done and Dominic Sessa gave a solid performance, the issue was with Anthony Bourdain AKA Tony himself. Indeed, the movie started with a quote from Bourdain’s bestseller book, ‘Kitchen Confidential’, mentioning himself that he was spoiled, miserable, narcissistic, self-destructive and thoughtless and I’m afraid he was right. He actually reminded me of how I was around the same age so I should have been able to identify with this character but, eventually, I thought the guy was just so insufferable. However, there here was a big difference between Anthony Bourdain and myself when we were around the same age though and it was the fact that Bourdain lied to everybody all the time. I was also amazed by how little cooking he ever did (Dominic Sessa admitted afterwards that his cooking skills did not really improve after making the film which wasn’t surprising). Again, I don’t know much about Bourdain, maybe he was a great guy but what I saw here was an arrogant self-centred young man who seemed rather talentless, except for making speeches about his own greatness. I was also amazed by the fact that, even though he had been so rude to Mary, he did apologize to Chef and Sal but not to her at all. In fact, even though they worked together, they had zero conversation afterwards. Eventually, she had only one line of dialogue after all to congratulate him for the clambake which was revolting. Towards the end, I have to admit that they did handle a specific detail properly. Indeed, when he was finally going to score with Nancy, the only reason why he actually ended up in this position in the first place, when he finally told her the truth, I thought at first that it was actually rather endearing and even romantic. However, my initial reaction was conditioned by decades of watching basic rom-coms during which such stalky behaviour is actually condoned and even promoted. Her rejection was actually the right way to react. And, yet, she couldn’t wait to see him again in Vassar after the summer but why exactly? The guy didn’t have any actual talent, as a writer and certainly not as a cook either. He seemed to be smart but mostly because his castrating mother taught him some difficult words when he was probably just a toddler. For the rest, he was just an empty shell who used and dropped anyone on his path (Chef, Sal, Nancy,…). While Tony was always and constantly annoying and never really interesting, Sal who obviously would never become world famous was so much more fascinating, largely thanks to Leo Woodall who always had such a magnetic presence even when playing someone who seemed to be most of the time a major a**hole. The conclusion of this movie was that Anthony Bourdain ended up being one of the most famous Chefs in the world completely by random after chasing some random girl while having no real affinity or talent towards the cooking Art and, well, it was obviously hardly satisfying. Anyway, I have to admit that it was not really bad but this movie certainly did rub me in the wrong way. 

Next month, the latest version called ‘Ebenezer’ is coming out next month. It’s supposed to be the big come-back for Johnny Depp. Even though I used to be a huge fan of Depp, I can’t say I’m really dying to watch again a new version of this story but Nick, my step-son, was really eager to check it out so we will probably end up watching it in the movie theatre when it’s released. In the meantime, I thought I might as well check this other (animated) version since it was in my queue for almost 3 years now. To be honest, it was maybe not a smart move to watch another version right now, after watching so many different versions before and, now, I think I’m pretty much done with this tale. Anyway, I wasn’t expecting much from this movie but I have I might as well check it out anyway. Well, from all the versions I have seen of this classic tale, I’m afraid it was probably the worst one. I mean, I have to admit that going for an animated take was actually a pretty good idea. Indeed, this medium was the perfect way to portray the various ghosts and the many fantastical scenes (I always had a weak spot for Robert Zemeckis’s version even if it didn’t get much love when it was released 8 years later). Unfortunately, they came up here with some of the ugliest animation I had ever seen. Seriously, it looked so cheap and clunky, it was rather embarrassing. For some reason, they also started and ended up with some live-action bits which were so completely useless. In fact, during the scenes, because the hand-drawn animation was apparently not pathetic enough, they also gave us some really awful CGI animated mice. By the way, concerning these mice, for some reason, they became a major focus in this version which was just another bewildering lame choice. It seems that they did a couple of changes to this classic story but I couldn’t care less one way or another. At least, this version was fairly short but it was probably the only positive thing I could find about it and you should probably avoid it.

