Reviews

Sound of Falling (2025, Cannes)

Like Renoir before it, this had the unfortunate timing of being watched with only a 5 min break after Renoir which had made me both extremely sleepy and hungry. And now I have to watch a three hour German drama about the life of women on a farm?

But this film is fantastic. I don't think I appreciated it at the time that much, but I think this was my favourite of everything I watched at Cannes. As other reviews have said, this feels just ... Grand. There's something incredibly captivating about the sound design and visuals and whole weird ... movement of this film. Like its not a genre film but feels almost like a horror at points? It's shot at many points like you're seeing it from the perspective of a ghost flying and peeking through walls. It just conveys this very visceral fear of death and decay. It takes a loooong while to get into the rhythm of this film, but it does get to you and then you're captivated. I think occasionally it's a little too confusing to get a hold of the actual structure of the family tree and who is related to who, but mostly you'll survive without it.

The film is also just absolutely packed with scenes and characters that won't leave my hard. I think other films have tried doing this thing, following a family over generations, but it's never quite worked for me as it have here?

Renoir (2025, Cannes)

I watched this film on perhaps a little bit too little sleep, and expectations set kind of low by supposedly negative reviews, and I have to be completely honest, this might have been one of the toughest fights against falling asleep I've ever fought. It's not s bad film though! It's honestly really grown on me and the feel and atmosphere of this movie won't quite leave me: Just beware it's a very *sleepy* film! This is a film taking place in the setting of being bored in the summer as a child with few friends. Without almost ever actually depicting anything surrealistic, it encapsulates so well how weirdly surreal and dreamlike this kind of boredom can feel? Things are a bit more magical as a child, the stories around us and in our head are a bit harder to distinguish from reality, so it's so hard to understand when things are actually supremely unmagical. We want to tell stories but there are none to tell!

I kind of remember being at my grandparents place where things moved slowly and feeling just this little bit of existential horror, not at like "oh they're old I'm gonna be old some day" but like being able to feel back then already that this magical vision you had in your head of the world as an exciting place was actually wrong.

But the film is never anything resembling nihilistic. Our main character isn't depressed in the obvious of losing all hope and becoming idle. It feels a lot more grounded where you know, things move back and forth a little bit. There's occasional interesting days for sure. She's honestly an extremely positive character, and I got by watching this just a shit ton more sympathy for anyone who's gone through neglect. It's a quiet film but occasionally there's an absolutely beautiful main theme that comes on. That shot of her, dancing on this boat on a sunny day and that theme comes on? It's just a very pretty kind of optimism and melancholy at the same time.

Really recommend this! Honestly feel like it could be shown to older kids too. They might find it horribly boring though.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)

A Private Life (2025) (Cannes)

The Disappearance of Josef Mengele (2025) (Cannes)

It Was Just an Accident (2025) (Cannes)

A Simple Accident is a simple, "small" film. Its an odd, short, inexpansive "gentle" slow-burn chrime thriller? It's events take place all in the span of 24 hours, and we always follow more or less the same character and his ragtag group. We never know anything more than they know. We're going "along for a ride" with this group of characters, lots of long-shots and some really great staging makes the whole experience pretty immersive, and the audio design (heightened sound but mostly no music in every scene) as well as the whole kind of pretext of you being told that this is a film about "a simple accident leading to a series of events that spiral out of control" keeps you on edge that "anything could happen". Filmically its setup for some bat-shit-insane exciting set-up pay-off tense events, but this film isn't really that. To be frank, even considering the short run time not a lot happens. Some letterboxd review says it's not a slow burn but it doesn't burn at all, and I think that's partially true, but I don't think I mind too much, especially with the short running time. Actually, for a film that is very much about trauma, revenge and healing, that sort of odd pacing and general sad quietness fits well. It shouldn't be too satisfying. There's a lot of arguing and characters accomplishing nothing.

I didn't find it "incredible" but it's not aiming for that kind of grand either. I quite like it for what it is, it suceeds at honing in on this sadness, anger and longing. And mostly remains quite a crowd-pleaser too!

Mickey 17 (2025)

Det er en god film, men i fucking 4DX scenen havde de sat den forkerte film på sædderne, så sæderne rystede vildt og spontant med ingen relation til handlingen - det blev klart det var den forkerte film, da alle effekterne stoppede en halv time før selve filmen stoppede.

TBF, komisk guld når nogen stille roligt går hen og placerer en kop på et bord og sædet reagerer som om en komet lige er landet på jorden.

Modern Romance (1981)

If you don't have feelings for your ex, if you very much think that things can't really be nice between you and your ex, why would you worry obsessively about whether or not they started seeing someone new? This is such an odd fear that a lot of us can probably to some degree relate to, even if we wish we were above that.

Robert and Mary are in an in-and-out relationship with constant breakups and re-get-back-togethers. They don't have much in common, supposedly, and we don't really see much chemistry between them. In fact, we don't see them interact much at all for most of this film's screen time. The first (and by far the weakest) half of this film just follows Robert badly coping with the breakup, and being all-around self-destructive and narcissistic. I was genuinely pretty close to quitting by the end of this part, as it seems shot through primarily a comedic lens, and most of the comedy and "observations" feel pretty unoriginal and unfunny. And it just goes on and on.

