• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

A few reviews

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
The Worst Person in the World. I haven’t seen (nor was I aware of) the two previous films that this film supposedly makes a “spiritual trilogy,” but I’ll now seek them out. The movie itself is about that (let’s call it) 1/3 life crisis; that point of life where you’re not sure what’s next and you’re unsure of yourself as you begin to set the course for the rest of your life. It’s interesting because it’s dealt with in a way we don’t see often. But the literary structure of separating it into chapters had the effect of making it feel longer than it should’ve. The bits where it gets into somewhat experimental filmmaking—it tries to excuse itself with a glimpse at family photos and character drug use—feels out of place and is unnecessary; it breaks the rhythm of the film. The main character, Julie, is at turns, selfish, reckless, immature, and insecure; but she always has an admirable sense of agency. Julie is played by Renate Reinsve. It’s amazing that Reinsve is not already a global star. She’s that good. I don’t want to spoil anything but suffice to say life happens.
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
Tick, Tick... Boom! (2021)
I was ready to love this first directorial effort from Lin-Manuel Miranda but there are elements that took me out of it and that's when the film is already operating on multiple levels of reality and fiction. There a number of distracting cameos, I had no idea who they were but they are shot, edited, costumed and acted in an indefinably odd way, so I felt sure they were some big name person from the world of musical theatre that I was supposed to be excited to see but I was clearly far too uncultured to recognise. It's supposed to be set in 1992 but looked just like it was set today, which I suppose is a deliberate design choice to make it feel current. The repeated plot point about writing that one crucial song felt clunky and predictable as to what it would mean metaphorically. I also couldn't help but be aware that one of the cast, Vanessa Hudgens, had made an infamous Covid related Instagram video, which if you look at the dates, was 4-days after this movie had to pause production because of the pandemic. That this whiny, self-entitled, air-head actor obviously thought her filming 'Tick, Tick... Boom!' was more important than thousands of other plebs dying, kept underlining the relative non-importance of this movie and the gleeful shallowness of her performance. All that being said, Hudgens isn't in it much, Miranda's direction is inventive and stylish, Andrew Garfield is giving it his all in every scene and Jonathan Larson's music is fab.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
Gallivant (1996)
Director Andrew Kötting presents an unusual "home movie" of a journey he took around the coast of Britain with his grandmother Gladys and 7-year old daughter Eden (who has learning difficulties and uses sign language). It's partly about their family relationship and partly about the eccentric people and unexpected events and places they discover. The presentation of the footage is highly experimental, with minimal narrative, playing with frame rates, swapping between different film and video formats and a soundtrack that doesn't necessarily sync with the image (in a literal sense). There are delightful moments which I'm sure will stick in my mind but overall I didn't love it.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
The Sparks Brothers (2021)
I love when documentaries about artists take the much too infrequently used "complete chronology" approach. So Director Edgar Wright takes us from Ron and Russell Mael's earliest records, through all 25 Sparks albums, regardless of whether they were critical or commercial hits, right up to their latest work. It's two hours plus of brilliant vintage clips, witty remarks from the brothers Mael and enthusiastic opinions from the great and good of Rock. I confess I've only got a few Sparks albums but this doc makes me eager to hear them all!


The mid-credits scene with the brothers reading "facts" about themselves was an unexpected bonus highlight:

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
The Keep (1983)
As Michael Mann's 'The Keep' (so far his only foray into any type of fantasy/horror/sci-fi) is notoriously hard to come by, so I watched an extremely beat up but high-resolution 35mm fan-scan. The ever present film damage and crackly soundtrack was kind of cool. The reports of this originally being 3.5-hours long sound like an exaggerated rumour of an early assembly-cut to me but it seems Mann did have at least a 2-hour-ish cut (as per his contractual obligation) which was butchered down to 96-minutes. These cuts don't render the film "incomprehensible" as some have suggested, the plot points are all there (except the abrupt ending) but it often feels like that is all there is. e.g. it's a requirement of the plot to have two characters be in love, so lets just cut from a brief scene of them walking into the same room, to them having passionate sex, with all of the material in the middle that would have developed that romance bizarrely missing. It's the same for everything else "How can we cut this down to the barest mathematical minimum of what is required to advance the plot?", it's a very strange experience. The dodgy sound-mixing, overbearing presence of the score, inconsistent FX quality and a surprisingly not brilliant young Ian McKellen don't help matters.

