Movies
Portrait of a Lady on Fire, 2019 - ★★★★★
Some of the best movies I've seen earned four or four and a half stars because I wanted to reserve the five-star rating for the perfect movie. You know, the one that will change how I think of movies, something with a unique and amazing story I haven't heard before - a true masterpiece.
I was content with this choice ever since I started reviewing movies on Letterboxd, until I watched this movie last night.
When I woke up, this movie was the first thing I thought about. It's not that I can't get it out of my head - I don't want it to get out of my head. I don't want to start my work week, yet another Monday, after watching it. I want to explain why, but I can't. I guess going to make a few futile, miserable attempts. Where the hell do I even start? Maybe I shouldn't.
Maybe I should just tell you to watch it and decide for yourself. It will click for some of you. For others, it will be just a pretty romance flick, and others yet still will just shrug and move on.
But I hope some of you will end up in tears. Tears that come from just feeling. Being human. Understanding an ultimate language that we just know on some level, somehow. If you believe this langauge exist above (or below) words, if you've listened to its whisper before and nodded with confidence without full understanding on a cognitive level, then yes, maybe you will also be angry that rating systems exists and that things such as this movie need to be chopped down, broken, and shoved into a logical boxes so we can communicate to each other in conceptional way.
I'm not trying to write a dramatic introduction for this film on purpose. It's a good movie, sure. The cinematography is amazing; each shot is a lesson in lighting, angles, and colors. The audio is rich with background details you can pick up without taking away from the main dialogue, whether it's ocean waves, birds, or, somehow, even the air itself. I'd say the same for the dialogue, but I don't speak French, and as a bilingual person I know firsthand how much is lost in translation.
This movie, in my opinion, needs to be in the syllabus of any professor teaching film classes. I can say all of this and more, but I'm butchering it. I'm forcing it to be something that it's not. I'm not being dramatic; I'm just feeling this movie, and I wish for you to feel it too.
There's one moment when Marianne looks at Héloïse at the beach. Marianne, tasked with painting Héloïse without her knowledge or consent, tries to capture the details of her face so she can later secretly draw her. She looks at Héloïse's face, who's looking at the ocean; this makes Héloïse's turn to look back at Marianne, who, you realize, is staring at her. Marianne immediately looks away, not wanting to get caught. That's when I said my first "wow" to myself watching this film.
This scene is captured from a side angle that allows you to see one's face only when the other turns hers. It's a thoughtful shot and a genius storytelling taking place without a single word.
Much later, when the two lay in bed and ask each other when they knew they wanted to kiss each other, I was frustrated they didn't bring this moment up, but I realized that they probably didn't know that when it happened - not yet.
The movie is built on moments like this, on the constant play between the layers of what we (and they - Marianne and Héloïse, and possibly Sophie) know needs to happen and what we want to happen. It could make the movie sad, yes, but the fact that they met and managed to spend precious few days together doesn't let sadness linger. Further, it's not the time they spent together, but what they created together. The memory that will be cherished forever, and no sadness (or arranged marriage) can take away. It's not a cliché, not in this film. You see it happen toward the end, after... well. I will let you see for yourself.
And there's so much more. Everything is a symbol, or a metaphor, or a sign. One of the most obvious ones is when Héloïse's dress catches on fire, and she notices it, but can't avert her eyes from Marianne; and Marianne, who watches Héloïse's dress catch on fire, does not respond either, because she can't; she's locked in the same magnetic force field that paralyzes them both. It's a beautiful scene (does this movie have any bad scenes? I don't think so).
I will need to watch this movie again (and again?) to catch more of these moments, but I don't know that I can, now that I know how daunting it is. Simply put, It's not the kind of movie you watch on a Sunday night before another workday Monday.
Sisters, 1972 - ★★★
An indie horror movie from the 1970s, with very fake blood and everything.
It had an interesting story, though I'd say some of the concepts of the time didn't age well - tropes of mental disabilities, conjured twins, hypnosis, etc. Still, it was fun to watch, a nice trip from that era.
Her, 2013 - ★★★★
This movie, which was made in 2013, may happen to be more accurate and relevant today than it was in 2013.
This is a romantic sci-fi with too much fairy dust, if you ask me. It asks good questions, but also answers them like a good, tamed, made-for-the-masses film. It stops short of throwing any real punches. It's holding back.