It starts to pick up in the second half when Sally calls Robert. What caused her change of mind? An extravagant display of affection from Robert who left presents and a letter at her house. She hasn't obsessed about the breakup in the same way though. Robert mentions that he feels like it's always him doing these kind of things, that she wouldn't really put on the same kind of elaborate act for him, wouldn't ever worry about him obsessively. But such an act isn't just about convincing Sally that he still really cares, it's also about convincing himself that he loves Sally, he doesn't need her.

Robert works as a film editor. He has an eye for detail, and his job is litteraly to take events and put them together in a sequence and narrativize them. Revise and rethink and recontextualize the same events for their emotional significance again and again. It's also a job that's very much always in service of someone else's vision. People don't see the editor. Robert will speak often of films he "saved in the edit", and he'll make changes whose only purpose is to just be his. He's working together with other artists, like the director, his co-editor and the foliage artists, but he's never really listening or using them to their fullest extent, he only wants them to either professionally confirm that he was right, or wants them to just "do the labor". The film he's working on doesn't seem to be very good, and the director, whilst very earnest and genuine, doesn't seem exactly like an artistic genius either. Still however, these are people he could talk to, be friends with, relate to, but he's quick to judge them as sort of "spiritually uneducated" compared to himself. He's only really interested in them through what they can confirm to him from the authority of their roles (the sound artists thought I saved the scene, ect). He could also talk to his mom, who seems genuinely interested in wanting to know about him and what he's feeling. He could probably have a great talk with his mom, but ack, there'd be no extrinsic meaning to that talk, no real validation or forwards social progress in talking to your mom, only just the enjoyment of the talking itself.

Mary is Roberts only friend, but then also, she's just sort of another one of these people to him - or maybe she's the last living proof to him that he is capable of being human and loving the way other people seem to do it. He obsesses constantly over whether or not she's seeing someone else, and that's because if she weren't, if she was heartbroken over the breakup, then it would prove he meant something special to her. Will Robert start really seeing Mary for who she is and not for whom she might be seeing after they properly commit to marriage? No, because after the marriage he will be obsessing over whether or not he really loves her, whether or not their love is real.

Maybe when you're not really feeling the love that much, when your words of affection don't feel quite completely right in your stomach, then you shouldn't second-guess yourself that much. You could rationalize it, list the ways in which this person you're holding is amazing, special, the ways you're meant for each other, ect, you could do elaborate gestures of affection, you could make it your most important job that the time you guys spend together is quality time. Maybe you're doing this because you need validation, or because you don't see any other choice - it's too late, too inconvenient to break up now. "Decision to Leave" by Park Chan Wook has on Letterboxd the tagline "The closer you look, the harder you fall", and is a film about (amongst other things, it deeply confused me) a man obsessing over whether or not someone who pretended to love him for a criminal scheme actually loved him. And yeah, I think that tagline finally makes a little bit of sense to me. But making the decision to leave is really really hard.

Mars Express (2023)

Such an instant classic honestly, and I feel really sad that fewer people haven't heard of this! It's so rare we get a feature-length, 2D animated, non-japanese adult film that doesn't need to sell itself on any kind of gimmick. It's clearly very "anime inspired", but it has a feel all of it's own, it's neither disney nor western trash-tv anime (ie, the netflix "anime" shows, or the new lord of the rings production), nor ghibli either. I guess it feels structurally kind of similar to a long, really good Cowboy Bebop episode? The art style looks like a french graphical novel come to life, it's honestly such a great look, and the blending of flat 2D and 3D works perfectly: I think it's mostly 2D animations in 3D environments, instead of the opposite (which is what lazy shows usually do to save money), but it's doing a little bit of everything in-between, and it never feels out of place.

It's a very earnest film that doesn't bathe in unnecessary gore or nudity, something the netflix trash seems to love to do ("hey, we're adult animation you guys!"). Everything feels like it serves a point, but despite this movie accomplishing *a lot* in 95 minutes, it never feels like it's rushing along in the same way some Hollywood films do. There's plenty of time for moments that just serve to build up an impression of the world of the characters but doesn't directly drive forward the plot. I love details like the androids having obligatory software updates, and hating them just as much as we hate software updates for our pcs. In general, the film is so effective at showing you so many neat sci fi and worldbuilding ideas without ever resorting to exposition. It just more or less shows us the thing exactly as the characters would encounter it, and lets us figure out how it works.

Also the plot is just really good? It's a slightly convoluted sci-fi chrime thriller, and though i was a bit confused on the first watch, it never gets to be too much. I was pretty invested throughout, and it never sci-fi magics its way out of a situation. While i will agree this has slightly less atmosphere than say, Ghost in the Shell, i thought it infinitely more entertaining. I love the dynamic between our two main private detectives, Carlos is an absolute treat. The alcoholism does feel like a slightly cheap way to extract personality out of Aline, but I can forgive it. The dialogue and the small, realistic human ways in which people interact is all just incredibly on point and charming.