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but, since it was directed by Jafar Panahi, I thought I might as well check it out. To be honest, it was only the 3^rd movie I saw from this director and I guess I still have some work to do considering his stellar reputation. It was so interesting that Panahi had decided to turn the camera towards him later on during his career and, as a result, this movie was quite complex. I think the best way to describe it would be that it was some kind of autofiction. Indeed, even though Panahi was playing a film director with some issues with the authorities, he wasn’t actually playing himself but some fictionalized version of himself. One of the most intriguing thing was that he never explained why he went to live in this remote village so closed to the border with Turkey which was super impractical since he was trying to remotely direct a movie. Several times he was asked about his choice, by the villagers and also his movie colleagues and, at some point, he literally stood on the actual border. I guess this choice or lack of it was to show his actual position. Indeed, considering all the pressure and how dangerous his position was in Iran, he should probably not stay there but, on the other hand, somehow, he couldn’t leave his country either because it would be like giving up on so many things dear to him. The contrast between these villagers, still living with some rather bizarre superstitions, and the seemingly more sophisticated film crew in Teheran was pretty neat as well. Eventually, I don’t think that Panahi did judge any side, in my opinion, he wanted to show that, no matter our background, we all try to cope somehow with the chaos in our lives, especially in a country like Iran where your options seem to be extremely limited. By the way, it was rather weird to see Turkey being displayed as some kind of symbol for freedom after watching  ‘Gelbe Briefe’ about 10 days ago. To be honest, I wonder if Panahi couldn’t have been more critical about himself somehow. Indeed, on one hand, he would rather put the focus on something or somebody else (he even gave the camera to one of the villagers to film instead of him) but, on the other hand, he kept filming himself and he was always at the centre of all the drama going on in this village but also on the remote film set. Anyway, to conclude, even though it might have been slightly too complex for my limited mental capacities, the end-result was really intriguing, that’s for sure. 

To be honest, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but since it was directed by Guy Ritchie and since it was available on Amazon Prime, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, even though it was not Ritchie’s worst movie, it was probably his blandest and most forgettable one and I’m not surprised it was a flop when it was released. I guess the main issue with Ritchie is that the guy might be too busy releasing a movie every single year, without counting his TV-series (‘MobLand’, ‘The Gentlemen’ and ‘Young Sherlock’). As a result, instead of spending several years on a single project, instead, he would apparently rather release something slightly rushed and definitely half-baked, even if the original concept actually had some potential. I mean, who wouldn’t like to watch Henry Cavill and Jake Gyllenhaal playing a duo of highly qualified fixers? Unfortunately, pretty much nothing really worked in this movie after all. Indeed, even though the movie was sold as some spectacular action flick similar to the ‘Mission: Impossible’ franchise, for at least 1 hour, there was actually no action whatsoever, instead, they hindered the business of their target to force a negotiation with him. It was not necessarily a bad idea but the issue was that none of it was really convincing. At some point, you kept seeing them going to court every 30 seconds but I didn’t buy it. Even if their schemes were indeed successful, it would take months to get a court decision, not 5 mins like it was displayed in this movie. On top of that, even though Eiza González (who kept popping up in Ritchie’s movies for some reason) was really lovely as usual, I never believed that she was a tough cutthroat lawyer. On the other hand, she was not helped by the fact that all the characters were so poorly developed. I mean, sure, Cavill and Gyllenhaal were quite charismatic but, except for some decent banter between them, there was literally nothing describing their characters one way or another. Sure, they were cool, bad*ss and seemingly super competent but the only thing I actually learned about them was that one was called Bronco (like a horse?) and Sid (short for Sidney?). Anyway, all in all, it wasn’t really bad, Cavill and Gyllenhaal were actually a cool duo, they just deserved a better movie than this one. 

