Month of Movies: January 2019

Total Films Watched: 12. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, The Graduate, Annihilation, The Virgin Suicides, Once, Leave No Trace, Eighth Grade, Bohemian Rhapsody, Upgrade, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Bird Box, In the Heat of the Night.

Top Two Films: Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse and Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Even with all the praise it's received, it feels strange to come out and list Spider-Verse as my favorite movie I saw this month, let alone one of the best I've seen this year. It seems both demographically up my alley and completely out of left field. I've seen plenty of superhero movies but only one of the previous Spider-Man movies (unless you count either Civil War or Venom, which you probably shouldn't). I appreciate a lot of animated films but I'm not all that familiar with the newest releases. Until a month ago, I thought Spider-Ham was just a weird joke from The Simpsons Movie. My love for the movie isn't based on the comic lore or the adaptational strength. I love the boldness of the animation and how thoroughly it commits to all the jokes and in-jokes. I love all the supporting voice roles, namely from 2018's new supporting star Brian Tyree Henry and my personal year-end MVP Kathryn Hahn. And maybe it's because I'm unfamiliar with his other films, but this is what convinced me how cool web-slinging and city-swinging can be.

My second choice feels similarly obvious on paper but still surprised me. Like I said last week, this is my first time watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I liked the first entry well enough, but not enough to totally buy in on the franchise. I'm still not all the way in- Elijah Wood still doesn't totally work for me as Frodo, the weak effects are more glaring and the villains feel more faceless. But who cares about one lead when the other seventeen major performances all work? (Specific shout-outs to Andy Serkis, Bernard Hill and Sean Astin among the major supporters.) Why focus on the weak effects when the landscapes look this incredible and the great effects have a bombastic beauty? And do I need more depths from the evil fire eye and the army of mud ogres? I just had a complete blast with every bit of high fantasy, from the massive battle scenes to the obvious but sincere character moments. And the score is still bigger and more cinematic than some entire movies.

Movie Death Match: Best 'Best Picture' nominee of 1967- The Graduate or In the Heat of the Night? In addition to seeing both of these movies, I also read the massive Mark Harris book Pictures at a Revolution that chronicled how these movies and the other Best Picture nominees of 1967 came to be. The book is interesting but tough to get into because it has jump between production meetings and studio workshopping of five films over several years. It picks up more once the shootings start and the background details start bleeding into the movies. As a piece of non-fiction craft, it's unbelievably well-researched and perfectly blends new interviews and details with historical notes.

But enough about books. That'll be the subject of the column I write after I retire and have time to read more than two books a month. I really enjoyed watching both of these movies, both with and without the historical knowledge that Harris provided. The Graduate feels like the obvious choice for me, in a different but related way as the favorites I discussed earlier. I'm a recent college graduate with no long-term plan who owns a vinyl Simon & Garfunkel album and enjoys melodramatic comedies. And most of the movie worked for me in that way. The filmmaking choices are so effective at nailing jokes, mostly thanks to the editing and the musical cues. There's a montage so long it has to use two different songs, ending with a famous climactic cut. I also love the broad comedy of the hotel scenes, which are strange and let Dustin Hoffman show off the frantic panic that matches the film's energy. However, I absolutely hate the five-to-ten minutes at Berkeley. Braddock fully crosses into stalker territory in a way that feels unintentionally creepy and the transition into a sincere romance with Elaine does not work for me. The movie eventually recovers but it still feels rough.

In the Heat of the Night also has some moments that have not aged well, which should not be surprising. A movie about racism from 1967 that had some controversy at the time is going to have some potential problems in 2019. The movie has no time for any black characters besides Detective Tibbs and even undercuts him at points. He's active in the murder investigation but gets a lot less to do when it comes to the physical and verbal attacks against him. The slap he delivers is a great moment but it definitely feels like the furthest a studio drama was willing to go.

That all being said, I enjoyed this movie as much as The Graduate and possibly even a bit more. It makes complete sense that the book and film inspired action-packed sequels- this movie feels more like a serious Jack Reacher adaptation than a Best Picture winner. The mystery plot works well in the moment, even if it's a bit weak in hindsight, and the two leads are excellent. Sidney Poitier and Rob Steiger both get to balance still intensity and explosive bursts, with the former leaning more on charm and the latter on physicality. Jewison's direction is solid, the geography of the town tracks well and it reuses the titular song as well as The Graduate uses "Bridge Over Troubled Water." My love for both these movies makes me want to go through the other nominees of that year, even though I doubt they'll reach the same heights as this pair.

Longer Thoughts About: Bohemian Rhapsody. In retrospect, it shouldn't be a surprise that this movie was a massive hit. Queen just has a staying power that is matched by few other classic rock acts. There's a reason radio stations break their normal formatting rules to make sure "We Will Rock You" and "We Are the Champions" always play back-to-back. There's a reason a bisexual African immigrant was able to become an acclaimed front-man and dancer without too much controversy. A movie about Freddie Mercury and Queen should work on the level of pure entertainment. And for many people besides me, Bohemian Rhapsody was a success at that level. I'm less convinced.

This review isn't going to touch too much on the back chat about Bryan Singer and the controversies behind the scenes. In short, I now feel justified in having never seen one of his movies before this one. I'll only mention it because you can feel the off-screen chaos in the actual film. As an early Mr. Robot adapter I'm happy that Rami Malek has become a massive star. He has the body language down well but rarely gets to actually showcase that skill during the movie. It's so broken up by other shots and meaningless inserts; several scenes end with a series of silent reaction shots from the cast. Most movies are shot out of order, but this one really feels like like the action this day is completely isolated and pieced together. I assume that is also from Dexter Fletcher, the editor and the studio having to put out the fire Singer left and cobble together a feature-length product. The dull, blue-orange cinematography and the cheesy effect are less excusable.

I know it sounds like I hated the movie and that's not the case. Seeing good lip-sync versions of Queen songs is cinematic and those moments really work. I don't care too much if Mercury's filmed life is real- small changes are fine as long as it's not glaringly stupid (see: Mike Myers and anything behind the scenes of Live Aid). The creative process stuff is shallow but interesting to watch, as are most of the romance scenes with Mary Austin and/or Jim Hutton. Whatever his true orientation was, seeing a $200 million movie where Mercury is calling all girls and boys to his side feels casually progressive in a way that isn't really being discussed by most critics.

No, my biggest issue with Bohemian Rhapsody is the scope of it. It covers fifteen years of complicated band history and massive songs, but the actors barely age a year during that time. It could have focused more on Mercury's love triangle, focused on the words of love between the three and subverting some biopic cliches. It could have borrowed the structure of Steve Jobs and only shown the band at different concerts over time- Live Aid is the highlight anyway and this would really showcase Malek/ Mercury as a cool cat combination. Hell, just combine the movie with the inevitable David Bowie biopic and focus entirely on them recording "Under Pressure." The movie would have to be renamed, but that would be a minor sacrifice to make a film that actually feels like a coherent piece.

I know this is a much longer review than normal but I have some Hot Space to fill on this page.