I was worried initially this would be a fun, competent entertaining film, but one that kind of lacked heart, and left everything too well-resolved by the end. But the final act here more than makes up for that. I really didn't know what to make of it the first time around, but it's very touching and depressing, and I love how it truly does feel climactic, it sticks out emotionally like a sore thumb to the rest of the film. I'm still not *entirely* sure whether or not the ending actually fits that well together with the rest of the film, and whether it really makes any kind of greater thematic point? Like I didn't get that much from it, it hasn't been returning to me in my thoughts. But I do think it *might* in the future, and I still really respect the ending for being a bit of a haunting and beautiful spectacle in my opinion.

So yeah, please watch this!

A Different Man (2024)

What does it mean to be "self confident"? It's a concept that frequently terrifies me, in that I may lack it in some "fundamental way", but this is just yet again a lack of self confidence and so the cycle feeds into itself.

I quite liked the first half of this film. Edward has a facial deformity, and lives a life doing small, shitty acting gigs. In one scene, he rehearses himself looking out in jealousy at a couple walking under the moonlight. He can relate to these feelings, but then also, the scene was written by people without his condition, because their view of him is fundamentally shaped by pity. There's something very morbid about acting out your deep-roted fears and desires in the context of an audition, and with someone else having written your lines. You're in a sense being both forced to be vulnerable, but also forced to cynically detach from the things you're saying, even if you sort of believe they are true.

Edward probably hasn't been treated very nicely by society. He is constantly turned into a curiosity or a monster at the round of every corner, and through this he has developed a crippling social anxiety and accepted himself as a kind of burden - it's probably better to just not ask for much, make yourself small, don't object. But think about what you feel if you see someone like Edward on the tram: Pity. You feel bad for him, but you don't wanna look at him, because it makes you uncomfortable that his horrible condition probably makes his life bad. You don't like to feel the existential horror that this could in theory be you.

While workplace discrimination has undoubtedly been a factor, there's nothing really forcing Edward to keep doing these shitty acting gigs. He's eating it up. He has chosen to make other's pity of him the central focus of his life. And so then, the opposite of pity is jealousy. There's many Kubrick stares in this film on Edward, who isn't really looking at people or really listening to what they're saying, just as the people on the tram weren't really looking at him. He's just focusing on how they're better than in him in someway or living a nicer life somehow. I can relate to this a lot, and am absolutely horrible on this point. Why can't i just thoroughly enjoy the happyness of others? I guess a big part of self confidence is that it is a complete and utter lack of a need to prove anything, because I think one part of jealousy is that you are looking at everything in front of you as data, evidence for proving something (about you). Even when jealousy isn't about skills, like being jealous that someone won the lottery of life or that someone is travelling to a hippy cult to do drugs and bang all day, I still think the part of it that hurts the most is the anger and cognitive dissonance of why *you* don't deserve that as much somehow.

I think the film starts going downhill a bit for me when we're introduced to Oswald. As this point, the movie has entirely made up it's mind, and Edward is now a villian who will never change or improve or reflect, and Oswald is pure-hearted good. The movie becomes increasingly absurd and ridicilous at this point, and the structure of the film as a whole feels in this way very similar to The Substance. It is very funny, and Oswald is incredible to see on screen, but it also gets repetetive and predictable. In a film like Synecdoche New York, where the main charachter is also constantly in a downwards arc of commiting increasingly stupid and selfish actions, there's still enough glimpses of realization and empathy that you're compelled the entire way through. But here (and in The Substance even more so), it feels very obvious, and I just think there was a lot of interesting potential to dig deeper into the roots of Edwards jealousy. Oswald also feels so pure and "good" that it almost feels dishonest to the suffering he probably has gone through too. There's just so much interesting stuff here that could be explored more thematically that the film ultimately doesn't go for.

Oswald is obviously a perfect example of self-confidence, but I think the film could have been bolder: Of course it's easy for us as the audience to view Oswald as self-confident and self-loving because, well, he's charismatic as all hell! He's got the social wits fully covered. He's self-confident in the most neurotypical understanding of the word. When you make people laugh and bring them joy in that kind of way, it's easy to see your value. I'd love for the film to show someone who neither provides many laughs nor works very hard either, but still loves him/herself nontheless. I think true self-confidence would be loving and accepting yourself, even as a "loser".

We're All Going to the World's Fair (2021)

A nice, mellow, extremely gen z little film where very little actually happens. It's fine though, because it's pretty short and *almost* never outstays it's welcome, even though I do think this could sort of have been cut down to a longish short film. It's also fine because the film never tries to be profound, it just captures this feeling, "vibe" , of being lonely and lifeless and detached and online. It portrays an altogether pretty realistic situation with a lot of honesty and empathy. There's a nice attention to detail throughout, and it's one of the few films depicting the current state of affairs of the internet without feeling out of touch. There's a lot of things they could have done to make things more dramatic or intriguing, but they don't. It's very uncompromising in not wanting to do something just to entertain us (even if it is occasionally funny), fot better or worse, since it's often kind of a bit boring. Occasionally the "vibes" of gen z, like the font choices and music and that-effect where-you-do-handwritten-text-but-its-kind -of-shaking-a-bit get a bit too much, and its starts to feel just like aesthetic pandering. But overall, as a fellow who also uploaded cringe as a child and hoped someone out there would watch, I respect this film!

