Last Week Was a Movie: Aug 19 - 25, 2024
Film Vomit's weekly recap: What we watched, what we recommend, and what to avoid.
After finishing Francis Ford Coppola’s filmography, I re-watched some of the year’s biggest films and made some new discoveries, while Jalen finally witnessed one of the greatest movies ever made. Here’s everything we at Film Vomit watched last week:
David: 5.75/10
Alright, stop me if you’ve heard this one before. A witch, a tinman, a martini, and a box of cigarettes walk into a hospital. That’s the opening of Coppola’s coming-of-age dramedy “Jack,” a film in which Diane Lane literally gives birth to Robin Williams—well, in a manner of speaking. You see, Williams’ titular manchild grows at a rate four times faster than the average person, so as he enters the 5th grade, he’s got more hair on his back than he has left on his head. To say this whimsical fairytale about accelerated aging is beneath Coppola’s talents would be an understatement, and yet, by the end, its schmaltz had almost won me over. Overcoming the unease that comes with seeing Bill Cosby interacting with kids, “Jack” evokes the bubbly effervescence of the 90s Disney movies I grew up on, which coincidentally was just what the doctor ordered as I lay in bed, riddled with Covid but still marching bravely through Coppola’s filmography instead of retreating to the comfort of familiar movies and easily digestible sitcoms. There’s also the Robin Williams factor, giving this movie a bit of an emotional boost, as seeing the gone-too-soon comedic master wax poetic about the fleeting nature of life was almost enough to jerk some tears from my bloodshot eyes. Maybe it’s just the concoction of cold meds circulating through my bloodstream talking, but I didn’t hate this. I recognize its flaws, but as Coppola leverages the physical comedy of Williams and the committed performance of Lane, my cringing turned to chuckling, and by the end, I wore a big, goofy smile on my face. Don’t get me wrong, this is a bad, poorly aged movie, but much like its shaggy protagonist, “Jack” can be kind of endearing if you look past its exterior.
If you love Robin Williams, then “Jack” is worth watching at least once. For something that tackles similar themes but does it a little better, I recommend Stephen Chbosky’s “Wonder.”
David: 7.25/10
A rock-solid procedural featuring a stellar central performance from Matt Damon and terrific supporting work from Danny DeVito, Jon Voight, Claire Danes, and Mickey Rourke, Coppola’s “The Rainmaker” is as sturdy as they come. It’s the kind of star- studded, competently crafted drama we used to get ten of in any given year, but which are now as rare as the storied filmmaker who directed this one. “The Rainmaker” joins a long list of John Grisham adaptations – none of which I’ve seen, sadly – but as I read up on the differences between this film and the novel that inspired it, I was struck by the way Coppola has seemingly warped the financial anxiety of the book through his own personal value system. In the film, the ending is played as an upbeat triumph rather than a disheartening defeat, as Coppola, who has only ever ascribed value to money in terms of the art he can create with it, views Damon’s character’s escape from the financial matrix of thought as worthy of celebration. Both a fitting finale to his ’90s work and a fitting final note to leave audiences on before his ten-year hiatus, Coppola’s “The Rainmaker” is, at its core, a film about a man becoming disillusioned with the structures he’s devoted his entire life to—something Coppola himself knows all too well. The lawyer who thought he could make a difference, the director who thought he could change Hollywood.
If you enjoy compelling legal dramas and classic underdog stories, “The Rainmaker” is an easy recommendation.
David: 7.25/10
Forming a bizarre thematic trilogy with “Peggy Sue Got Married” and “Jack,” Coppola’s self-financed “Youth Without Youth” (his first film after a ten-year sabbatical from filmmaking) once again sees the director exploring the concept of anachronistic aging. This time, it takes the form of a suicidal linguistics professor—bemoaning his wasted life spent fruitlessly searching for the origin of human language and longing for the love of his youth—who is struck by lightning, reversing his age from seventy to forty in the span of a week. Rejuvenated and developing strange psychic powers, as well as a metaphysical split personality, the professor (played by the great Tim Roth) rapidly attracts the attention of the Nazis occupying his home country of Romania. Fleeing the occupying force, the professor resumes his work and, many years later, becomes entangled in a romance with the reincarnation of his former lover, who herself had a similar experience with lightning, developing strange abilities as a result. His reborn paramour falls into trances in which she believes she is Rupini, one of the first disciples of Buddha, and with each trance, she linguistically travels further back through history. Finding both love and the key to his life’s work, the professor must make a difficult choice, as his proximity to his object of desire is aging her as quickly as the lightning de- aged him.
