Breathless (1960) Review
September 28, 2025.
Drawing from the spirit of the 1930s French cinema of Jean Renoir and Marcel Carné, Godard explores love as it drifts through the streets of Paris. The conversations between Michael and Patricia, not unlike the majority of Godard's films, are aimless yet poetic. The film moves through cafés, cinemas, and cramped hotel rooms. In the Hôtel de Suède on Rue de Berri, Michel and Patricia spend the afternoon talking, smoking, and half-flirting. The long, meandering takes in that room are intimate, mirroring the city outside the window. Even Parisian traffic becomes a motif as Michel weaves through the city, evading police. The film captures the city in motion, both historically (on the cusp of cultural transformation) and physically. Paris is not romanticized, it’s fragmented, just like Godard’s editing, but it remains vital. Through its streets, Godard removes the city from postcards and turns it into a space where cinema can be spontaneous, political, and poetic.
The most famous innovation in Breathless is its making. Instead of crane shots, they stood on balconies. Instead of dolly shots, they pushed desk chairs with wheels. Above all, the film is remarkable for its editing. Godard took what was traditionally a mistake, the jump cut, and made it central to the film’s language. These jump cuts were born of necessity. Godard cut scenes to shorten the runtime, but rather than smoothing over the gaps, he left them visible. This technique would go onto shape the future of editing forever.
Godard gives Seberg long takes in which she talks about love, death, the difference between being in love and loving someone. It’s here that Godard’s spine becomes most apparent as he studies behavior, boredom, flirtation, and distance. She might love him or she might just be bored. While the film is revolutionary for its innovation in cinematic style, it is a product of Godard’s sexism, seen in his portrayal of Patricia. She is often reduced to a passive, decorative figure, existing primarily to serve the narrative arc of the male protagonist. Her agency is undermined by the way the camera and dialogue frame her as an object of desire, confusion, or betrayal, rather than a fully realized individual. This shallow depiction reflects broader misogynistic attitudes prevalent in 1960s French cinema, where women’s roles were frequently defined by their relationships to men, rather than by their own autonomy or complexity.Godard famously said that all you need to make a movie is “a girl and a gun.” With Breathless, he proved it. More than that, he proved that cinema didn’t need to be safe, clean, or traditional. The film's rebellious spirit is in every frame, every jagged cut, every moment of silence that lets the audience feel the awkwardness, rather than covering it with music. By 2022, Breathless ranked 38 in the Sight and Sound poll by the British Film Institute. It remains a rite of passage for cinephiles and film students and a reminder that the rules of cinema are not fixed. You can break them, cut them up, and rearrange them. You can make a movie that feels chaotic, dissonant, alive, and with a disregard for convention.
Boom! (1968) Review
September 27, 2025.
By the late 1960s, Tennessee Williams was no longer the dominant figure in American theater that he had been during the 1940s and 1950s. With landmark plays like The Glass Menagerie (1944), A Streetcar Named Desire (1947), and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1955), Williams had earned critical acclaim, Pulitzer Prizes, and a stake in American literature. By the 1960s, his work had taken a more abstract, less grounded in realism, experimental turn and audiences and critics began to turn away. One such work, The Milk Train Doesn’t Stop Here Anymore, premiered on Broadway in 1963. It was a critical and commercial failure.
The source material for Boom!, The Milk Train Doesn’t Stop Here Anymore, was never embraced by the public or the critics. Premiering on Broadway with Hermione Baddeley, the play closed after just seven performances. A heavily revised production the following year, this time starring Tallulah Bankhead, fared no better. Years later, Rupert Everett played the role in drag to the same effect. Even among Williams’s defenders, the consensus was clear: the play lacked coherence, momentum, and credibility. Williams, however, remained committed to it. In The Milk Train Doesn’t Stop Here Anymore, he explored themes that had long haunted his work. Mortality, aging, erotic ambiguity. He stripped of the Southern settings and psychological realism that had defined his earlier plays. The characters in The Milk Train Doesn’t Stop Here Anymore are not people so much as archetypes: a dying woman, a drifting poet, a chorus of onlookers. If A Streetcar Named Desire (1947) and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1955) dramatized private tragedies, The Milk Train Doesn’t Stop Here Anymore aimed for metaphysical allegory.