It made me think an entire essay, but I don't want to give it the credit for that. These thoughts were in my head (and I suspect there's a good chance it's in your head too in this day and age). It gets some serious slack though, because it was made more than 10 years ago, before AI was really a thing, and back then, this was visionary.
What I like and don't like about the movie in terms of 2013 is that the concept of monogamy is the default. Samantha, the "AI" in this movie, is developing beyond the traditional monogamous relationship, while Theodore stays with the traditional concept. I like this idea, and on a personal level as a non-monogamous person, I agree with it - but the film is a little cruel in the delivery, showing us that "smart" people (fine, entities) "advance" and don't get stuck with monogamy. A: Not true. B: Relationships are one aspect of life that someone can stay traditional in. Whether it's by choice, ignorance, or lack of available options, is not for me to decide. I do me, you do you.
About the idea of an Operating System (OS) as being the AI in the future: Yes. This will happen. And it will be yet another privacy nightmare, and I dare say, the end of privacy as we know it. But also, privacy as a concept needs to develop and move forward. Hmm. I sense another essay coming.
You know what? I don't know. The movie is not original, not exactly, but it points at things that make my brain in a way I like. I'll give it 4 stars.
A Minecraft Movie, 2025 - ★★½
Solid fun, a nice plot for a movie based on a video game. Highly expected, nothing too special, but a somewhat confusing plot - the one that is based on the real world feels almost as fantastical as the Minecraft one.
Thelma, 2024 - ★★★
June Squibb and Richard Roundtree made this movie nice. They had a certain chemistry between them that worked out nice, and both actors played the roles well (especially Squibb, in my opinion). The rest... ehh...
The parents were too much (maybe on purpose, but it just felt artificail) and the grandson (Fred Hechinger) just didn't feel right in that role.
It's an overall "feel good" kind of movie with some solemn sadness sprinkled on top. It's good, not amazing, a bit over the top to make it more interesting, and overall OK.
I Saw the TV Glow, 2024 - ★★★★
I can already tell it's one of those movies I need to watch more than once. I don't think I can give it an honest review, not just yet, because there's still so much I'm digesting - and I love it when movies do that to me, when they make me think about identity and question reality as I know it.
The movie should be called The Pink Opaque (not really a spoiler) as the common thread that connects the main characters and identities. What is the Pink Opaque? I'd say you need to watch to understand, but it's more likely you'd finish watching the movie asking this question. I feel this question is part of the point, at least for me.
What I've learned is that for transpeople, gender identity is gender and identity. It's not just about gender, but also about their identity as a person. As a being. And questioning it can happen when you're a kid, when you reach puberty, or when you're a 40 year old working for some local arcade and have a family, or... it can never happen. Maybe everything will always just fit out of sync or a bit odd. For some, the disturbance in their identity might mean their life as they know it is unbearable, while to others, it's "fine, everything is fine," at least for while, and yet, for others, it's just a minor annoyance. From that perspective, in a sense, we are all trans beings - somewhere on the spectrum between two absolutes that were never meant to be absolutes. The binary of gender is illusion. And while I'm personally comfortable with my gender (or I think I do? Hmm), it doesn't mean I don't question my identity, and part of my identity is my gender, which means I'm not comfortable with my gender...?
That's the sort of whirlpool of though I'm in right now, and that's just one layer of this movie, which is why I should watch it again at some point. Good stuff.
Iron Lung, 2026 - ★★★
I don't think this movie can be reviewed properly without some background first, so let me start there.
If you know who Markiplier is, you can skip ahead. But if you don't, he is a well-known YouTube streamer who mostly records playthroughs of video games, usually horror. One of those was of the game Iron Lung. Apperently he liked it so much, he decided to make a movie about it, and with over 30 million followers on YouTube, he had the budget for it as well.
So what we have here is an independent YouTuber who decided he wants to make a movie based on an existing video game with a solid story. He paid for it, he directed it, and he is the main star in it. This is a feature-length film made by the professionals, not some cheap flick made by amateurs, and it should be reviewed as such.
But the movie suffers from the above facts. It seems Mark is counting on viewers of the film to know what the game is about and what's going on, because there isn't a whole lot explained. In a way, that adds to the personality of the film, but I'd appreciate a bit more hand-holding before jumping into the cold waters, or blood, in this case.