This is the densest film Coppola has ever made, and as such, one viewing is simply not enough to sift through all the shifting ideas of time, consciousness, fate, mortality, identity, memory, and existence. And yet, I feel compelled to take the cold plunge into this movie’s complex web again and again, in the hopes that with enough repeated submersions, I, much like the film’s main character, will be shocked with the charge necessary to glean understanding from this winding mystery. I’m less inclined to say that Coppola failed to keep his arms around the ideas bursting from the seams of this film and more certain that I, despite white-knuckling the reins of this thing to the best of my ability, somewhere fell off this ride, with Coppola dragging my confused and befuddled body along to the finish line.
This one is for the real sickos—easy to dismiss as avant-garde or pretentious to the uninitiated, but packed full of discoveries and musings for the avid cinephile.
David: 7.25/10
Much like his other beautifully shot black-and-white tale of a boy living in the shadow of an unknowable older brother, Coppola’s “Tetro” can, at times, test its audience’s patience. However, while “Rumble Fish” was an adaptation, “Tetro”—featuring an original script from Coppola—finds its roots in the director’s own life. The domineering presence of an emotionally distant composer, inspiring sibling rivalry, is as true for Coppola as it is for the characters in this film.
The film opens with a young cruise line waiter, Bennie (played by a fresh-faced Alden Ehrenreich, almost a decade before he would portray the renowned space outlaw in Disney’s financially disappointing prequel, Solo: A Star Wars Story), arriving in Buenos Aires, where his older half-brother, Angelo (played with emotional torment by Vincent Gallo), resides. Angelo had left their family to go on a writing sabbatical when Bennie was a child. When Bennie shows up on his older brother’s doorstep, Angelo, who now insists on being referred to only as “Tetro,” is cold and distant. In contrast, Tetro’s girlfriend, Miranda, welcomes Bennie with open arms. To Tetro, Bennie represents a past he has strived endlessly to escape—even Miranda doesn’t know who their real father is. To Bennie, Tetro is both an inspirational figure and a liar, still chafed by Tetro’s unfulfilled promise to come back and rescue him from their father’s grasp.
As the story unfolds, shocking family secrets come to light in a truly soap-operatic film, with each memory or dream rendered in vibrant color, contrasting the monochromatic present. Something this experimental and personal can likely only be fully appreciated by Coppola himself, as the director is clearly exorcising some generational demons through this artistic expression. However, the arresting visuals and staggering performances keep it compelling. The film is captivating in its own benign way. While it may not drum up the urge for revisitation like Coppola’s classics, there is a unique amusement in seeing an auteur of Coppola’s caliber toy with the form with the gusto of a fresh-out-of-film-school amateur.
“Tetro” may prove impenetrable for the average moviegoer, but if you’re an avid movie fan who enjoys the kind of messed-up family dynamics found in “Succession,” then this is right up your alley.
David: 7/10
In a small town with a seven-faced clock tower, each face displaying a different time, a down-on-his-luck horror novelist named Hall Baltimore arrives for a book signing in the local “bookstore” – which, amusingly, is just a shelf in the town’s hardware store. This writer, portrayed by a ponytailed Val Kilmer, is greeted by a single, eccentric fan: the town’s sheriff, Bobby LaGrange (played by the great Bruce Dern). LaGrange eagerly asks Baltimore to read some of his own writing and to accompany him to the town morgue, where the body of a nameless runaway teen lies dead, a stake driven through her heart. LaGrange, hoping to collaborate with Baltimore, proposes a vampire book inspired by this mysterious killing. However, as Baltimore encounters a young girl named Virginia and the legendary writer Edgar Allan Poe in his dreams, it becomes clear that there are far more sinister secrets lurking within this seemingly quaint community.
As we near the end of one of the hottest summers in recent memory here in North Carolina, “Twixt’s” chilly, autumnal vibe made me excited about the impending arrival of fall. As an exercise in atmosphere, “Twixt” is exactly my kind of film, perfectly suited for a spooky October night, even if the film itself left something to be desired. A gothic horror in the same vein as “Bram Stoker’s Dracula,” Coppola trades the maximalism of his earlier vampire film for something far more personal here. The murder has already occurred, so the terror lies not in the acts of violence but in uncovering their origins. As Baltimore draws closer to the heart of the mystery, Coppola weaves the tragic real-life passing of his son into the story with gut-wrenching effect.
