• Saturday, 22 Mar 2025 4:51 pm

  Conclave (2024)

  

  80% of the runtime is a Good Movie. It looks really good and is well-acted. Ralph Fiennes looks like my grandpa, which is a bit uncanny.

  The sound design is a little weird—there are lots of scenes with gratuitous breathing noises as people stand around wondering what they should do. It also feels like the sound designer unnecessarily muted background noise, so that when characters talk the sound sort of pulses in and out to ensure total silence in between the lines.

  There are subplots that are not resolved and never go anywhere—terrorist plots occurring outside, Fiennes’ crisis of faith—and subplots that appear out of nowhere in the final five minutes of the film and also don’t go anywhere.

  The whole movie builds and builds and then goes, “Oh no! Anyway,” like Jeremy Clarkson, and then it’s the end.

  Movies Review

• ---

  Sunday, 15 Sept 2024 12:08 am

  Now

  

  It’s fall. There’s a light breeze up and the sky is patchy with windswept fluff carried to and fro before the sun, causing the brightness in the window to pulse gently every few minutes. The light has, over the course of a single week, adopted the watery faraway look that it will retain for the next six or seven months. I can see Daylight Saving Time at the end of the street, going door to door with its pamphlets advocating Full British Darkness. Pretty soon it’ll be here. I double-check that the rechargeable batteries for my headlight are charged.

  I picked up Ghyll’s poo and mowed the lawn yesterday. Put a load of laundry out but it’s just barely too chilly to dry clothes all the way through. Tidied up the kitchen. Made up a list of chores that I’m not likely to do. I like the orderly feeling of brisk weather.

  I knelt down on the ground this morning and discovered that a cable had come undone under the car. I think it probably happened while we were driving through Wark Forest at the weekend. I remember going over a bump and hearing a bit of a bang. The Check Engine light came on a little after that, and the engine started giving off a new grumbling sort of sound. I’ve plugged the cable back in and cleared the engine fault codes. I wonder if it’ll come back. We may be in the market for a new connector. Doesn’t explain the grumbling, though. I’ll get the car up on jacks at some point and see if I’ve knocked a hole in the exhaust. That would be a pain.

  *

  I’ve just recovered from a quick bout of covid. I think about covid probably less than I should. People are still out there getting covid all of the time, and some of them are getting really ill. It knocked me on my bottom pretty good. But a full day’s rest bookended with gratuitous, sweaty fever dreams was enough to break its hold in my case. I’m fascinated by the metrics my watch recorded throughout: elevated heartrate, depressed heart rate variability. My Stress Score was abysmal, and my Body Battery was pretty much empty for three days. Technology can be a marvel. I give covid

  *

  

  Sam and I watched a couple of seasons of Clarkson’s Farm recently and now we’re scrolling Zillow listings for smallholdings in the Pennines and the Borders. Twenty acres would do us. Twenty acres for a cow or two, maybe a goat. A shed to keep the car in, maybe some freeweights or a treadmill. Abutting open access land, close proximity to singletrack. I don’t want to be a farmer, but I want to live on a farm.

  When we ran out of episodes of Clarkson’s Farm we went back to catch up on The Grand Tour. I can see why Clarkson has elected to stop doing it. It’s clear that the three of them just aren’t into reviewing cars anymore. That’s fair. Cars are pretty much all the same now, with minor variations. You can only say, “Please look at this 700-horsepower supercar with a Mercedes-AMG engine,” so many different ways.

  *

  More tiling this weekend. From here on out I’m going to do my utmost never to tile another surface in my life. I expect this resolution will last maybe 4 months. for the work, for the result.

  now Review

• ---

  Thursday, 21 Jan 2021 10:12 pm

  Ad Astra

  I've been posting a lot of movie reviews lately, and I was going to stop posting movie reviews because I want this to be a Tech Blog and not a Movie Reviews Blog.

  But I have to write about Ad Astra. It's a bad movie, and no one else seems to think so. I don't understand it.

  First of all, the movie is maybe 70% exposition. And I'm not just talking about exposition by title cards, though the movie has that; and I'm not just talking about exposition by narration, although the movie has that too, in spades. But almost every character, including Brad Pitt, spends the first half of the movie just wandering around saying things like, "My father, he most decorated astronaut in the history of the program. US Air Force Academy, his doctorate at MIT..." To say nothing of the continual psych evals that Brad Pitt has to take, so that he can look into the camera and tell us how he's feeling.