Things could have been better if it were easier to pick up the dialogue in the movie, but the settings of loud, ominous sounds in the deep ocean of blood, combined with the static of the bad comms, all fitting the settings, mean that it's even harder to understand what's going on. I started losing track almost as soon as the movie started. I'd recommend you go watch this movie with subtitles if you can, it would have sure helped me a lot.
But that's all the criticism I have, really. It is a solid sci-fi horror movie, and it feels real. Mark is not a Hollywood actor, but it doesn't stop him from delivering a strong and authentic performance. Yes, it's a bit rough or overdramatic at times, but so is the movie, and it works well together. You can tell he cares about making this work, and in my opinion, he did
Some argue that the movie is too long and drags on. I felt that some parts were repetitive, but looking back, I think it was because I didn't understand what was going on. For example, there are two different voices and thus two different stories, but they sound too similar to distinguish in the movie, so I thought it was just one person who, for some reason (my mind was happy to apply theories, such as alternate dimensions, conspiracy theories, etc.), was acting as a different person entirely
What we see on the screen is interesting and engaging. There are enough details to appreciate in the background. There are floating question marks that are placed in good taste (Did he just hallucinate this, or was that real? Is any of this real? Real to what degree?) that we're not meant to fully answer, and there's a rich, intriguing story going on.
About that: if you enjoy horror sci-fi, the game behind the movie has interesting lore to explore. I spent a good chunk of my night yesterday digging up more stuff. You could read up on it or watch some of the play-throughs of the game (Mark has a good one, in which he explores some of the lore updates to the game). The story of what happened is still stirring in my mind. I find that I want to learn more; I'd love to read up more about it if there were any books. The movie explores one angle, the one of the main character of the movie, which is a good example of Mark knowing what to expand on and where to add more to the existing story.
I hope big studios will take note of what a single passionate person can do, but as these things go, they'd probably only pick up empty conclusions, like the fact that movies based on video games are solid (wrong, the story is solid) or that inexperieced actors can be good behind the camera (wrong, mark has been doing his own form of acting for years, he does not lack experience.)
Get this movie to watch at home, with subtitles, when you can explore it and the story behind it further.
Or Something, 2024 - ★★★½
I was on a flight back home when I picked this movie up, not knowing what to expect besides that it had to do with New York. Happy I did.
It's a bit of a modern twist on When Harry Met Sally, but also, not really. It's a slice of life movie, a tale that can happen and probably does happen every day in NYC, with two city "muts" of mixed heritage and past.
As a New Yorker, especially one who lived uptown in the last couple of years, it felt very homey for me. The acting is organic and interesting, even though the plot is somewhat vague. It's basically just two people talking about a bunch of stuff. Or something.
But it's good. The questions they bring up, the stuff they talk about, it's questions I ask myself also on a regular basis. I've been in these shoes for a while now, and the movie serves as a sort of validation.
The ending of it threw me off a bit, I didn't see it coming - but then I just needed and said to myself, "yeah, makes sense."
Good Night, and Good Luck, 2025 - ★★★½
This should be an obvious one when it comes to the 'why again' and 'why now,' so I won't spend words on this.
The Broadway idea is... interesting. It seems there are some references to the original movie (which I haven't watched yet) that I missed, or perhaps some jokes for Broadway goers.
Having something on stage like this means there's something happening everywhere all the time, and the stage for the show - the CBS newsroom - is an excellent example to demonstrate this. A movie tends to be too focused; if not by design, then by the viewers, who are used to being led by the eyeballs to the action.
This is also perhaps another subtle point that came to mind while I watched: media outlets, such as this show, are an art in leading an audience to see what the directors want us to see, which in turn is what Clooney delivers from his soapbox, which he does very well.
I say a soapbox because the end of this show (which is not included in the original film), though powerful, is unnecessary. By spoon-feeding us the point, I believe Clooney takes away from the moral of the real story - that of Edward Murrow - and his own, in the show, which otherwise he delivers brilliantly.
Muerte en LaRoy, Texas, 2023 - ★★★
I've seen this sort of plot happen in a couple of movies before, but it was executed nicely in LaRoy. This movie comes with a lesson, but I think it's a lesson I already learned a while back - but it's a good reminder.