But don't watch this with the wrong people cuz oh god there's some cursed stuff in here, they really nailed the cringe

The Shrouds (2024) (Cannes)

Barbarian (2022)

really don't think I've ever seen a film fall so completely flat on its face in its third part. For most of this I was incredibly immersed and intrigued, the writing was good, the characters were all pretty unique and well-defined, and it was building up to such a good mystery. But then it's just fucking stupid. And most of all, it's pointless. It abandons any attempts at theme or tying together all of its different elements and just turns into camp, and bad camp too. And what a lame, uncreative, unsatisfying answer to the mystery too. I was initially really intrigued by the unique and surprising structure of the film, but the actual story does not warrant this unique structure, because it really isn't in the end that compelling or interesting, and could easily have been told in a simpler way too.

I just feel vaguely angry because it all felt like it was building to something, but then it wasn't

The Lawnmover Man (1992)

The Boy and the Heron (2023)

Eeeehhh need to think on this one. Fantastic soundtrack, don't think I'm completely sold on the movie, but it might grow. It really needed to be longer honestly! I'm fine with questioned left unanswered, but the movie tried to resolve things too quickly by just ... Telling us the thesis, straight to our face. And it kind of works, because it's a nice thesis, and it hits at the right time with the right music, but it isn't deserved.

Also, uhhh, this is one of the uglier Ghibli films honestly? There's some gorgeous sequences in here (as in any Ghibli film) but it's *very inconsistent*. Some shots and background characters looked kind of bad? Idk, still good looking, but yeah

The Zone of Interest (2023)

Really liked it, will probably post more thoughts later, but it did make me feel a special kind of dread and horror and awe. It's to me not really necessarily going for trying to convey to us just how horrible Auschwitz is by framing it in a new way: I think it knows that that is ultimately kind of impossible to do with film. We'll just find various ways to detach ourselves from the scale of the whole thing. It's trying to convey the horror of this specific kind of *detachment*. We had this philosophy session in film school one evening (thanks Marie!) about evil, and someone talked about if maybe "evil" isn't even that useful of a term, and how we shouldn't necessarily try to "make people less evil" but acknowledge the fact that we inherintly care more about the people closer to us, our "tribe", and then structure society in a way that reduces the potential harms and conflicts in interest between people that can arrive from this. This seemingly simple observation, that we all have a "zone of interest" of what we care about and what we care about less made me weirdly terrified. Like, maybe we can't be that good at all, maybe there's some fundamental darkness hiding in us and me and we're not moral even though that is something that gives us (at least me) a lot of comfort. There's this poster of this movie with an abstract red flower, and inside the flower it's fading to black, and I've just felt *that* so much: That horrible fact about you, like a darkness reminding you that you are ultimately quite selfish and won't really change dramatically. For me, the movie is kind of about the horror of that side of humans inside all of us.

There's one decision I'm not quite sure whether or not works as well as it could, and I discussed this with Ingrid and want to elaborate my thoughts later but: Does it really work to the movie's favor to make Rüdolf and his wife so banaly evil? He cheats on his wife, she's vapid and rude to the servants, ect. Does this add anything? Doesn't that just allow us as the audience to detach ourselves from them further so that we can say "But this wouldn't happen to us, we're not like them!". The movie intentionally doesn't really want us to get actually invested in the family drama, but if it really went hard into this? Wouldn't there be a horror in getting genuinely invested in these characters and realising you've kind of forgotten a bit or stopped caring a bit about the camp? On the other hand, this also in its own way allows us to detach ourselves because we can just say: "Man, look, movies and propaganda are really powerful at detaching us from what matters" and then we've made that thought and we don't have to *feel* anything again and it's just done. So I'm torn. I genuinely do think it needed to make these characters more human (without being anti-heroes) so that we can't think they're that different from us.

It's pretty incredible stuff all around tho, really loved it

#Manhole (2023)

The Excorcist III (1990)

The First Slam Dunk (2022)

Alright, den har haft lidt tid til at køle ned efter jeg så den i biografen her i onsdags, og selvom jeg anderkender at filmen godt kan være lidt dum nogengange, så syntes jeg stadig den fortjener en kæmpe mængde ros, og tror den vil blive talt om månge år frem: Filmen gør bare noget helt vildt unikt rent filmisk. Den har sat sig ud for at lave noget ingen andre har lavet før, og har måtte løse en helt masse tekniske og kreative problemer for at gøre det. Selv hvis jeg lidt er i tvivl om hvor vidt filmen faktisk gjorde noget som helst interessant tematisk eller følelsesmæssigt (måske decideret manipulerende nogen gange), så er effekten af det her filmiske eksperiment fuldkommen klar når man ser filmen: Den er helt adrenalinpumpende spændende og medrivende, man sidder på kanten af sit sædde, og man er fuldkommen optaget af filmen hvert sekund. Det er intet sekund der går til spilde. Jeg havde vitterligt svært ved at sove der jeg kom hjem fra filmen, fordi jeg bare fysik kunne mærke i min krop hvor fucking hyped den her film havde gjort mig.