However, there is an undeniable spooky and oppressive atmosphere, beautiful Gothically lit visuals and wonderful Tangerine Dream score (although overused) that suggest the film could've been great. The combination of that music and the extended dialogue-free, slow-motion sequences sometimes make this look like a Jim Steinman-esque pop video. There is something really interesting that the film is trying to ask about whether the ancient apocalyptic killer god being which is threatening the characters, is worse than the Nazi humans who also occupy the walls of it's keep. By the way, at the end I was thinking, gee this music sounds weirdly like 1982's 'The Snowman' and that's because apparently it was.




The Eyes of Tammy Faye (2021)
I listened to an episode from Jon Ronson's brilliant BBC podcast 'Things Fell Apart' a few months ago on the subject of 80s televangelist Tammy Faye's surprising and compassionate TV interview with a gay Christian minister at the height of the AIDS pandemic/panic. So I just assumed that interview and exploring what it was about Faye's beliefs that would bring her to do it, would play a central role in the movie. It is in there but it partly plays in the background of another scene and none of the controversy, impact and wrangling it took to make it happen are explored. Jessica Chastain does a fantastic job (as she usually does), disappearing into the role of Faye and bringing out so much compassion for a flawed person. The prosthetic makeup and especially the use of what looked like CGI de-ageing in the early scenes was very distracting, very "uncanny valley". 'The Eyes of Tammy Faye' isn't as good as it could have been but I did enjoy the two hours.

I might be the only person to notice this but... I've never seen a film do fake split-diopter shots before. Using modern tools to create two separated areas of sharp focus within a shot is one thing but to actually go to the trouble of recreating the characteristic blur and distortion when a split-diopter is imperfectly executed was an odd choice.

 
Last edited:

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
The Green Knight. This is my kind of movie. It’s fantasy, yes. But fantasy that transports you to its world not through lavish action scenes but by using the fantastic to convey its themes. Part of its magic is that the viewer is not beat over the head with the themes; that is to say, themes aren’t necessarily obvious. I imagine different people coming away from this movie with different experiences. Suffice to say, my wife, who grew up with the original poem as a significant part of her summer camp experiences, had a totally different take on the film than I did. For me, none of the messages or themes were particularly revelatory, but rather the poetic nature of the film swept me up. It is flat out gorgeous to look at. Every frame is a work of art, sometimes grounding us in the human experience or the beauty (and sometimes indifferent cruelty) of nature; and other times sweeping us up in fantastical images. It feels like everything we see, hear and feel is purposeful, even if I didn’t always understand the purpose. The acting is also top notch, with several career best performances. Patel is great, but Vikander stood out to me, especially in her monologues. This isn’t a movie for everyone. But, for me, it is the sort of experience I crave from films; the sort that only film can provide. And it is one of the year’s best.
 

asterixsmeagol

Well-known member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
924
Trophy Points
128
Blade Runner: Black Lotus
This anime-style CGI series originally aired on Cartoon Network, but it just dropped on HBO Max. I've watched the first two episode so far, but I'm not sure I'm going to finish it. They've done a great job with the aesthetics and music, and the animation is decent but a little stiff, but the character's faces are totally wooden, the voice acting is terrible, and the pacing is dull.
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
Blade Runner: Black Lotus
This anime-style CGI series originally aired on Cartoon Network, but it just dropped on HBO Max. I've watched the first two episode so far, but I'm not sure I'm going to finish it. They've done a great job with the aesthetics and music, and the animation is decent but a little stiff, but the character's faces are totally wooden, the voice acting is terrible, and the pacing is dull.

^ Oh I wasn't even aware of that.

As this year is the 25th anniversary (how is that possible!!!) of the brilliant Blade Runner PC game, it really makes you appreciate the animation of that games early CGI FMV sequences because this brand new show only looks about 25% better. It's interesting that they seem to have gone with recreating the warm look of the original film and not the teal look of "The Final Cut" like 2049 did.

 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
The Keep (1983)
As Michael Mann's 'The Keep' (so far his only foray into any type of fantasy/horror/sci-fi) is notoriously hard to come by, so I watched an extremely beat up but high-resolution 35mm fan-scan. The ever present film damage and crackly soundtrack was kind of cool. The reports of this originally being 3.5-hours long sound like an exaggerated rumour of an early assembly-cut to me but it seems Mann did have at least a 2-hour-ish cut (as per his contractual obligation) which was butchered down to 96-minutes. These cuts don't render the film "incomprehensible" as some have suggested, the plot points are all there (except the abrupt ending) but it often feels like that is all there is. e.g. it's a requirement of the plot to have two characters be in love, so lets just cut from a brief scene of them walking into the same room, to them having passionate sex, with all of the material in the middle that would have developed that romance bizarrely missing. It's the same for everything else "How can we cut this down to the barest mathematical minimum of what is required to advance the plot?", it's a very strange experience. The dodgy sound-mixing, overbearing presence of the score, inconsistent FX quality and a surprisingly not brilliant young Ian McKellen don't help matters.