Like much of his 21st-century work, Coppola’s “Twixt” is less concerned with adhering to conventional narrative structure and more focused on serving as a vessel for the director’s introspections. Long before grief and trauma became buzzwords in the world of “elevated horror,” Coppola delivered a mournful horror film that stands as a monument to his own grief, with its painfully ambiguous coda both an acknowledgment of the guilt he feels and a refusal to absolve himself.
Those seeking a straightforward horror film might prefer the theatrical cut, but for those interested in witnessing the great director lay bare his tormented soul, the “authentic cut” (as Coppola calls it), “B’Twixt Now and Sunrise,” offers the most personal experience.
David: 7/10
I owe Alex Garland’s “Civil War” an apology. Initially dismissed as a frustrating exercise in apolitically depicting an inherently political subject, two events have occurred since seeing “Civil War” in theaters that have changed the lens through which I view the film. The first is the attempted assassination of a former president and current presidential candidate. In the ensuing chaos, Evan Vucci, the Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalist for The Associated Press, risked his life to dart across the front of the stage and capture a photo that may very well win the assassin’s target his second term in office. The second is a seemingly unprompted nightmare that I had many months after seeing the film.
In this nightmare, I was volunteering at a church that was being used as a polling place. As I handed out ballots to the denizens of this church, a group of men wielding assault rifles burst through the door and began herding everyone onto the street outside, zip- tying our wrists and lining us up in a straight line. Starting on my left, a man went down the line asking his captives who they were voting for, and for every “wrong” answer he got, a bullet was put through the skull of an unarmed citizen. As my turn to answer approached, a second faction began raining bullets down on our captors from the rooftops above. I ran for cover behind the man who had just held a gun to my face, pleading with him to cut the wire and give me a gun so that I could help him fight back against the attackers. This man saw through my deception, knowing that I intended to flee the second my ties were cut, and responded with a swift bullet that shot me upright in my bed, drenched in a cold sweat.
I was wrong about “Civil War” in two ways. The first is that Garland’s film is not about politics at all, but rather about the morality of photojournalism and how a picture worth a thousand words can never truly have a political leaning—so why should his film? The second is that the film didn’t affect me. Clearly, Garland’s latest got under my skin more than I initially gave it credit for, and while it’s still too somber to be enjoyable, I have a newfound respect for it.
“Civil War” will be frustrating for a myriad of reasons to most people, but if you’re someone who can appreciate well-acted, beautifully shot depictions of harrowing events, then I recommend it.
David: 7.5/10
I desperately want to join the ranks of those who feel that George Miller’s “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” represents a missing piece they didn’t know they needed. I have read so many beautiful reviews where critics have gushed over how “Furiosa” provides untold insight into the masterpiece “Mad Max: Fury Road,” with many saying they now cannot imagine one without the other. I even have friends who feel the same way, believing that the backstory provided in “Furiosa” gives renewed meaning to “Fury Road,” deepening the plight of the titular character and transforming “Fury Road” into more of a coda than the totemic film I think of it as.
Alas, even after a second viewing of “Furiosa,” I have yet to unlock the experience I see so many others having. Initially, I chalked up my muted response to the film as it being a victim of my own lofty expectations—this was, after all, one of my most anticipated movies of the year. Even “Fury Road” took a couple of viewings for me to fall in love with (for context, I missed it in theaters, and the rinky-dink television I first watched it on couldn’t effectively communicate the magnitude of what Miller had accomplished). So, I resolved to wait and try again, with readjusted expectations.
Nothing sucks the air out of a film more than a chaptered narrative, something I was immediately caught off guard by during my first viewing of “Furiosa.” I recognize that this is likely a personal aversion that most are not afflicted by, but I completely deflated when the first of “Furiosa’s” five chapter cards appeared on screen. The second thing that surprised me was the lack of Anya Taylor-Joy as the titular road warrior, who doesn’t appear until the film’s second hour. Instead, Furiosa is a relatively passive (and young) character for the first hour, played by Alyla Browne in what is admittedly a staggering child-actor performance.
