If the movie seems too much for you, at least listen to the soundtrack. Here is the lovely, “I Get Overwhelmed” by Dark Rooms.

What got you to watch this movie? At first, it was the title. Then, after I watching the trailer, I was instantly curious. I enjoy Rooney Mara. I was intrigued by the visuals and the music really drew me in.

What kept you watching the film? Curiosity, really. It is filmed in such a unique way in the way it deals with time, that I wanted to understand the directors reasoning. The shots are long and stay with the character for minutes. The director seemed to want to really focus on “real time” in regards to watching someone mourn. I got to sit with Rooney and observe her without a quick cut to another scene. I appreciate when I get to sit with a moment instead of quickly being thrown into another scene and I’m unable to fully grasp the emotions of the character.

What emotional response did the film have on you? During…after? I felt the sadness in my gut and it haunted me throughout. It made me think about death in a different way. It also made me think about life in a different way, too. I still think about it!

Do you think this film has a specific demographic appeal? Not particularly. I do think that it will only appeal to those who are willing to go on the journey with the director. IT IS NOT FAST PACED BY ANY MEANS. So, it’s definitely not for anyone who hates a long build up.

Was the language use in the film appropriate/authentic? The LACK of language or dialogue played into the mystic quality.

**Was there anyone in the movie that you identified with at all? **The way the movie is set up, you are really just an observer. It’s not filmed in a way that really connects to the characters, themselves. You connect to the story as a whole and some of the lines cut straight to the heart. (The scenes in which two ghosts are communicating…are heartbreaking.)

Would you recommend this to anyone or to only certain friends? I would only recommend this to certain friends. This is not for everyone. If you love SLOW moving movies that make you think, then this one is for you. If you want to be really entertained…skip it.

Would you spend money to see this again? In a theatre/DVD/Streaming? I would if I were wanting to show it someone else. I’m not sure I would watch it alone again.

Is this a movie that you’d like to own? Yes, but only as a film geek–as it is an interesting study of filmmaking and storytelling. It would also be a great one to discuss.

The film was able to do something quite rare in regards to romantic-comedies for me. It made me genuinely care about its characters. It had a story full of tender people, as well stark ones. We were taken on a journey that revealed just how far society has yet to go too. Mostly, the movie works for the reason that all the best romantic-comedies do: the couple falls in love and we with watching them, there’s drama with Kumail and Emily and want them to stay together. With the added familial conflict, we cared about her parents too.

This film has a big heart and as a writer it showed me there are still new territories to explore in romantic comedies; it just takes someone willing to take a risk and seek them out.

Director: Michael Showalter
Writers: Emily V. Gordon, Kumail Nanjiani
Stars: Kumail Nanjiani, Zoe Kazan, Holly Hunter, Ray Ramono

Now I will admit that I am not a huge del Toro fan. I have seen very little of his work, Pan’s Labyrinth and Hell Boy are the only works of his I’ve seen up to this writing. Will that change… perhaps– perhaps not. I will say that del Toro makes his films far more personal and it shows in his eye for details.

The first thing that stuck out to me upon seeing the trailer for The Shape of Water was that it felt whimsey and had elements of magical realism like Amélie and del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth. Everything about the film in the trailer looked just beautiful. So I found the script quite fast. The bonus of Sally Hawkins, Octavia Spencer, Doug Jones, Richard Jenkins and Michael Shannon was the sugar in the batter which allowed me to read it in their voices. And, I was impressed with the simple adult fairy tale that left room for other dynamic cinematic elements. A story made for film. Giddy-up, I was ready to see this and got into film-watching chair immediately.

So I was not 100% ready to behold the true depth of Team del Toro’s latest fare. An adult dreamy world…with eye popping colours and wonderful near hallucinatory sensory elements… like its French cousin Amélie.

1960’s Baltimore. The rain. The government laboratory. The apartment building. Strickland’s home. Everything was built on sound stages in Toronto, or shot around Ontario, Canada. I knew I was watching a movie, yet I was still immersed in this cinematic world. It was beautiful thanks to Production designer Paul D. Austerberry.