Williams himself adapted the play for the screen, making few significant changes to the script but introducing a new setting and visual palette. Where the play had taken place in an Italian villa, the film was relocated to a postmodern Mansion above the sea. This was more than merely a shift in location; it was a transformation of genre. The film wasn’t just a play put on the screen, but an operatic fever dream. Production designer Richard Macdonald and costume designer Annalisa Nasalli-Rocca used mise-en-scene to define the film. The costumes were done in conjunction with the Tiziani fashion house, with Karl Lagerfeld as their chief couturier at the time.
Despite its poor reception, Williams remained invested in the material, revising it multiple times. The play tells the story of an aging, wealthy woman, Flora Goforth, who lives in isolation as she writes her memoirs while facing her own mortality. This is until a mysterious young man named Christopher Flanders arrives. Flanders is a figure who may be an opportunist, an artist, or a metaphorical “angel of death.” Williams described him as a “poet and drifter,” though his symbolic function was often clearer than his motivation.
In 1968, British director Joseph Losey adapted the play into a film, casting Elizabeth Taylor as Mrs. Goforth and Richard Burton as Christopher Flanders. This would be the final film the famous couple made together during their peak years, and one of their least commercially successful. Katharine Hepburn was approached to play the role of Sissy Goforth but she took it as an insult and declined.
Not unlike the source material, Boom! was met with overwhelmingly negative reviews upon its release. Critics found it slow and self-indulgent and its box office performance reflected that as it quickly faded from public view. Over time, however, the film has acquired a cult following, particularly among fans of camp and queer cinema. In later years, John Waters praised it as “the best failed art movie ever” and the film has been screened at festivals and retrospectives as a cult classic.
Boom! may be understood less as a failure of conventional narrative filmmaking and more as a cinematic artifact from a transitional period, for both Tennessee Williams and for the American and European cinema of the late 1960s. For Williams, it represents an attempt to preserve the thematic obsessions of his later career: death, isolation, and sexual ambiguity. While Boom! is not widely regarded as a successful film in traditional terms, its place in film and theatrical history is secure as a unique, if flawed, collaboration between major 20th-century artists. In his book, Williams said it was his favorite film based on one of his plays.
The Long, Long Trailer (1954) Review
September 26, 2025.
Fresh off their domination of American television with I Love Lucy, Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz took their chemistry to the big screen during the summer after their second season. Lucy had made 60 movies before ever appearing on television. She was unable to find great success on the big screen until she and Desi met. She had a hard time at MGM before her television career so her return to the studio was met with open arms when the two decided to star alongside each other in 1954's, The Long, Long Trailer.
What feels like a 90 minute episode of I Love Lucy (minus Ethel and Fred) follows newlyweds Tacy and Nicky (essentially Lucy and Ricky) when they decide to buy a 40-foot trailer instead of a house. They tow it across America, through rain, mountains, and marital spats. It’s like National Lampoon’s Vacation (1983) twenty years before Walley World.
The studio was afraid that no one would pay to see the people they can see for free at home. Television was viewed as lesser than the pictures with actors seen as second class citizens compared to jimmy stewart or cary grant, but the box office proved MGM wrong.
Their trailer isn't the one you'd find beatnik hippies traveling the national parks in. It’s taller than Desi, longer than their marriage would be, and becomes both a symbol and source of their escalating chaos. Lucy, ever the idealist, wants to turn it into a home while Desi just wants to survive towing it. The jokes practically write themselves, but thanks to director Vincente Minnelli (yes, that Minnelli), the physical comedy is staged with real cinematic flair. Mountains loom, roads are narrow, dishes fly, and Lucy screams like her life depends on it.
