Disc Reviews

Much to the dismay of probably most of my family and friends, I like to watch lots of weird films. Films directed by David Lynch, Planet of the Apes movies, and Johnny Mnemonic (I freaking love that movie) among many others I have watched over and over again. This is even more true with animation as I love to find clever styles that goes beyond convention and still produce a wonderful and thrilling story. So today, I review Satellite Girl and Milk Cow, a Korean animation film that is sure to test the boundaries of my fondness for weirdness. Is it too much for this critic or is it right in my sweet spot? Let's find out.

Above the Earth, we see various satellites circle the great planet. One of those satellites is named KITSAT-1 who takes pictures of the Korean Peninsula and provides other measurements. But like all things, KITSAT-1 has started to break down and stop working. Instead she uses her time to focus in on various sounds, sounds like a boy playing a wonderful song on a piano at a lonely club. The sound captivates her so much, she decides to speed towards Earth to seek it out.

“Welcome to Jurassic Park.”

With those words begin an adventure that started with the legacy of Willis O’Brien’s The Lost World. You see, dinosaur films are nothing new; they have held our childlike fascination since the industry was born. Jurassic Park was, however, something very new when it thundered into our cineplexes and forever into our imaginations 20 years ago. The marriage of brand new CGI technology with Stan Winston’s superbly detailed animatronics models transports you back 65 million years in time. CGI technology has improved since then and has become somewhat commonplace, but there is nothing common about Jurassic Park.

The film is based on a series of books that I had never read, and from what I understand the film takes many liberties with the storyline and characters. As his sophomore effort behind the camera, there were high expectations for what Garland would do, and the result I believe is one of the most divisive films I’ve seen in a while. This is the kind of film that gets me excited for the future of cinema, not just because I loved the film, but I love the conversation it can provoke with other filmgoers.

The film has a non-linear narrative; really, this is my only complaint, since it opens virtually where our story is nearing its end. While I usually don’t have a problem with this kind of storytelling, I’m annoyed by it this time around, because all the suspense around the survival of our lead is stripped away. The film still manages to squeeze in some head-spinning surprises at the end, so I can easily put my one measly complaint aside.

“I find giants…I hunt giants…I kill giants”

This is one of those films that for some reason didn’t find an audience during a theatrical run, but I can guarantee there are viewers who are going to connect with this film and embrace it for years to come.  I say this because only a few years ago there was a film that was similar in tone, A Monster Calls, and to be honest, that film devastated me as we went along with the main character as he and his imaginary monster helped him cope with his mother who is dying from cancer.  I Kill Giants is at face value the same film, only told through the eyes of a young girl, though despite the films being so similar, it doesn’t lessen the film’s overall impact in the least. Sometimes a good story simply works. No matter how much you may dress it up, its emotional impact can remain the same.

I’m going to pretty much start this off by saying The Manor is pretty much the horror equivalent of The Room.  When I write this I’m not sure if the comparison is a compliment or not, whether the film was intended to be this bad or not.  It’s possible to do a film that is so bad it’s good, this goes way back to the Ed Wood era with some B-movie classics and later on in years we got Troma films. Though despite many of these films later becoming fodder for Mystery Science Theater, there was still a level of quality or charm to them that made them watchable (usually in the late night hours when viewers are too drunk or stoned to care about what they were watching).  This brings me back to The Manor where I’m left questioning their intentions. Is this a film made to garner the same success that we’ve seen from The Room or is this film just bad?

When we first meet Amy (Christina Robinson) she is having herself checked out from a mental ward after being there for a few years.  Now that Amy is 18 and being released into the care of her mother, the plan is to simply reacquaint her with the family.  While the family is getting together at Anders Manor there are a few more oddball guests that are staying for a visit as well.  Between a trio of hillbilly hunters, one of which seems to be a generic leather clad Steven Seagal impersonator, then there is a religious group called the True Believers and their leader is played by Kevin Nash.  Mix in some cotton candy, incest talk and some booze the film only continues to get stranger.