  Speaking of the psych evals! The fact that Brad Pitt just moans and moans about how he's feeling fine, and then the robot is like, "Well, you sound totally good, psych eval passed," highlights how blatant the holes are in the reality of this film. And it's not just the psych evals. It's the way that half of our astronauts are all in their 50s and up. It's the way that everyone crucial to finding the Lima Project is also severely emotionally compromised by the Lima Project. It's the way the military rocket decides to stop en route to help a stranded Norwegian science spaceship. Do you think the Navy would put aside their military exercises to help a sinking ship? A little after this, one of the astronauts gets mauled by a crazed ape, and they just bring the astronaut back into their ship. Is this the same space program that stopped Ken Mattingly from riding Apollo 13 because he hadn't had the measles vaccine? Later on in the film, Brad Pitt has a knife fight with a bunch of astronauts during takeoff. They're all weightless for some reason while the rocket is accelerating through the martian atmosphere. One of the guys fires a gun inside the ship and releases some toxic gas, I don't know. I don't get it.

  The weirdest part is that someone did clearly put some thought into this film. When Brad Pitt arrives on Mars, you can briefly see a sign in the background trying to warn against suicide--as if someone had gotten so sick of life on Mars that they wanted to end it all by going outside. Someone noticed and put the effort into the details. And then they're like, "Look, we did a news:"

  

  The characters are, without exception, 1-dimensional. I don't believe in Brad Pitt's character's, like, internal agony. He has no reason to feel the way he does. Or not feel the way he does. We're just told that he doesn't feel. We're told that TLJ has gone crazy. We're told that he has some ambiguous relationship with his father; his father likes musicals or something. That's their relationship. We need some flashbacks here. We need some more Tommy Lee Jones in the movie. He's got two speaking lines and then we meet him and he's loopy and doesn't say much. And then he kills himself for no reason.

  This film wants to be Interstellar but it's taking all of its cues from Armageddon. In Armageddon I didn't care that they brough a Glock to space, because the movie wasn't meant to be a space movie: it was a disaster movie, which happened to take place in space. Space was incidental. But then this movie starts bringing up the Drake Equation and they put Brad Pitt in an anechoic chamber and you're like, "Well well well this must be a Science Movie," and then Brad Pitt climbs up the side of a rocket during liftoff and then the crew of that rocket immediately unbuckle and start firing guns.

  To say nothing of the multitude of visual homages that director James Gray is trying to pull off here. Off the top of my head: 2001: A Space Odyssey keeps popping up whenever people are moving around in spaceships; Interstellar is referenced in all of the lens flares; Gravity when the two guys are tethered together while flying through space; The Martian when Pitt does some sort of self-surgery on his obliques; Sunshine when they use long red-tinted cuts and then long blue-tinted cuts. All of which just makes you think of the better movies you could be watching than this.

  When Brad Pitt finds Tommy Lee Jones, it occurred to me that I don't actually know what either of these characters want. TLJ wants to find aliens, but it sounds like he wants to find little green men with laser guns and flying cars. "No sign of consciousness." I'm not sure what Pitt wants. To bring his father back to earth, I guess? But then what? Pitt clearly finds no fun with anyone on Earth. And it's not like we've had any backstory where he feels like he misses his father, like he wants to see him again. I don't believe in that.

  Something else I didn't like but couldn't find a spot for

  This movie has a weird prejudice against screens. Every interface is a vocal interface. There's always someone talking in the background, talking through a speaker, speaking some content that belongs in text, on a screen. Things like "Approaching Neptune," or "Please enter your access code." I think if I was trying to be generous, I'd say that maybe they're trying to show us how people are disconnected from each other, that we can only communicate with other people through machines. (Maybe that'd explain why Brad Pitt is so upset throughout the movie.) But comes across as clunky and ham-fisted, since 9 out of 10 times, the content would be served through a screen in regular old 2020. When you turn on your computer, it doesn't say, "Please enter your password." And then you certainly don't have to say your password out loud, so the whole room can hear.

  Brad Pitt's story arc

  1. Depressed anhedonic weirdo
  2. Depressed anhedonic space pirate
  3. Find dad
  4. Dad kills self
  5. ???
  6. "I am active and engaged. I will live, and love."

  The credits

  This movie has too many bloody producers.