This film was made at the absolute peak of their fame and just a few years before their marriage unraveled for good. Behind the scenes, their real-life story was far more complex than what MGM would’ve let on. Lucy, a trailblazing businesswoman and the first woman to head a major studio, was a powerhouse. Desi, a Cuban-born musician and producer, was the brains behind the technical innovations of I Love Lucy (multi-camera shooting, live audience, syndication deals). Together, they created an empire but as for the alcohol, the affairs, and the fights, they were real. Watching them in The Long, Long Trailer, you sometimes wonder: are we watching comedy, or coded cries for help?
In the end, The Long, Long Trailer is both a time capsule and a spiritual prequel to every road-trip comedy that followed. It captures the glamour of the '50s, the tensions of domestic life, and the absurdity of trying to bring comfort on the road. It’s a look at the country always on the move and a warning about what happens when you try to take it all with you. If you love Lucy, you’ll love this.
it's a turned back world with a local girl in a smaller town
June 11, 2025.
when i made those documentaries five years ago i was listening to surfs up throughout the process. i chose the songs to accompany the montage footage because it sounded the way i felt. happy times, country shade, clearer stars. it was all in the music. no matter what movies ive made since or will go on to make, there's a scene from the hawaii installment that will always be my favorite. it's the most genuine expression of my spine and soul as a director. the most authentic images ive put on film. even at the time there was a deliberate reason i filled those two movies with so many beach boy songs. something that has to do with teenage nostalgia and summer nights perhaps. four years later i rarely speak to some friends outside of a birthday text. brian wilson's death today fills me with the deepest feeling of nostalgia for those summers that he was the soundtrack to and i thank him for his works.
Rear Window (1954) Review
June 9, 2025.
Jimmy Stewart: the rugged, adventurous action photographer. Grace Kelly: the elegant, fashionable socialite. Their relationship is stunted by the broken leg L.B. Jefferies (Stewart), leaving him wheelchair bound and unable to ‘get up’-so to speak. Forced to look out his window for entertainment, Jefferies noticed his neighbor acting suspicious and the couple reconnects through solving what they believe to be a murder.
The film is set in New York’s Greenwich Village, inside of Jefferies apartment. His room overlooks the courtyard, giving him a view into the private lives of his neighbors. The courtyard was based on the real apartment building of 125 Christopher St, although the film was shot entirely on stage 17 at Paramount Studios in Los Angeles. The nearly 40 feet tall, 185 feet long constructed set was so massive it required the crew to dig into the basement as well as install a drainage system for the scene in which it rains.
L.B. Jefferies is introduced through a series of photographs across his apartment. Daring shots of explosions, high speed cars, and a smashed to pieces camera on a table below them. Jefferies sits in his chair with both his legs in full casts, an autograph reads, “here lie the broken bones of L.B. Jefferies”. It is with this that his nurse arrives, played by the hilarious Thelma Ritter. It’s not often “the nurse was my favorite” is said by audiences as they leave the theater but Ritter's wisecracking remarks as Stella makes this commonplace. That night Jefferies is visited by his elegant, 5th Ave socialite girlfriend, Lisa Fremont, brought to live by legendary actress (and princess of Monaco) Grace Kelly.
Rear Window has many defining qualities that rightfully earned it the 40th spot in 2022s Sight and Sound poll for The British Institute of Film. A standout feature is the work of costume designer Edith Head. She stated, “There was a reason for every colour Grace wore, every style, and he was absolutely certain about everything. Hitch wanted her to appear like a piece of Dresden china, something slightly untouchable.” The elegance of Lise Fremont is a performance that can only be achieved by Kelly, accompanied by the six outfits she wears in the picture.