However, there is an undeniable spooky and oppressive atmosphere, beautiful Gothically lit visuals and wonderful Tangerine Dream score (although overused) that suggest the film could've been great. The combination of that music and the extended dialogue-free, slow-motion sequences sometimes make this look like a Jim Steinman-esque pop video. There is something really interesting that the film is trying to ask about whether the ancient apocalyptic killer god being which is threatening the characters, is worse than the Nazi humans who also occupy the walls of it's keep. By the way, at the end I was thinking, gee this music sounds weirdly like 1982's 'The Snowman' and that's because apparently it was.




The Eyes of Tammy Faye (2021)
I listened to an episode from Jon Ronson's brilliant BBC podcast 'Things Fell Apart' a few months ago on the subject of 80s televangelist Tammy Faye's surprising and compassionate TV interview with a gay Christian minister at the height of the AIDS pandemic/panic. So I just assumed that interview and exploring what it was about Faye's beliefs that would bring her to do it, would play a central role in the movie. It is in there but it partly plays in the background of another scene and none of the controversy, impact and wrangling it took to make it happen are explored. Jessica Chastain does a fantastic job (as she usually does), disappearing into the role of Faye and bringing out so much compassion for a flawed person. The prosthetic makeup and especially the use of what looked like CGI de-ageing in the early scenes was very distracting, very "uncanny valley". 'The Eyes of Tammy Faye' isn't as good as it could have been but I did enjoy the two hours.

I might be the only person to notice this but... I've never seen a film do fake split-diopter shots before. Using modern tools to create two separated areas of sharp focus within a shot is one thing but to actually go to the trouble of recreating the characteristic blur and distortion when a split-diopter is imperfectly executed was an odd choice.

I just watched this. I felt that scene was pretty prominently featured. But I agree there needed to be more context. I’m not a big fan of biopics and this is one reason why; the story is manipulated to serve the confines of a two hour movie and its somewhat inflexible structure. As a result, you end up with the story the filmmaker wants told rather than the actual story, where flattering elements may be glossed over since they don’t serve the narrative. I’m no fan of televangelism or religion or even belief in “god.” But I think there has to be more going on here than is presented. The movie does feel sympathetic to Tammy; she’s presented as perhaps naive, but good hearted and well-intentioned. But they do that by portraying the other, male televangelists as basically the antithesis of that. But a two hour movie doesn’t have time for the sort of nuance that would’ve better served a true story such as this. Chastain does deserve her plaudits. She is very good as one would expect. I’m not a professional reviewer so I don’t have to impartially review genres I don’t particularly enjoy. It’s probably a better movie for people who enjoy biopics than it was for me.
 
Last edited:

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
Licorice Pizza (2021)
'Licorice Pizza'
is the most straight forwardly enjoyable, consistently written and character driven film that Paul Thomas Anderson has made in over a decade. It's solid and satisfying without having to sacrifice any of his visual style, or eccentric wit. The two main characters, Alana and Gary, are a dialogue about maturity, or the lack thereof. One is stuck in a mid-20s malaise and should behave like an adult but doesn't, the other is an irrepressible teenage entrepreneur who thinks he's a man already but isn't. They're different but both fun but spiky, flawed people but because they always seem to realise they've screwed up and are decent deep down, you sympathise with them. There are also some lovely supporting character moments too. Some are bizarre and funny, like the ridiculous American Japanese-restaurant owner, while some are beautifully touching, like the sad, strained relationship between the politician and his partner. At 134-minutes, I thought it was just a tad too long for the relatively simple story, the Sean Penn and Tom Waits bit felt extraneous and indulgent. The 70s atmosphere and jukebox soundtrack are fab. Smash cutting from a water bed commercial, to 'Peace Frog' by the The Doors was a highlight, as was the extended running/falling-over sequence at the end, like a parody of that type of scene in a more mainstream romcom.