Wa waa waaa waaaaaaa… The score sounded beautiful thanks to Alexandre Desplat. Desplat is one of my favourite French composers. He’s the maestro behind many French films that I have watched over the years. The score sounded like a celebration of the optimistic and cheery… very fairytale…fantastical. The music haunted me in a good way with harmonica and flute motifs throughout. I’m glad he was chosen to score this film, one that is a tribute to old school romanticism.

Acting is never simple. The actors (and the director) have to do their best to realize… to inhabit the world through the individuals created by the screenwriter. In The Shape of Water, every leading and supporting role was written by del Toro and Vanessa Taylor with the actor in mind. Flattering yes (I tend to do the same with my productions) but, the actors were so natural that I forgot they were acting. From Doug Jones’ physical intelligence, to subtle expression on the face of Richard Jenkins. Everyone just fit. Every movement was natural.

The Shape of Water is up for a 13 Academy Awards next month. This film and Dunkirk (review coming up by the end of the week) both are my favourites going into the Academy Awards ceremony, and I look forward to seeing how they both fare.

The Shape of Water I’d say that you should SEE IT.

Release date: December 8, 2017 (USA)
Director: Michael Gracey
Box office: 231.5 million USD
Nominations: Golden Globe Award for Best Actor – Motion Picture Musical or Comedy, MORE

What got you to watch this movie (adverts, talent involved etc)? Hugh Jackman…and the soundtrack.

What kept you watching the film? The cast, the music, the colors…it is just entertaining!

What emotional response did the film have on you? During…after? Happiness. My daughter (7) loved it. We’ve seen it 3 times together. The 5-year-old has seen it twice. We listen to the soundtrack all of the time.

Was there anyone in the movie that you identified with at all? No, this one I just let run over me…just enjoyed it and didn’t think too hard.

Would you recommend this to anyone or to only certain friends? My friends who like musicals…

Did any production elements (i.e. sound, costume, art direction, production design) stand out? I felt the colors popped. I loved the filming of it…kept it exciting. It was beautiful to watch.
Would you spend money to see this again? In a theatre/DVD/Streaming? Absolutely.

Is this a movie that you’d like to own? It’s a must.

Director: Steven Spielberg

Writers: Liz Hannah, Josh Singer

Stars: Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, Sarah Paulson

What got you to watch this movie (adverts, talent involved etc)? The trailers and the talent.

What kept you watching the film? Simple. Meryl Streep.

What emotional response did the film have on you? During…after? “Man, that could have been done so much better…what the hell?”
Do you think this film has a specific demographic appeal? Not exactly.

Was there anyone in the movie that you identified with at all? I could feel the emotional turmoil Meryl was in with dealing with dear friends and having to put them in their place. (Though my friends have never put me through such trials as these!) She also has to figure out the best way to deal with such a misogynistic group. I think most women today have dealt with that.

Would you recommend this to anyone or to only certain friends? I’ve just been saying, “If you love Meryl, you’ll enjoy her.” Otherwise, I have a hard time recommending it. But, again, I am in the minority here.

Did any production elements (i.e. sound, costume, art direction, production design) stand out? Yeah…they stood out like a sore thumb. The costumes were awful and the makeup wasn’t much better.

Would you spend money to see this again? In a theatre/DVD/Streaming? Ummm…no.

It’s quite rare when an actor surprises me. This time it was James Franco. James played Tommy in a very sincere and passionate manner. He wasn’t trying to play Tommy. He was Tommy, even when a Franco fourth wall smirk emerged on occasion. I think having his younger brother Dave as his co-star helped ground him. After I got over Tommy’s uniqueness… the film began to grow on me. This film was saved by friendship. That was compelling me to keep watching too. I always tell people. Story matters. Relationships between characters matter. While watching Tommy take himself, the cast and crew into further madness… you could also see what was at stake for him. And, the beauty of Greg and Tommy’s friendship was on full display from the beginning and till the end. And, I was just blown away by it.