The last slam dunk er unik fordi hele filmen spiller sig ud over én enkelt basketball kamp på 48 minutter (plus pauser). Ud over et flashback fra hovedpersonen i starten, så får vi ingen introduktion til konteksten bag den basketballkamp, hvordan karakterene kender hinanden, hvem de kæmper mod eller hvorfor. Efter det korte flashback på ca. 5 minutter begynder der bare at spille metalmusik, hver karakter på holdet bliver tegnet ind af en blyant og begynder at gå dramatisk mod kameraet (det er meget cheesy og direkte ud af en anime opening), der bliver fløjtet, og så er basketballmatchen kraftdedme igang. Det her er problemet filmen skulle løse: Hvordan investerer vi publikum i denne kamp uden nogen kontekst, og hvordan udstrækker vi en ca. times kamp til en 2 timers lang film uden at spille noget tid?

Filmen løser problemet på mange forskellige måder. Der er en god sjat slow-mo, interne monologer og andre anime-ismer på spil. Primært to ting dog: Den giver os flashbacks fordelt ud på hele kampen og alle karakterer, og den viser kampen rent teknisk og scenetographisk gennem spillerene og på spillerenes øjenhøjde på en måde der simpelt aldrig er blevet gjort før.

I stedet for at vise os karakterenes baghistorie og motivation helt i starten fordeler filmen flashbacks ud gennem hele basketball kampen hvornår end det er relevant. Det virker utrolig godt. Det er lidt ligesom et godt mysterie der åbner sig op for dig gennem filmens spilletid. Begge aspekter af filmen forstærker hinanden: Karakterenes flashbacks gør dig mere interesseret i basketballkampen i nutiden, og basketballkampen i nutiden gør dig mere interesseret i karakterenes og deres historier. Det skal siges at filmen her faktisk basere sig på en manga og anime, og at den del af filmen vi ser er finalen på første akt af mangaen (eller et eller andet), så man kan godt se den her film med en masse kontekst og viden om karakterene, men den fungerer utrolig godt uden.

Filmens flashbacks fungerer også fordi de bare er ... virkelig følelsesmæssigt vellavede og autentiske? Jeg syntes mange anime film der forsøger at lave dramatiske og følelsesladede scener ender med at virke ret manipulerende og platte. De prøver at få os til at græde ved at vise os en masse meget triste ting og ved at vise os en masse karakterer der, well, græder. Scenerne i denne film er velinstruede, velskrevne, og formår et gøre utrolig meget med utrolig lidt. Filmen bruger så lang tid på basketballspillet i nutiden at flashbackscenerne rent økonomisk set er *nødt til* at være effektive i deres kommunikation. Musikken - og især stilheden - er brugt rigtig godt, og scenerne for lov til at trække vejret. Jeg sad tæt på tårer i en af scenerne nær slutningen! Ja, filmen viser os nogle meget åbenlyst traumatiske og forfærdelige ting som døde familiemedlemmer og mobning, men den formår at gøre det på virkelig autentisk vis. Filmen var sjælen til aldrig moraliserende. Der er ikke nogen objektivt gode eller onde karakter i disse flashbacks.

Som et karakterstudie siger denne film ikke som sådan noget banebrydende nyt, og jeg syntes heller ikke rigtig de forskellige karakterers flashbacks blev flettet ind i nogen større pointe (nok mit største problem med filmen). Der er mest fokus på hovedpersonen i disse flashbacks, og det er ikke fordi filmen viser noget nyt rent følelsesmæssigt jeg aldrig har set før (føler ikke jeg lærte det helt store af at se filmen), men den kommunikerer disse følelser så effektivt og autentisk at det er svært ikke at elske filmen. I én af mine ynglingsscener er holdets leder (ikke hovedpersonen) faldet ned efter en takling, og ligger på gulvet mens resten af holdet kigger ned på ham. Og så indser han for første gang hvordan det føltes at, well ... blive set ned på! Vitterligt! Vi lærer så meget om denne karakter på så kort tid og på sådan en simpel vis.