More than anything, the hurdle I can’t seem to clear with “Furiosa” is the film's overall look. There’s a digital sheen that feels out of place compared to “Fury Road,” which, while certainly filled with visual effects, still managed to convey a gritty, dirty aesthetic that underscored the sense of danger and urgency. Some of “Furiosa’s” action sequences are stunning—arguably some of the best in the entire series—but there’s a distinctly plastic look and feel to the whole thing. The balance of practical and digital effects in “Fury Road” was perfect, so the imbalance in “Furiosa” perplexes and frustrates me to no end.
Don’t get me wrong, “Furiosa” is a good movie, and it’s an easy recommendation for anyone looking for a solid action film. I just desperately wanted it to be a great one.
David: 7.75/10
You can read my full review of “Strange Darling” here.
I highly recommend “Strange Darling,” an inventive thriller and one of my favorite movies of the year so far.
David: 6.75/10
You can read my full review of “Blink Twice” here.
”Blink Twice” is a serviceable enough thriller, but for those sensitive to the depiction of sexual assault, the film will be highly triggering.
David: 8.75/10
“Ocean’s Eleven” might be the heavyweight champion of effortlessly cool movies. Soderbergh’s update of the 1960s Rat Pack caper—which has become the modern benchmark for all heist films—is, in essence, everything I want from a movie: a group of dudes (preferably A-list movie stars), each incredibly skilled in their chosen craft, coming together to problem solve the shit out of an impossible situation. It could be any situation; it doesn’t have to be a “job,” but the “job” of robbing three casinos in one night is, admittedly, the best premise you could hope for.
Clooney has his movie star charm dialed up to an (pun intended) eleven. Pitt, meanwhile, cruelly shovels junk food into his mouth, making it look as if anyone could eat like Rusty Ryan and still look like Brad Pitt. Roberts delivers the ultimate heat check, nailing every line with fiery contempt and sharing such palpable chemistry with Clooney that steam practically rises from the screen whenever they share it. Damon, Garcia, Cheadle, Affleck, Caan, Gould, Jemison, Mac—they’re all great, but the MVP is undoubtedly Carl Reiner as Saul Bloom. The grace this movie extends to his too-old-for-this-shit con artist in quiet moments is beautiful. There’s a palpable concern from everyone about Saul’s ability to perform his role in the heist, as evidenced by how often they check on him.
Soderbergh takes a poignant beat when Saul is getting dressed to meet Benedict, holding the shot on Saul as he checks himself in the mirror. He’s like a great maestro gearing up for his final performance. While the film never explicitly positions itself as a “one last job” movie, for Saul, this likely is, whether they succeed or fail. Moreover, he doesn’t have much time to enjoy the benefits if they do succeed. He’s truly doing it for the love of the game, and that sentiment permeates through the other characters as well. In another favorite exchange, Damon’s Linus asks Rusty if he’s suicidal, to which Rusty responds with a trademark Pitt grin, “Only in the morning.” You get the sense that all these guys are doing this because they simply don’t know how to do anything else. There’s no cooler character in a movie than a criminal with a code, and this film gives us eleven of them, all forming a sort of Masonic club with their own unique vernacular. More than wanting to see these guys succeed, you just want to hang out with them, which is the hallmark of an endlessly rewatchable movie.
“Ocean’s Eleven” might be the most recommendable movie ever made—it’s pure, electrifying fun.
David: 9.25/10
Next year, “La Haine” will turn thirty years old, and unfortunately, it will still be just as relevant as it was back in 1995. Chronicling a day in the life of three friends from a poor neighborhood in Paris, “La Haine” tackles police brutality and the socio-economic divide through the Trojan horse of the typical vibe you’d expect from a coming-of-age movie. The three friends—one of whom has recovered a police officer’s snub-nose .44 Magnum revolver from a riot that took place the previous night—spend their day engaging in typical teenage activities: smoking weed, flirting with girls, busting balls, and quoting their favorite movies, all while waiting for news about the condition of a friend who is in intensive care after being badly beaten in police custody. Should their friend die, Vinz (played by a young and incredible Vincent Cassel) vows to exact revenge by killing a police officer, settling the score in an eye-for-an-eye manner.
Through its beautiful black-and-white cinematography and tremendous use of music (courtesy of French rap group Assassin), the film lulls the viewer into a relaxed trance. Yet, with each tick of the clock, this tension-filled narrative comes closer to exploding. The film itself mirrors a story told within it multiple times about a man falling from a skyscraper who keeps telling himself, “So far, so good” as he passes each floor. But as they say in “La Haine,” “It’s not about how you fall, it’s about how you land,” and “La Haine” lands with a soul-rattling thud. The ending rocked me to my core, sucking the air out of my body as my jaw hit the floor.