Kelly's first appearance comes at night as Jefferies sits in his wheelchair and a shadow covers him. A close-up of Kelly takes over the screen as the two kiss. As she turns on the lights her and her outfit are highlighted in dialogue as well as camera blocking. She wears a monochromatic dress with floral patterns, a black low-cut, off the shoulder top, red lipstick, a pearl necklace, accompanied by white gloves and a white stole . The two argue about their future together, her dressed like the window models at saks, him in pajamas. As she storms out, Jefferies returns to looking across his courtyard, only to hear a woman scream. The next morning, he tells Stella (Ritter) what he saw and she scoffs at him. That night as he and Lisa kiss, he is preoccupied with what he believed to have seen. Lisa wears a black, see-through top and black dress, again with pearls. She, of course, thinks he's gone mad, until they see the neighbor backing a large trunk, possibly containing the mangled corpse of his wife. The next day Jefferies continues to watch his neighbors through binoculars and a telephoto camera lens. The private lives and relations he intrudes upon remind him of his own relationship with Lisa. He watches a young and attractive woman, a newlywed couple, a heartbroken aging woman, and of course a man who is suspected of murdering his wife. That night Lisa returns in a light green suit on top of a white halter top. She matches this with a pillbox hat, which was a popular style at the time, and a pearl and gold bracelet. They work through the murder and Lisa suggests spending the night. Although this is nothing explicit by today's standards, the hays code was still in full effect at the time of the film's release, making it a risque request. For their sleepover she dawns a silk negligee which is fancy enough to be an evening gown. The next day the two of them, including Stella who is beginning to believe their accusations, come closer to figuring out the truth. Lisa wears a white dress embroidered with gold flowers and again, red lipstick and a pearl necklace. It is in this outfit that she sneaks into the neighbor's apartment, as Jeffiers sees him return home from across the courtyard. Once all is said, the camera pans across Lisa, laying on Jefferies bed. For the first time she wears a much more casual pair of black penny loafers, blue jeans, and a red button-up. She reads a travel book about the Himalayas, only to switch to an issue of Harper's Bazaar once Jefferies falls asleep. She's missing her signature red lipstick and pearls, demonstrating her adjustment to Jefferies lifestyle.
Hitchcock has been subject to scrutiny over his treatment of leading females, both their characters on the screen and the actor portrayed the role. In this picture, it has been suggested that Lisa is submissive and reliant on Jefferies, despite her being the one actually put in danger while he sits in his wheelchair. The moment she decides to enter the suspected murder scene while Jefferies watches is her crossing over into his life of action and danger, something he claimed she was incapable of. Stewart said of Kelly: “Everybody just sat around and waited for her to come in the morning, so we could just look at her. She was kind to everybody, so considerate, just great, and so beautiful." She had a "complete understanding of the way motion picture acting is carried out."
The picture can be perceived as a commentary by Hitchcock on film itself. Stewart’s eyes are the camera and his window is the screen. The audience sees only what Stewart can see, as his reactions are dispersed throughout his gaze. By this, Hitchcock intentionally uses “The Kuleshov Effect”. What is now taught to students on the first day of film school was the lesser known film editing technique demonstrated by Russian filmmaker Lev Kuleshov throughout the 1910s and 20s. Hitch described this to Fletcher Markle in 1964 as “Pure Cinematics. The assembly of film and how it can be changed to create a different idea”. He goes on: “let’s assume [a man] saw a woman holding a baby in her arms. Now we cut back to his reaction to what he sees and he smiles. He’s a kind man, he’s sympathetic. Now let’s take the middle piece of film away but leave his two pieces of film as they were. Now we’ll put in a piece of film of a girl in a bikini. He look, girl in a bikini, he smiles. What is he now? A dirty old man. That’s what film can do for you.” This exercise in editing is what drives the film through the quiet, draw-out moments of Jefferies looking out his window. These peaceful moments of reflection tell us about the character without words, but expressions. As he sees his young and beautiful neighbor dubbed “miss torso” get dressed, he smiles. As he sees “miss lonelyhearts” cry over her failed relationship, he sighs. It’s a masterclass in acting through micro-beats and facial expressions from Stewart, which combined with Hitch’s directing and longtime editor George Tomasini creates one of the great American motion pictures. With every picture, Hitch set out to achieve something new. He viewed reusing elements and themes as self-plagiarism, so Rear Window was an opportunity to create a challenge for himself to overcome, and overcome he did.