I see what you did there Paul Thomas Anderson ;) :

51964775866_9f2beb246c_c.jpg
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
King Richard (2021)
I heard there were some complaints about the decision to tell the Williams sister's journey to tennis stardom from the perspective of the only male member of the family (even though Venus and Serena exec-produced the film). But after seeing it, I thought this approach avoided a lot of the usual tired “tags to riches” and “sports movie” cliches. It’s much more about the grit it takes for a parent to achieve any kind of success from a starting position of relative poverty, in a rich man’s game. Will Smith’s Richard Williams cuts a potentially ridiculous figure, himself unsure where ambition, determination, self-belief and tough-love stop and stubbornness, arrogance, vanity, pushiness and self-delusion begins. ‘King Richard’ looked like weak “Oscar bait” but it’s more than that. Aunjanue Ellis as Mrs. Williams outshines the rest of the cast by some distance, I could've done with more time devoted to her. Also Jon Bernthal plays "exasperation" so well, he gave me many chuckles.

By the way, it’s amazing that the Williams family achieved everything they did in elite sports while drinking so much Coca-Cola.

 

asterixsmeagol

Well-known member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
2,010
Reaction score
924
Trophy Points
128
Blade Runner: Black Lotus
This anime-style CGI series originally aired on Cartoon Network, but it just dropped on HBO Max. I've watched the first two episode so far, but I'm not sure I'm going to finish it. They've done a great job with the aesthetics and music, and the animation is decent but a little stiff, but the character's faces are totally wooden, the voice acting is terrible, and the pacing is dull.

Well, I ended up finishing it after all. Coming in close to 5 hours total, it's way too long. There are two entire episodes that don't need to exist, and lots of other repetitive scenes with too much dead time between lines, and lines delivered way too slowly. Overall the story was ok, but not great. I think the series could be improved greatly cutting it down by about 50% to a decent length movie, but probably not good enough to be worth the effort.

 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
Windfall. The Netflix thriller hooked me with its cast; well mostly Jesse Plemons as an arrogant tech billionaire. Other than that I didn’t know what to expect. It’s a throwback thriller that wears its Hitchcock influences on its sleeve. After watching, I found that the film is mostly hated by audiences. I guess I understand why as it’s billed as a thriller but that doesn’t much give you an accurate picture of what to expect. I liked but didn’t love the film. It’s really well done. One could be forgiven for assuming the story is told all through dialogue, but there’s a lot going on visually here. It’s a hard movie to discuss without spoilers. But suffice to say this is a character study, but one that isn’t just about the character on screen. The characters represent larger societal trends and issues. The acting is great. Plemons, as always, stands out; but Collins, who I only knew as the woman from that show my wife watches, was really good as well. It’s not perfect. I get the slow burn nature of the film but it still felt padded, even at 90 minutes. And there are some twists that, although perhaps necessary to up the ante, feel out of place. Overall, I think it’s worth an hour and a half of your life. Don’t be scared off by the reviews.
 

ArtisDead

Banned
Messages
3,582
Reaction score
3,519
Trophy Points
143
Jigsaw Endgame a Fanedit by Maniac and Zagadka

Blood, Gore and More Blood and Gore

Maniac and @Zagadka have been at it again with a new collaboration from their twisted minds. These two need serious therapy.

Jigsaw Endgame seems to literally pickup where A History of Desperation left off. Bringing together scenes from both Saw III and Saw IV seamlessly, we are presented with Kramer's endgame.

Jigsaw and his apprentices plan the final game teaching people to appreciate their lives as two FBI profilers help detectives sift through Jigsaw's test and piece together the mortal puzzle.

I didn't care for these movies when they were released. I did see a bit of genius in the writing. I think most people don't get past the obese amount of gore that these movies throw at you to see the existential underpinnings. However, if I am to be force-fed existentialism, I'll open my crate and get out my Skinner books and read them again.

The most depressing thing about this series is not the myriad of ways to torture but the bleak view of human nature, specifically our talent for ruining the present to avenge the past.

A point is driven home in this edit that is actually intelligent screenwriting. Saw IV takes place during the events of Saw III (which you don't realise until the very end). Amazingly, you learn through this edit and these two installments that the SAW timeline is literally all over the place. Minor characters return years later, and Jigsaw himself actually dies in Saw III, but that doesn't stop him from coming back each time.

There are more dirty rooms, rotting flesh and elaborate torture. This time the masked sadist whose fondness for men in chains continues unabated, has decided to play marriage counselor to a couple whose young son has been killed in a car accident.