  The reviews

  Somehow this movie has top-score reviews from lots of people who seem to know what they're talking about. I don't get it. The film was bereft of scientific accuracy; there was no character to speak of, from any of the people who walked around on screen; the story was patchwork; Pitt and TLJ seemed to be emotionally checked-out. I don't know what to say. I don't know how Richard Roeper can give this film 3.5/4 stars.

  Stray observations

  • Having a special code that opens any spaceship (like the one they used when attending the stranded space monkey ship) seems like a bad idea in a world with space pirates.
  • These "comfort rooms" appear to be anything but. I like how they put Pitt in time out there when he finally fails a psych eval.
  • The patch on Brad Pitt's shoulder is so abnormally large.
  • Before the spaceship takes off from Mars, they say that they're planning a launch at 7:52 UTC. Why the heck are they using UTC on Mars? Use Mars time! Wouldn't 7:52 UTC on Mars be a different time of day, every day?
  • The way that the lady was like, "Do you want a hot towel? I really appreciate you flying with us, thank you so much for flying with us," really makes me want to fly Virgin Atlantic.
  • Wait--Virgin Atlantic? Virgin has a spaceship company! Why are they flying Virgin Atlantic.

  Film Review

• ---

  Wednesday, 20 Jan 2021 8:52 pm

  Soul

  I see what people mean when they say that this movie is a return to form for Pixar. Pixar does it's best work when it takes abstract concepts and puts life and feelings into them to make them approachable from an everyman's perspective. Now and again you'll see someone repeating the old saw about how each of Pixar's films is just "What if X had feelings?" But I think Pixar takes it a step further that that: they also ask, "...and what does that mean for us, as living, feeling people?"

  And this is Pixar at its best. From an aesthetic point of view, I'd say that this one's even better than Toy Story 4. I think that the 'souls' are really interesting to look at in the beginning--the weird focus, the shimmer, the gradient on them like in old film; but they sort of fade into the background after a little while, especially when 'shot' close up. The eyes are traditional plasticky-looking 3D animation, while the body itself is that lightly fuzzy texture we first say in Inside Out. Neither on its own looks bad, but when you put them next to each other it's a little... off. The real world, however, is something else to behold. Easily their most technically astonishing world. It doesn't look real--it looks the way that you wish that real looked.

  I think using Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross was also a terrific choice. I could listen to this movie, no visuals at all. The title cards are breathtaking. I don't throw around that word, either. Reznor and Ross are absolutely on form here. The juxtaposition of their unobtrusive ambient soundscapes with the more 'conventional' jazz music works a lot better than you think it would. Especially considering that this is a "children's" film (in the sense that Pixar's films are never just for children).

  If I had to pick something I wasn't a huge fan of, maybe I'd say the structure was a little wonky. I liked that we had an opening scene, before our introduction to the soul-world; but once we were in soul-world it sort of felt like we were going to stay there for a while and explore--that these were our characters and we were going to stick with them. Which made it a little jarring when, a third of the way through the movie, we took a right turn back into the real world, and our characters started looking different. It wasn't disorienting per se--it just took a minute to get back into. And but after this the movie caught its stride, and everything fell back into place.

  I'm also not sure that I'm coming away with it with that sense of awe, the wake that I've come away with after watching other movies--Pixar or otherwise. Some movies stick with you for a few days, you know? You go back and watch a couple of scenes again and notice things you'd missed. You want to talk about it with someone else. And I don't think I've got that. I don't think this is the film's fault: the message of the film (which only really emerges from about halfway through) is basically the same message as DFW's This is Water, which I've just about been indoctrinated with. So maybe I'm not the ideal audience. Not to say I'm not receptive.

  But it makes ranking the film here a bit tough. I'm inclined to give it a 4/5 because I'm not coming away with that wake, like I said; but I'd also have given Toy Story 4 a 4/5, and Soul was better than Toy Story 4; for all that it was a technical achievement, it really was just a thorough nostalgia trip for folks in their late twenties. But this isn't a Toy Story 4 review. So I've pulled a Fantano. Strong 4.

  Film Review

• ---

  Sunday, 17 Jan 2021 7:41 pm

  Metropolis (2001)

  As a movie about a power-hungry upperclass that overreaches and is undone by its own desire to rule, I think it's a fine movie. I like the juxtaposition of jazz music and the sort of 1980's-lived-in-science-fiction world, though by 2001, when the movie came out, I think that we were probably getting a little weary of this sort of grimy sci-fi world, having lived through Star Wars, Aliens, Blade Runner, Akira, and Ghost in the Shell. That's a minor quibble, though—overall, things here were just fine.