I implore everyone to check out “La Haine,” a thriller as prescient as it is poignant.
David: 8.25/10
“Ponyo” is so adorable it almost hurts. It’s essentially Miyazaki’s take on “The Little Mermaid”—a goldfish who escapes her overbearing mystical father and, through a relationship with a young boy who rescues her, develops a desire to become human. All of this is rendered through the gorgeous animation and trademark magical imagination you’d expect from a Miyazaki movie. There’s a strong thematic undercurrent about how humans abuse the ocean, but what really struck me is how this works just as well as a coming-of-age story for kids as it does for adults. Ponyo’s father, Fujimoto, is chafing against his daughter growing up and her desire to have new experiences, meet new people, and ultimately, become her own person. Beautiful and uplifting in equal measure, which should come as no surprise considering who’s directing it, “Ponyo” is an utter delight.
This is an easy recommendation, as “Ponyo” is fun for the whole family.
David: 8/10
“Ocean’s Twelve” is a sequel that’s more about being a sequel than about the Ocean’s Eleven crew begrudgingly reconvening to pull another job. Like a studio exec hungry for a check, Terry Benedict reassembles Danny Ocean and the gang for one purpose: making more money. Owing all the money they stole from Benedict in the first movie, plus interest, the Ocean’s crew must find a way to pull off an even bigger job than they did before, when they robbed three Las Vegas casinos in one night.
There’s just one problem: the first movie positioned its con as the perfect heist, a once- in-a-lifetime opportunity, and finding a score bigger than that proves difficult. As Danny tells Rusty, “We’re forcing it.” Then there’s the new addition to the series, Vincent Cassel’s character, The Night Fox, a master thief who wants to test his mettle against Danny Ocean. The Night Fox knows all the Ocean’s crew’s tricks and wants to prove, once and for all, that he is smarter than Ocean. In effect, The Night Fox functions like the most insufferable moviegoer who tries to guess the plot of the movie they’re watching. Now, Danny and the gang have to find a way to execute a heist while being surveilled by someone who’s intent on staying one step ahead of them, all while their hearts just aren’t in it.
In this self-reflexive caper, the audience becomes the mark, so it’s fitting that “Ocean’s Twelve” received a divisive reaction from critics and fans alike when it was released in theaters back in 2004. In “Ocean’s Eleven,” the viewer feels like they’re in on the joke, part of the crew pulling off the heist of the century. But when Soderbergh’s long con reveals itself to be one perpetrated on the audience, suddenly “Ocean’s Twelve” becomes a litmus test for who can and can’t take a joke.
“Ocean’s Twelve” may not be as breezy and fun as “Ocean’s Eleven,” but the “heist” it pulls off is arguably an even bigger achievement—for those who aren’t offended by being fooled.
Jalen: 10/10
I hate to be that person, but we truly don’t make movies like we used to anymore. Admittedly, I’ve been called a “boomer” a time or twenty in my life, but this is no joke—we really don’t make movies like we used to, and that’s a shame. More and more, I find myself scouting for those tiny details when I watch movies, but I was completely blown away by how much went into the sets for "Alien." There must have been at least a million tiny lights used in the spacecraft. I couldn’t get enough; I found myself pausing the movie just to appreciate all the details in the design.
Since finishing the movie, I’ve watched videos on the practical effects, and I am completely amazed. The level of detail in the alien suit and the effects when the alien bursts out of Kane’s chest are incredible. And to top it off, when the alien bursts from Kane’s chest, the shock on the cast’s faces is completely real—the machine had been malfunctioning, so their reactions were authentic and genuinely shocked. Brilliant. While I am totally amazed and in awe of this movie, I am confused as to why we don’t make films like "Alien" anymore. It’s 2024, and our technology has advanced tremendously, yet we rely heavily on CGI these days. It’s a shame.
Outside of my frustration with modern movies, "Alien" is an absolute must-watch. In fact, if you’re one of the 67 people who haven’t seen "Alien," consider this a prescription. I can’t recommend "Alien" enough, and I encourage you to pause throughout the movie to take in the incredible detail that went into the sets, costumes, and effects.
So, that’s everything we watched last week, but we want to know what you’ve been watching! Jump into the Discord and let us know if you’ve seen anything good lately.
David Lee
Published August 27, 2024