He creates a protégé in Amanda, a whack job who slices her own thighs when no one else’s are handy. Amanda probably spent a lot of time in her teens writing to men on death row.

Some new devices include a rack that twists one’s extremities until the bones pop out, and an abattoir inspired scenario involving deliquescent pigs is enough to make you long for the stench of rotting corpses.

We are immediately given a reveal that the new games may not have been the work of Jigsaw. His point of giving his victims some chance of survival doesn't happen here. The person being tortured is going to die. Period.

The tension that the first film had and to a lesser degree the second, is completely absent here. However, gore is definitely a big part of this movie and it utilizes it quite well. It's used mostly in the torture storyline which continues to be the most interesting part of these movies. We are to feel compassion for our main character as he goes through each test and while it isn’t as emotional it could have been, it’s a decent study of grief. The driving force of this storyline also continues to be the anticipation of our character’s decisions which is interesting and captivating.

The good news is that, while not able to completely redeem the source material, Jigsaw Endgame is far more enjoyable than it's parts. It is a far more character-driven affair than the SAW franchise as a whole, which often seems like an exercise in gore just for the sake of it. This is the most human that we've seen Jigsaw. John Kramer is now an ordinary man with extraordinary skills who, due to tragic events in his life, finally snaps. Jigsaw ends up being the most sympathetic character in the edit, which is no small accomplishment when you consider that he's also the puppet master orchestrating all the film's violence.

Much of the movies' plots in this franchise rely on characters making completely arbitrary decisions. One different choice and the entire plan would have fallen apart. It's illogical to believe that anyone could foresee every eventuality and prepared for any outcome. The movie excels in projecting the arbitrary nature of the story's construction. The ending will irritate as many people as it dazzles.

It's amazing how @Zagadka and Maniac were able to come up with ideas to maximize on the little that was actually good about these films and bring them together into and edit that's far more enjoyable than it's parts and easily digested.

Despite the flaws of the source material, Jigsaw Endgame is a somewhat gripping, fast paced thriller that will keep you engaged throughout. You may be somewhat confused about what it all meant and how things played out, but you'll also leave with a better understanding of Jigsaw as a character. If you liked the franchise or specifically, these two insane editors' previous edit, Jigsaw A History of Desperation, you will love this edit.

Great work!
 
Last edited:

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
Boiling Point (2021)
'Boiling Point'
is 90-minutes inside an up-market London restaurant kitchen, as almost everything goes wrong for the stressed staff. It begins mid-way through a bad Health & Safety inspection report and goes rapidly down hill from there. Unlike some other "one take" movies (and this time it genuinely is a single take) where it feels like little more than a stylistic whim to impress people, with 'Boiling Point' the theme is stress, so making the actors and crew have to do this all live, remembering their lines, blocking, camera moves, lighting changes, prop positions etc must surely feed energy into the intense and powerful performances. Plus, due to lockdown, they apparently only had three attempts to get it right, instead of the planned eight chances. Again unlike some other examples of this sub-genre, it never feels like the Director Philip Barantini is trying to draw attention to the "one take" thing, he moves the camera around to simulate natural cutting and framing, so I found myself just forgetting about it most of the time, plus it adds a documentary realism. If you've ever worked in a high-pressure environment which wasn't functioning 100% correctly, you might feel quite triggered by the behaviours, good and bad, of the different staff members, depending on who you identify with, or get p*ssed off at. It's non-stop heart-attack-inducing drama. Stephen Graham and Vinette Robinson are sensational and Jason Flemyng is so good as the passive-aggressive celebrity chef "antagonist". One of the films of the year for sure.




Fast Hands (1976)
An Alan Clarke directed short about boxing for Thames Television. A focused, excited young boxer gets conned into fighting above his class by a ruthless boxing promoter. He's still determined to win but at what cost. It’s a grim, depressing tale of poverty and desperation. I think this is one the earliest examples of Clarke’s trademark tracking shot style. The final such shot following Jimmy walking the street alone, in silence says it all. I assume with this being ITV, it was shot on film but the DVD doesn’t look great unfortunately.