What I love about filmmaking is the bonding, the sense of community making a film creates. And, this film explored that process quite well. I did often have good cringe while watching. But, in this film it worked both ways. For people unaware of our labours… filmmaking labours they could see it. For those of us in the know… it was a refreshing… Oh I am not that bad sigh. The film is not perfect but, it worked. Tommy Wiseau had no idea what he was undertaking when he was making The Room. He had no filmmaking experience, yet he had some natural charisma and passion (or just money– Money talks).

SIDE NOTE: I love being on a film set. I can never get enough of watching audience reactions during movies I’ve seen dozens of times. I’m a people watcher… I’ll leave you with this…

This scene always fills me with so much joy and, I tear up often when I see. The music helps…a lot.

So The Disaster Artist, I’d say that you should SEE IT.

Director:

Luca Guadagnino

Writers:

James Ivory (screenplay by), André Aciman (based on the novel by)

Stars:

Armie Hammer, Timothée Chalamet, Michael Stuhlbarg

What got you to watch this movie (adverts, the talent involved etc)? Actually, two good friends of mine loved the movie and told me to see it. I really hadn’t heard anything about it before I went.

What kept you watching the film? Did any production elements (i.e. sound, costume, art direction, production design) stand out? The movie is beautifully done. The setting is Italy in 1983. The cinematography is gorgeous as it pans the Italian countryside. But I kept watching mostly due to the smart script.

Would you spend money to see this again? In a theatre/DVD/Streaming? Yes, definitely.

What emotional response did the film have on you? During…after? I found myself remembering the feelings I had when I was 17. The excitement and the confusion…the absolute heartache. I was moved to tears hearing Elio’s father’s talk with him, knowing his son’s heart is breaking. His advice is beautiful…and universal.

Do you think this film has a specific demographic appeal? I would love to say that anyone would enjoy this movie, but I am not ignorant of the times. If you are okay with seeing two men fall in love and have a physical relationship (done tastefully without nudity), then I’d go see it. If you feel this would make you uncomfortable in any way, I wouldn’t.

Was the language use in the film appropriate/authentic? Yes. This is a very smart movie with rich dialogue about music, art, and human relationships. It’s charming and quite passionate.

When I found out Frances McDormand, Sam Rockwell and Woody Harrelson were involved it became much easier to decide, that YES, I would see this. Even if the script was salty ham in tarter (sauce)… sometimes magical things happen once a screenplay is produced.

And, it was those three carried the film for me. It wasn’t that the dialogue or directing this time around… I just needed– I needed it to come to life. The screenplay itself read like a mess. The draft I read. And, as is the case with Aaron Sorkin… you need to see it performed or its just voices trading verbal Molotov cocktails back and forth. Sometimes funny, sometimes clever… sometimes just exhausting. Frances, Sam and Woody, all three performed their roles excellently. I never felt like they were playing a caricature of Missouri folk or angry woman or racist cop or overwhelmed police chief… I saw them deeply invested in their characters.

Sam Rockwell’s character, Officer Dixon, is seemingly lazy, and grossly incompetent. He took years to graduate from the academy. Despite wanting everyone to respect his authority, he blatantly abuses his position. Dixon is racist. There’s no doubt about it. McDonagh doesn’t give us a reason, nor did I want one. Usually writers show us to help audiences understand… wasn’t needed. What instead was needed and was executed perfectly was Dixon’s about face. His change of heart. Which in this reviewer’s opinion is SO HARD to pull off in an authentic way. But, Rockwell and McDonagh pull it off!

SPOILER ALERT HIGHLIGHT BELOW

Dixon receives a letter from the now deceased Chief Willoughby (Woody Harrelson). Willoughby reminds him of his ambitions to become a detective. A bit later his change of direction has him instigating a fight and getting the living pulp beat out of him in order to obtain a DNA sample of someone he suspects of murdering the daughter of (Frances McDormand) Mildred Hayes.

The story does flow in a natural way. I valued the performances more than other elements, which elevated the script. And, the film.

I’d give this film: SEE IT