Brian's Thoughts on Movies

Writer-director Quentin Taratino is back on track with this, his 9th film. Tarantino's previous two films, Django Unchained and The Hateful Eight, had some good moments but I did not find them very rewatchable, especially with their inflated running times.  Both films contained some interesting characters and dialogue but focused more on violence and revenge, upsetting the balance from Tarantino's previous films.  I enjoy excitement but I prefer it to be wrapped in a story worth of the character dynamics that he excels at.  In Once Upon a Time in Hollywood Tarantino tells a story from a positive perspective about the film world he loves so much and he mixes real and fictional characters to tell a little revisionist history. When I first learned that Once Upon a Time in Hollywood would focus on the death of Sharon Tate, I was concerned that Tarantino might sensationalize it or tell some story of her husband Roman Polanski waging war on her killers since Tarantino had been so foc

In early 2020, prior to the Academy Awards I saw director Sam Mendes' war film 1917 and was wholly impressed by it.  1917 was an utterly immersive look at the wartime experience and the single take approach (in actuality about 24 takes cleverly stitched together to appear as one) put the viewer in the shoes of the lead characters.  I had not yet seen Parasite but had heard good things about it.  In previous years I had seen Boon Joon-ho's films Mother and Snowpiercer (I do not know if his films always use single word titles in Korean, but they always seem to in English) and I had really liked Mother.  I did not really connect with Snowpiercer however, since despite liking the concept as presented I felt the film was a little too outlandish and some of the performances were too big.   There was some surprise when Parasite won Best Picture over 1917 and I admit that I was disappointed.  A few days later I watched Parasite on a plane.  Now having had time to think about both films

  Quentin Tarantino films are always events.   They occur every three or four years and are represented by a talky film that has memorably named characters, spouting fun dialogue as they go through an often larger than life scenario.   They are usually kind of violent though his better films mostly use it sparingly. Despite the rhythmic nature of the title, I found the name The Hateful Eight uninspiring.   For the most part I love Tarantino films and I thought Inglorious Basterds was one of his best films, but he followed it with Django Unchained.   As I mentioned in the review, I was disappointed by the amount of blood spatter and lack of imagination especially in the last act of that film, after an intriguing set up.   When I learned that Tarantino was going to make another western, with an advance poster showing a wagon creating a trail of blood I lost enthusiasm.   At one point a copy of the script leaked (Tarantino writes all his scripts on a word processor so there were only hard

  The late Sir Sean Connery will likely be most remembered as the original James Bond but his work goes far beyond that and any examination of his career should account for his other roles.  Starting in 1962, Connery starred in five Bond films in six years, got tired of the role and all the scrutiny that came with it (and of being underpaid for it), started to develop his career with other roles, but returned to Bond twice, in 1971 and 1983.  After his last Bond Connery did a lot of films which were either ensemble pieces or films in which he was paired with a younger current star often as a mentor.  I will note, I have seen most of Connery’s work in the 1980s and 1990s (except for the Highlander films which never interested me).  The only films of Connery’s that I have seen from the 1970s are The Man Who Would Be King, The Offence and Robin and Marian.  I still want to see The Andersen Tapes, Wind and the Lion, Murder on the Orient Express, and Cuba.  Another disclaimer here.   I ha

 Avengers: Endgame was the last film that several of the core actors were contracted for so going in I knew it would be the final time to see them work as a group and some would likely not survive.  I am happy to admit that I guessed the title in advance as I had picked up on the significance of Dr. Strange’s line in Infinity War “We’re in the endgame” after he gave the time stone to Thanos. The title is, in truth, a misnomer as it really was only the end for Tony Stark and Steve Rogers.   Just about every other Avenger either has or will appear in a follow-up film or TV show.   The planning for these two films allowed the audience to feel the impact of the Infinity War finale by separating the two films by a year.   We mourned the loss of the blipped characters and wondered how the remaining Avengers could possibly resolve it.   I thought it might involve some time-travel but was pleased that the marketing for the film gave little hint, spending other than to show two minor spoilers

It is odd to think of Coming to America as a series.  While I heard rumors about a potential sequel to Eddie Murphy’s big 1988 hit for years, I thought it about as likely as another Austin Powers, or True Lies film.  Comedy sequels often do not work because they are a result of a financial decision as opposed to inspiration.  See Arthur 2, Three Men and a Little Lady, Little Fockers, The Hangover Part II, or one of the endless Police Academy films to name but a few that merely recycle the main beats of the original film. The few that work usually are a result of broader ideas that did not quite make the first film and or further the story or expand the lives of the characters and can exist on their own (a la Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me or Meet the Fockers). Spoilers below for both Coming to America films. Coming to America (1988) Coming to America came out in the summer of 1988.   Eddie Murphy, who had been on Saturday Night Live, standup specials and a handful of big m