Sinners (2025) Review
April 27, 2025.
What could have easily been another hicksploitation, B-level horror flick in the vein of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre(1974) or, more recently, Ti West’s X (2022), is layered with performances and themes that allow it to stand on its own as a new kind of film. Sinners is all the evidence needed for Ryan Coogler to earn a spot among the current leaders of contemporary cinema—and if he continues to create films from his own mind, that status will be cemented.
Unlike the usual horror movie, Sinners waits until nearly halfway through to reveal its antagonist. This hour of exposition and world-building is incredibly necessary, as it makes the handful of upcoming character deaths impact the story as well as the audience. Delroy Lindo, as drunkard blues singer Delta Slim, delivers a standout performance.
Cinematography and sound design are not lost on Coogler, as these are highlights of the two-hour runtime. Recent Oscar-winner Ludwig Göransson sets music to Ernie Barnes’ 1971 painting The Sugar Shack, which can be seen in the opening credits of CBS’s Good Times and on the cover of Marvin Gaye’s 1976 record I Want You. The dynamic cameras used to shoot Sinners creates a variety of aspect ratios, further enhancing the beauty of the colors and action on screen.
Drew Taylor wrote for The Wrap that it was “an Avengers-like experience.” Taylor is correct, although he doesn’t realize that this is not a compliment. It’s no surprise that Ryan Coogler’s first feature film since working in the Marvel universe would have its own “hold for applause” moments. Sinners is his first original concept film while maintaining the themes of Black culture and the Black experience seen throughout his growing body of work. These fan-service moments are the film’s only weakness, pulling you out of the drama with clichés and cheesy lines of dialogue. Coogler is effective at pulling you back in after these moments, but they stain what would otherwise be a flawless script.
Sinners is not only a film deserving of the biggest screen in your town, but one worth driving to a bigger screen to experience. The post-credit scene, albeit unnecessary, leaves a sense of satisfaction and closure. The only question becomes: Will the next project from Ryan Coogler be the hacky, IP-driven blockbuster of his previous pictures, or another risk-taking original film that not only reminds us cinema is alive, but that it is thriving?
man in bryant park
April 6, 2025.
Death of a Unicorn (2025) Review
March 29, 2025.
death of a distributor.
it seems like just yesterday the film community was raving over the spectacle that was brady corbet’s the brutalist(2024). in fact, it was just a month ago. unfortunately, 2024 has come to an end and we begin the 2025 watchlist which contains a plethora of films from a24. best picture winning, elevated-horror producers, a24. their newest trending topic to start the year is the alex scharfman fantasy, eat-the-rich thriller, death of a unicorn.
the film was presented to me as the new work from the art house giants of modern cinema that are a24. their whole shtick is based around a so-called aesthetic that has garnered praise from fans and critics alike. this appeal has been perfected by such filmmakers as ari aster, the safdie brothers, yorgos lanthimos, and sean baker. the ladder two eventually stopped working with the company and found themselves massive success. funny that. up until i saw the 2021 film ‘lamb’ i was in support of the accolades and fully subscribed to the hype. although lamb(2021) felt like a misguided attempt to fit in with their respective catalog, it was visually appealing enough for its shortcomings to go relatively unnoticed. death of a unicorn(2025) is proof that the folks at a24 are not only capable of missing the mark, but they are growing more accustom to it. the fantasy of an elevated cinema experience provided by the all-powerful gods that are a24 is over. might as well take it out back and shoot it like old yeller because if their upcoming film slate for the rest of 2025 is accurate, it’s only a matter of time before they turn into the rest of the competition.