Alright, nok om flashbacks. Det andet filmen gør så utrolig godt er at sætte os i spillerenes sko rent filmteknisk. Basketball (og jeg vil måske bare sige sport generelt) bliver filmet i denne film på en måde man simpelthen aldrig har set før. Vi ser meget sjælen kampen højere oppe fra end nogen af karakterene, og kameraet udnytter det fulde potentiale af 3D animation. Det er vanvittigt godt instrueret, animeret og klippet. Se det på en stor skærm med god lyd, det er accelererende. Flashbacks udnytter for det mest 2D animation og baggrunde, og de er ærlig talt ret grimme ifht standerne man forventer fra andre anime film, men det er helt okay når selve basketballscenerne er så mesterligt vellavede. Jeg kan simpelthen ikke fatte at det her er den første film instruktøren har lavet. Det er simpelthen umuligt. Det føltes ikke som om du er en tilskuer når du ser denne film, det føltes som om du er en del af kampen, og det er præcist hvad filmen har brug. Hen mod klimaks (som i alt ærlighed er ret cheesy og forudsigeligt) er du overbevist om at den her kamp faktisk er den vigtigste ting i universet.

The Last Slam Dunk mangler lidt at gå op i nogen tematisk højere enhed, men jeg syntes alligevel den fortjener titlen som en moderne klassiker fordi den er så utrolig *gennemført*. Filmen gør ikke ting fordi at den har set at det virker i andre film. Filmen har sat sig for et ret simpelt mål, og har gennem en masse kreative løsninger og hårdt arbejde ramt plet. Filmen er singulær, velinkapsuleret, og bare så utrolig gennemtænkt som en helhed

Oppenheimer (2023)

Kunne ret godt lide Oppenheimer! Syntes 100% det er en af Nolan's stærkeste film. Det er ikke en tematisk eller følelsesmæssig revolutionær film der fuldkommen åbner øjnene op og ændrer ens blik på historien eller atombomben, og den er heller på ingen måde fejlfri rent filmisk, men med det sagt, så syntes jeg virkelig at filmen virker. Jeg var fuldkommen medrivet af plottet gennem i hvert fald 2/3 af filmen, og når den forsøgte at ryste mig følelsesmæssigt, så var den for det meste utrolig succesfuld. Jeg var skeptisk omkring den 3. akt, men i de sidste 3-4 minutter formår filmen med ret stor sucess at gå op i en højere enhed, med en stærk slutscene der skræmmer og susser gennem sjælen og sidder som en stor, tung vægt i maven. (Note fra Buster i fremtiden: Jeg er nu ret uenig med det her)

Alright, spoilers herfra.

Oppenheimers klart største problem er dens længde. Jeg føler nemt at filmen med et mere effektivt manuskript kunne have fortalt samme pointe og tegnet det samme portræt af en tortureret sjæl på 2 timer i stedet for 3. Hele den tredje akt med Robert Downey Jr. der forsøger at ødelægge Oppenheimers kredibilitet fordi han ... er sur over at Oppie kaldte ham en "lowly" skosælger i stedet for en skosælger og gjorde lidt grin med ham til et pressemøde ... falder fladt på sit ansigt. Vi har lige set atombomben blive opfundet og smidt over Hiroshima og Nagasaki hvor hundrede tusindvis af mennesker dør, og nu skal vi bruge en halv time på en smålig hævnkonflikt?

Men Oppenheimer fortjener ros fordi den virkelig flot flætter småligheden af hele den her procedure ind i den støre pointe om vores manglende evne til at perspektivere hvad der sker rundt omkring os til noget større end os selv, hvordan vi så let kan blive opfanget af idéen om at alle andre også tænker og handler på samme måde, og hvordan ingen ad os har retten til ansvaret over en bombe når vi slet ikke rigtig kan se udover os selv, når vi lever i et politisk miljø der handler om popularitet og magtspil til venstre og højre og kun kan forstå og tolke verden omkring os ud fra dette utrolig individualistiske synspunkt. Når du smidder en bombe, så er du enten ligeglad med det større perspektiv eller du bliver drevet sindsyg af skrigende fra de tusindvis af mennesker du har været med til at dræbe. Der findes ingen mellemting. USA's fiasko i deres håndtering af Manhatten projektet og atombomben var dets gennemborende individualisme, især i det politiske system. Hvordan kan sådan et individualistisk land på nogen måde tænke det har retten til ansvaret for hele værdens skæbne?

Rent kognitivt er det svært for os mennesker virkelig at se langt ud over vores egen bobbel og interesser. Vi er simpelt hen ikke bygget til at bære hele verden på vores skuldre, at kun gøre det der etisk gavner jorden som helhed. Vi er nødt til at begrænse vores "zone of interest" til et mindre udsnit af verden: Os selv, vores familie, vores by, måske vores land som helhed? En pop-historie artikel vil forklare at idéen bag atombomben var at lave et våben der var så stærkt at du kunne slutte alle krige. Filmen viser os hvor åndsvag en fortolkning det egentlig er: Atombomben var en opfindelse der formede hele verden men var drevet af primært selviske interesser, af folk der ikke havde ret til at lave de valg de lavede. Der bliver ikke smidt 2 milliarder dollars og 1000 mænd afsted mod fred og blomster.