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but, since it was available on HBO Max, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, it is rather sad that, already with their 2^nd movie, the new DC Studios already seemed to be struggling as this movie was a flop when it was released. I wish I could say it deserved better but, to be honest, I would be lying. I mean, it wasn’t completely awful. Indeed, the character Kara Zor-El / Supergirl was neat, at least, she was more interesting than the rather boring Superman and the way they explained her general behaviour was not bad. On top of that, Milly Alcock delivered here a solid performance. It was also nice that they introduced Lobo who is such a cool character and Jason Momoa was basically born to play him, even though it was slightly jarring that he was already playing Aquaman only a few years ago in the DCEU. However, Lobo showed up in this tale completely randomly and I wondered what the hell he was doing here. It was also a good idea to have Supergirl getting involved in some intergalactic adventure. Unfortunately, pretty much nothing else in this movie was interesting though. First of all, Krypto the dreadful mutt was easily the most annoying thing in the previous Superman movie and it was just so lame that he became so important in this story. Seriously, it was such a poor idea to add this ‘character’ in the new DC Studios universe and he might ruin the whole thing for me if they keep focusing so much on him. Even more problematic was that the story was just so generic, predictable and plain boring. There is always this issue that the Kryptonians, by being so invisible, are actually terribly tedious and they always struggle to come up with some interesting challenges for them. Eventually, they always come up with some boring devices like this green sun in this case and, of course, some good old Kryptonite. But these narrative devices are just too limited because the Kryptonians always regain their power somehow and then dispose fairly easily of their opponents. I was also rather amazed by the ending. Indeed, one of the main ideas was that Kara wanted to prevent that Ruthye would kill Krem because it would actually ruin her and I really liked this idea. However, as soon as Ruthye had a back turn, Kara actually executed the guy himself which was rather flabbergasting and vastly contradicted who Kara was supposed to be (I seriously doubt that Superman would kill someone like that). There is also the issue that, after the Golden Age of the superheroes, especially the MCU, the genre is clearly struggling right now. Indeed, it all pretty much stopped with ‘Avengers: Engame’ because they completely oversaturated the market with too many movies and TV-shows in the genre. Maybe if they would try something really different, it could still work but, if they keep coming back with the same old stories we have seen too many times already, I’m afraid these movies will keep tanking like this one.

I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this movie but, since there was a decent cast involved, I thought I might as well check it out. To be honest, I have to admit that I didn’t remember at all this tragic incident that took place in the San José Mine in Chile but I think it actually helped me to more appreciate this movie since I didn’t know at all what was going to happen. Eventually, it was quite an incredible story. Spending 2 weeks with barely any food and water was already so horrendous but then they also spent an extra 2 months in the mine before being rescued which I didn’t expect at all, even if it actually made sense though. It was apparently all over the news, not only in Chile but also in the rest of the world but I honestly didn’t remember it at all. Apparently, it was adapted from a book which was made with the involvement of all the survivors and their family so it seemed reasonable that the story was fairly faithfully told here.  Concerning the directing, it was nothing fancy but it was effective enough and the beginning scenes with the collapse of the mine were quite spectacular. There was one detail that bothered me though. Even though most of the actors involved were Spanish speakers, for some reason, they all spoke in English instead, probably to easily reach an international audience but it actually had the opposite effect on me though. Concerning the cast, it was neat to see Naomi Scott in her first feature film role, even though she played more football (soccer) than she actually had dialogues. In fact, the only one who felt really miscast here was Juliette Binoche. I wonder what could have possibly attracted such a strong actress to play such a thankless role which was obviously not a good fit for her at all (she actually replaced Jennifer Lopez). In general, they didn’t focus much on the men stuck in this mine and their relatives, it was all fairly shallow. Instead, they focused on the actual events which was not a bad approach, especially since this true story was quite impressive. Anyway, to conclude, even if it was nothing really groundbreaking, I thought it was still a decent watch though.