  I did think that the movie failed on a couple of fronts. And I think that these failures depend on taking the movie seriously, and trying to reason with its script; though it's not clear to me that it wants to be thatkind of movie. Maybe it's just a weirdly violent kids' movie.

  But, assuming that it's a movie for critical-eyed adults, here's what I wasn't crazy about:

  The value of a robot

  The first 20 minutes of the movie seem to delivery a pretty clear message: society is propped-up by an underclass of human labour, and that under-class is being slowly replaced by an even-lower class of robots, whom humans treat like garbage despite the fact that they show emotion, desire, and fear. We're meant to sympathise with the robot plight.

  We're also introduced to a set of revolutionaries planning a coup d'etat to overthrow the ruling class. It would make sense, then, for those revolutionaries to team up with the robots and dismantle the class hierarchy. We could get a nice exploration of how class structures dehumanise the poor or some message about how, when society reduces humans to their utility, they're no more than robots. Okay, that's fine.

  But then the revolutionaries also seem to hate the robots: they resent the way that robots have taken their jobs and opportunities. The coup d'etat goes ahead anyway, and a leader of the revolutionaries tells a robot that Human Lives Matter, and then he blows the head off the robot and the revolutionaries go and causes some havoc (before the coup d'etat fails off-screen).

  The film itself doesn't treat robots any better, either. Despite trying to pull some heartstrings with cute robots cut down for no reason, the movie treats robots as effectively disposable whenever the audience deserves fome chaos. Of all of the on-screen deaths, some 80% are robots. We're treated to gratuitous scenes of robot gore—bolts and springs bouncing everywhere, oil leaking from burst eye sockets—but nary a drop of blood anywhere (except for Rock, just pre-death; he and Duke Red (the villains) both die offscreen).

  The pacing

  The movie is also cut and paced very strangely. We get a couple of weird Looney Tunes-esque scene transitions, where a black mask sort of closes in one one part of the frame—but I'm not too bothered by this, since it happens pretty rarely.

  What bothers me more is the way that some scenes start. The endings are always generally right, ending on a poignant image or a significant line; but sometimes the scene starts in such a way that I thought I might have missed the actual beginning.

  Within scenes, as well, we're treated to extremely sudden and graphic violence apropos of nothing—which violence then ends as abruptly as it began. Maybe there was a point to this: maybe we're meant to understand that this sort of violence is commonplace, that dwellers in Metropolis are inured to this sort of thing; a lot of these brief scenes of intense violence are also rife with passers-by who cry out in alarm but otherwise seem unfazed. In one scene, anti-robot violence is actually committed by passers-by; but at this point in the movie we're deep in the seamy underbelly of Metropolis so I guess this is meant to be forgiven. The robot is treated basically as a casualty of storytelling, and then the two characters that come upon the mangled wreck are treated to some exposition and then run away in search of more story, as quickly as they can.

  The overall pacing is also a little weird. For example: from Kenichi and Tima meeting the revolutionaries, to planning the revolution, to the coup d'etat itself, to the quelling of the coup with the second coup, takes about 13 minutes. Whereas the whole scene in the Lego throne room is also about 13 minutes long, and covers significantly less ground, bogging down the film right before the climax.

  This isn't the only instance of this sort of thing. Early on, we follow Bun, Kenichi, and Pero (the robot) through the layers of Metropolis for expository purposes, for five minutes or so. Then we cut away for story to move the plot along (the explosion in Doctor Laughton's lab) before cutting back to Bun and Pero for some more exposition (about the Malduks). It's not totally out of place—we need the background to understand the story—but I sort of wish that the movie showed us more instead of just telling.

  Overall, though

  I think it's a worthy watch in the genre of gritty-sci-fi-anime. I'd have liked it to make some commentary on the nature of power, or on the border between humanity and robotics—even if it was just rehashing Ghost in the Shell. I'd have liked to come away going, "Huh."

  But as a romp through an ugly, grimy, but ultimately attractive world—and especially if you know what you're getting yourself into vis-a-vis the anime angle—it's a goodun.

  Stray observations

  • They make a point of telling us that robots aren't allowed to be called by human names, but then they introduce us to a class of robot called Albert II.
  • Duke Red looks like Ocarina-of-Time-era Ganondorf.

  Film Review

Archive

Posts Stream Books Walks • Clear filters