Hvad med manden selv, Oppenheimer? Handlede han kun på vegne af videnskaben og verdens interesser? Nej og ja. Oppenhomie vil rede verden fra nazisterne, fordi han ikke stoler på hvordan de vil håndtere samme våben. Det er ret nobelt. Men er det fordi han vil hjælpe verden eller fordi han personligt som jøde er bekymret for at tysklands anti-semitisme spreder sig så han ikke kan være i sikkerhed? Er han måske også til stor dels bare drevet af en morbid, videnskabelig nysgerrighed? Svaret er at det nok er en mix af alle de her ting. Oppenheimer vidste det nok ikke selv, i hvert fald ikke før det var alt for sent. Han blev indblandet i noget meget større end noget individ nogensinde ville kunne fatte, og blev konstant presset og kontrolleret af folk med ret selviske interesser. Der var aldrig tid til at zoome ud og tænke på det store billede. Og så overgiver tyskland sig og ... hvad nu? Var det ikke målet originalt? Så begynder alting pludselig at gå utrolig hurtigt. Går Oppenheimer virkelig op I krigen mod Japan? Efter 3 år, 2 milliarder dollars og så mange patriotiske interesser der konstant ånder en ind over nakken er nogen som helst nobel og etisk motivation for længst tværet ud og erstattet med forvirret viljekraft mod et eller andet "mål". Filmen er ikke en film om fejl i Oppenheimers personlige karakter, mere en film om hvordan ingen burde være i den position han var i, og hvordan enhver i samme situation ville blive korrupteret og udmattet indtil det var alt for sent. Ingen kan eller bør bære sådan et ansvar.

-*-

Anyways, hele Florence Pugh's karakter blev mega dårligt behandlet af filmen, male gaze var klamt og unødvendigt, og hvis vi flere gange skal se hende nøgen, hvorfor kan i så aldrig visse os Oppenholmers nuclear balls?

Barbie (2023)

I ingen verden havde jeg forventet at Barbie (2023) ville starte med en homage til 2001: A space Odyssey.

Virkelig lang tid siden jeg havde grint så meget til en film dog! Syntes den var vidunderlig!

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (2023)

Dune part 1 - part 2

Den var ret fed, men det er jo simpelthen ikke en færdig film. Som en enkelt film syntes jeg ikke den virkede specielt godt dramaturgisk.

*Elskede* den første time omkring hvor filmen chillede og konsekvenserne for det meste var ret små. Filmen tog sin tid, og animationsstilen var ikke bare flashy for at være flashy, men vildt kreativ og kunstnerisk og altid passende til hvad filmen ville sige. Følte virkelig karakterene og deres mål og problemer i den her del af filmen, mere end i 1'eren også.

Men så pludselig skal de rede *alle universer* i alle tidslinjer i jeg ved ikke hvad, og instruktionen og animationen er stadig fantastisk og imponerene, men alting går så ufattelig hurtigt at jeg både har svært ved rigtigt at forstå hvad der sker og svært ved virkelig at gå op i de tårnhøje konsekvenser/stakes. Både actionscener og især dramatiske og følelsestunge scener begyndte at miste deres vægt en smule, følte jeg.

Måske ender Dune part 1 - part 2: 2 Elektrisk Boogalo med smukt at flette den her følelse af overvælelse og ligegyldighed over for gigantiske konsekvenser og en verden meget større end en selv sammen med, hvad Miles' går gennem. Og det ligner egentlig også lidt, at det er det, filmen går efter rent tematisk: Hvad vil du være, hvad bør du være, betyder dit liv og dem du har nær noget når du kunne bruge så meget tid på at rede hele verden.

Men måske gør den ikke! Into The Spider-verse syntes jeg også startede ud stærkt, men den endte ikke rigtig med at bruge spider-verset til mere end at sige "tro på dig selv, alle kan være et ederkoppemenneske, hvis bare de kæmper". Har vi virkelig brug for et mutlivers for at sige det? Og gør det ikke hele moralen lidt mere kludret at du skal tro på dig selv meeeeeen du skal altså også lige være i det rigtige multivers hvor du bliver bidt af den rigtige edderkop.

Everything Everywhere har ødelagt multiversfilmen, fordi den har i min mening lavet den ultimative, den éne multiversfilm. Den har strukket multiverset til dets logiske og emotionelle ekstrem og *good riddance*; Så kan vi lukke multiverset fordi det ræs er allerede vundet. At introducere et multivers til ens verden har i min mening en drastisk negativ effekt på ens evne som publikum til faktisk at gå op i *de her karaktere* og *de her konsekvenser* fordi at alt kan ske. Man bør simpelthen have en virkelig god grund til at gøre det, og jeg føler at Everything Everywhere har udtømt det meste interresante tematiske man kan gøre med det.

Stadig, på trods af det hele, virkelig god biografoplevelse overall. 8/Dune.