As with Vol. 4 of Film Movement’s Festival Picks, this grouping of films is tied together by a very specific theme: estranged father figures. On the whole, this set of films has a much better pacing than its preceding volume, but it is not without pockets of slow-moving story. However, I feel that there is something naturally compelling about an estranged family member within a narrative, as it provides a conflict that seems to write itself. The most interesting aspect of this collection is the different ways in which each relationship is reconciled. In Jermal, the relationship between father and son is repaired through hardships. In The Girl in Yellow Boots, the relationship is rekindled negatively. And in Entre Nos, the relationship is abandoned.

The Girl in Yellow Boots is strange, as it has the most intense narrative, but also it the slowest pace of the three films. It is a character study about a young woman who moves to India to find her father. While the titular yellow boots don’t really factor into the plot of the film too much (she wears them at the beginning, but they largely become inconsequential), her profession as a massage therapist and the relationships she develops with her clients are the crucial elements of the film. While the film does sport a slow pace, it has the heaviest, or “messed up,” climax of the three films, in terms of reconciling with her father.

"Just another American who saw too many movies as a child? Another orphan of a bankrupt culture who thinks he's John Wayne? Rambo? Marshall Dillon?"

So the great debate rages on. Is Die Hard a Christmas movie or just a movie that happens to be set at Christmastime? Recently Stephen Amell from Arrow told a press group that his favorite Christmas movie was indeed Die Hard. He's not alone there. I've had the debate a few times myself. Unfortunately, I come down on the side that Die Hard is not a Christmas movie. Here's my criteria. Does Christmas play a vital part in the plot of the movie? The truth is that Die Hard could have happened at any time, as the many sequels have demonstrated over the years. Fox obviously doesn't think of it as a Christmas film. Why? Because they've waited until summer to release the film on UHD Blu-ray in glorious 4K. They could have released it for the shopping season or even held it for next shopping season. Either way, be glad it's not a Christmas movie, because it's May, and the film is out now in 4K. Grab it up and enjoy Christmas in May, if that's your thing.

“Don’t give them all of you, Dominika. Hold something back. That is how you will survive.”

There appears to be nothing Jennifer Lawrence can’t do. She is an Oscar winner, the face of a successful movie franchise, and now she is a Russian spy who specializes in seduction techniques. Now in the looks department, there are scores of men that would gladly hand over their social security number for the opportunity to be seduced by J Law, so her casting was a no-brainer. But she went much deeper than that, showing an unparalleled intellect and natural aptitude for the world of espionage.

"My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions and loyal servant to the TRUE emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next."

After nearly 20 years, it's hard not to already consider Ridley Scott's Gladiator a classic. But not in the same way we think of Blade Runner, which has become more of a cult classic, or Alien, which has all the trappings of a genre film, blending horror and science fiction into a nice little package. Gladiator is a mainstream film that took the deserved Oscar for best picture along with four others in the 2001 awards ceremony. With this film, Scott was able to explore more powerful themes that, like the actions of Crowe's Maximus, echo through eternity.

The Matrix (1999) was a landmark film in the Sci-Fi genre. While its box office intake was dwarfed by Episode 1, it was The Matrix that had people talking. Andy and Larry Wachowski’s story of a post-apocalyptic world where humans serve as biological generators of energy for the machines that rule the planet challenged people’s perceptions of what reality was. Computer hacker extraordinaire Neo (Reeves) has this gut feeling that life isn’t all that it seems to be. Turns out he’s right in a big way. A group of revolutionaries led by the thought-to-be-mythical Morpheus (Fishburne) open his eyes to the Matrix.

The Matrix, it turns out, is nothing more than an elaborate computer-generated reality intended to mollify humanity who are in reality nothing more than sheep, or in this case a renewable energy source, to feed the machines that have inherited the Earth. Morpheus believes Neo is “The One”, a prophesized savior who can bend the Matrix to his own will who will eventually lead humanity out of slavery. What follows is enough eye candy to give an army of Swiss chocolate factory workers diabetes.