Fast+Hands.jpg
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
Mass. I knew a little about this movie, but I didn’t know the details. I knew it was two families getting together to deal with a child’s death. But I didn’t know more than that. I’m glad I didn’t. In fact, I wish I knew less. The first part of the movie unfolds slowly, revealing bits and pieces of what’s going on. The awkward church lady and her teen helper are perfect. They are characters six and seven in this movie (in order of importance). There are seven speaking roles and nine total if you count two distant background characters. But the bulk (90%) of the movie is four actors in one room. It’s a movie that relies on a very good script and very good performances. It’s not an easy movie to watch, especially if you’re like me and have two boys entering the most difficult stages of adolescence. But, whoa, does it feel real. And honest. And messy. And though it’s a totally different film and experience, I couldn’t help but be reminded of 12 Angry Men due to the brilliant dialogue and acting that makes a single room so captivating. Without getting into spoilers, I will say the movie does avoid—consciously so with a scene written in to defend itself—talking about political issues. That may be a dealbreaker for some, but I felt it let the movie focus on the human issues. And it still allows for viewers to have that discussion after. It took me a while to get up the courage to watch this one, but I’m glad I did.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
Boiling Point (2021)
'Boiling Point'
is 90-minutes inside an up-market London restaurant kitchen, as almost everything goes wrong for the stressed staff. It begins mid-way through a bad Health & Safety inspection report and goes rapidly down hill from there. Unlike some other "one take" movies (and this time it genuinely is a single take) where it feels like little more than a stylistic whim to impress people, with 'Boiling Point' the theme is stress, so making the actors and crew have to do this all live, remembering their lines, blocking, camera moves, lighting changes, prop positions etc must surely feed energy into the intense and powerful performances. Plus, due to lockdown, they apparently only had three attempts to get it right, instead of the planned eight chances. Again unlike some other examples of this sub-genre, it never feels like the Director Philip Barantini is trying to draw attention to the "one take" thing, he moves the camera around to simulate natural cutting and framing, so I found myself just forgetting about it most of the time, plus it adds a documentary realism. If you've ever worked in a high-pressure environment which wasn't functioning 100% correctly, you might feel quite triggered by the behaviours, good and bad, of the different staff members, depending on who you identify with, or get p*ssed off at. It's non-stop heart-attack-inducing drama. Stephen Graham and Vinette Robinson are sensational and Jason Flemyng is so good as the passive-aggressive celebrity chef "antagonist". One of the films of the year for sure.




Fast Hands (1976)
An Alan Clarke directed short about boxing for Thames Television. A focused, excited young boxer gets conned into fighting above his class by a ruthless boxing promoter. He's still determined to win but at what cost. It’s a grim, depressing tale of poverty and desperation. I think this is one the earliest examples of Clarke’s trademark tracking shot style. The final such shot following Jimmy walking the street alone, in silence says it all. I assume with this being ITV, it was shot on film but the DVD doesn’t look great unfortunately.

Fast+Hands.jpg

I’m intrigued. Though I’m often put off by “one take” movies. They very often don’t need to be, as I thought was the case with 1917. But you say this one earns it. The trailer does emphasize that aspect of the film. But marketing isn’t always the best litmus, I say as a former marketing guy.
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,379
Trophy Points
228
I’m intrigued. Though I’m often put off by “one take” movies. They very often don’t need to be, as I thought was the case with 1917. But you say this one earns it.

1917 was one of the examples I was thinking of where the fake one-take thing only worked in the movie's favour for a small section at the start, the rest seemed to be finding ways to get around it, or make it superfluous. Plus the (not very) "hidden" cuts were distracting.

The trailer does emphasize that aspect of the film. But marketing isn’t always the best litmus, I say as a former marketing guy.

It's the movies USP, you'd have to fire the marketing team if they didn't play that aspect up ;) .

'Boiling Point' is one of only a handful of genuinely one-take movies. I believe the first was 2002's 'Russian Ark' (which has long been on my watchlist). It hadn't occurred to me before but it's because it's a thing that could only be done once high-quality digital cameras were developed in the last 20-years, since physical film reels need to be changed as much as every 10-minutes. Fake one-takers like '1917' and 'Birdman' being possible are also the result of recent digital FX technology to smooth the joins.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
Yeah I misspoke when I said one take movies. I meant long take shots. There’s two that I can think of that use it incredibly well for effect and don’t overly call attention to themselves: Touch of Evil and Children of Men. Both use it for tension but in very different ways. The problem, IMO, with making a long shot too long is tension needs release. If the tension just builds and builds, it ceases to be tension anymore.

As for the modern “one take” movies, Birdman and 1917 were two movies I just didn’t share the popular sentiment. I don’t think was only the one take nature though.
 
Top Bottom