Raise The Red Lantern (1991)

Flirting Scholar (1993)

John Wick: Chapter 4

Jeg var ikke særlig vild med Wick 4. Det var en O.K tur i biografen, og der *var* ret fed action og filmisk håndværk. Holdet bag filmen var tydeligvis utrolig passionerede omkring hvad de lavede. Problemet ved Wick 4 er at det er en meget lang film hvor tempoet er helt forkert: Både action- og dialogscenerne var for lange. Man blev træt af de ellers utroligt veleksekverede aktion-scener fordi de blev ved og ved, og man blev træt af dialogen fordi ... ja, der er den anden side af historien:

Wick 4 er dårligt skrevet på den dårligste måde. Alt andet end filmens action var i min mening ikke bare kedeligt, men helt tårkrummende dårligt skrevet. Problemet er at Wick 4 tror og lader som om det er en ret klog film, hvor alle dens karakterer bliver ved med at snakke i monologer og citater, som om de kun kan udtrykke sig i #deep. Men alle filmens karakterer er lejemordere og - i alt respekt - nogle kæmpe røvhuller der har gjort og konsekvenet gør forfærdelige ting. De snakker om ære, om broderskab, om tro, om loyalitet, om hævn og om at holde på sine løfter, men den kognitive dissonans er så stor at det er svært at tage noget seriøst. Deres konsekvente forsøg på at refærdiggøre deres idioti er lommefilosofisk på det bedste og direkte skadefuldt på det værste.

Man kunne måske godt argumentere, at filmen er bevist om at reglerne og ærekodekset der styrer den kriminelle underverden i Wick-niverset, er dumt: Alt det her startede trods alt med Wicks hund der blev dræbt og bil der blev stjålet. Wick prøver jo netop også at stoppe det høje bords "orden" og at forlade underverdenen, og filmen slutter endda på et klassisk mexicansk standoff - som lidt en parodi på hvad det selvseriøse kodeks egentlig er når alt fedtet koges væk. Problemet er at Wick 4 ikke kan beslutte sig. Hævn, for eksempel, er moralt og korrekt i Wick-niverset - i hvert fald hvis du ikke er træls. John Wick starter med et forsøg på helt at destruere den høje orden, men skifter så lidt mening og har det fint hvis han bare selv bliver fri. Wick åbner sjælen munden, men når han gør kan filmen ikke beslutte sig for om han er et absolut brød eller en sej badass med Schwarzenegger one-liners. Wick bliver spurgt på vej gennem en kanal i Paris hvad der skal stå på hans gravsten, og svarer "Loving husband" - ... øh, okay? Det kom lidt ud af ingenting Wick, men ... sure?

Jeg har absolut intet imod en underholdende action film hvis eneste formål er at være en god tur i biografen. Wick 4 vil bare så utrolig gerne overbevise os om at den er noget mere. Hvad det "mere" er ved Wick 4 ikke. Det er en kæmpe skam, for hvad Wick allerede er, er egentlig ret fedt.

Hunden der tissede på manden var sjov.

Future Boy Connan (1978)

Æv, nu har jeg set alt Miyazaki 😥

Kæmpe anbefaling dog! Det er som Miyazaki lavede en 12 timers film, der er intet filler at snakke om! Conan er en mega simpel karakter men man elsker ham også.

3 Idiots (2009)

Triangle of Sadness (2022)

Magical Girl (2014)

Paprika (2006)

Total Recall (1990)

Night on Earth (1991)

Evangelion: 3.0+1.0 Thrice Upon a Time (2021)

12 Angry Men (1957)

Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me

Welcome to the N-H-K (Anime)

I have found an anime i like more than FMA Brotherhood (don't know if it beats evangelion, but still), and it came from the most unlikely of places: A femenist critique of the god-awful isekai "Rise of the shield hero". And NHK is not a grand, sweeping 60-episode action epic. Rather it's a drama, with alot of time spent inside a dude's tiny, messy apartment. Also, it's fucking amazing.

NHK has great, loveable, and most importantly really realistic charachters. They're all flawed, and NHK has no obvious villians or heros. While other anime might attempt to reach for "maturity" through edgy charachters or body-horror, NHK is an actual fucking mature show. It avoids many of the typical pitfalls of anime, and actually has great writing: Charachter's don't always talk only to progress the plot forward (proably the single biggest problem i have with alot of anime), and yet the whole plot is completely charachter driven, not just artificially created by external events. It acknowledges that life doesn't always fit the satisfying structure of a 20-minutte hollywood model. Most importantly, it's smart as fuck: It cuts any crap or metaphysical nonsense, and each episode has so much to say, and so much of isn't stupidly obvious like many other animes, because this show isn't factory produced (the novel was written by a hikikimori with serious depression), and it doesn't care if people disagree with it's opinions. Oh, and also this thing from 2006 (written even earlier), bassicly says briefly in one episode that big coorperations are behind climate change, so there's that. Op and Ed are both absoloute bangers as well, and while the animation isn't great, there's some creative, good direction at display.

All these things are great, and they are to some degree important in making the show work, and getting you to actually start watching and binging. But they're not the reason why i love this show. I love it because it actually changed me through it's amazing story. I don't want to go in detail and spoil anything, but this is a show that has pretty radical things to say, and it changed the way i viewed human relationships, self-improvement and exsistensial absurdism. Also politics for that matter. I don't want to spoil anything, but there are two episodes in particular that are absoloutely phenominal. This is a show with a very, very satisfying ending.

Just watch it okay?