the film is not without its highlights, albeit far and a few between. it doesn’t take itself as serious as other a24 movies which is refreshing. jenna ortega gives the film its legs to stand on, even when forced to deliver exposition and hold the audiences hand through the story. she gives the character of ridley life and depth while anyone else would leave it as the moody teenage girl trope and nothing more. will poulter as shepard is the saving grace of the film as its comedic relief and is the main aspect audience will walk away having remembered. paul rudd brings nothing more than being paul rudd to the film, but that isnt necessarily a bad thing. the themes of folk mythology are integrated nicely into the stories plot points as well as the costume design and colors. the biggest blunder of the movie, which i would be remiss to not mention, is when ridley is vaping out of her room window and elliot walks in. she panic throws the vape on the bed and sits on the floor as she and her father talk. in every single coverage of her, the juul is in a completely different spot. it’s centered in the frame and is the only thing besides ortega in the bottom left. i had no idea what they were talking about in the scene because i couldn’t ignore it. the whole time i was thinking, “why not just have her throw the juul under the bed or put it in her pocket?” eventually the camera goes to a head-on angle and the juul disappears so they could have edited the scene with that coverage from the beginning. there’s really no reason why the shot changed either since the dynamic between the characters remained the same.
death of a unicorn(2025) is in no way a bad movie and i see it doing well on its theatrical release and even better once it inevitably goes to streaming. the harsh criticism i have is not directed at the cast and crew (minus whoever was in charge of continuity) but rather at the distribution studio for losing what made them special. death of a unicorn is emblematic for the end of the a24 era. their upcoming alex garland film, warfare, will be the nail in the coffin they’ve been constructing since they produced his previous movie, civil war(2024). the pomp and circumstance behind the distributors has led to this point where they prioritize virality and for lack of a better word, aura. the writing has been on the wall with ill-advised decisions like travis scott’s circus maximus(2023), the announcement of a remake of kurosawa’s high and low, and the continuation of television shows from “the sick and twisted mind of sam levinson”. the resulting products from the company continue to stray further from films such as the last black man in san francisco(2019) and their magnum opus that is moonlight(2019). i fear we may never see a true picture from the studio again, or one that can rival their pre-oscar spunk. it is with that i say - help us tim robinson and celine song, you’re our only hope.
note: a24 gave me my ticket for free so it’s not like i wasted any money. thanks guys please don’t stop giving me free tickets after this review.
What’s Up, Doc? (1972) Review
March 7, 2025.
Before he ever picked up a movie camera, Peter Bogdanovich was a film critic and writer in New York City. In the early 60s he worked as a film programmer for the Museum of Modern Art where he played retrospectives from Hitchcock, Ford, Welles, and Hawks. The latter, director Howard Hawks, was known for his screwball comedies such as Bringing Up Baby (1938), His Girl Friday (1940), and Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953). He was referred to as “one of the greatest American Directors of pure movies and a hero of auteur critics” by Roger Ebert and It’s clear that Bogdanovich agreed.
Hawks’ 1938 classic, Bringing Up Baby, starred Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn in a laugh-out-loud misadventure and entanglement. In a 1972 interview between Hawks and Bogdanovich, Hawks told Bogdanovich that he believed his film to suffer from its insanity. He said there was no sanity to measure how insane the other people were. Bogdanovich must’ve agreed which is why he delivered Ryan O’Neal in the role of Howard (as in Howard Hawks) for his film. O’Neal plays the role of Cary Grant as Howard Bannister and Barbra Streisand as Katherine Hepburn in Judy Maxwell. There’s even a moment where Judy mistakenly called Howard Steve, which is a reference to Lauren Bacall doing the same to Humphrey Bogart in Hawks 1944 film, To Have and Have Not.
In 1971 Bogdanovich’s debut film, The Last Picture Show, was set to release when he was approached by Warner Bros to direct a film for them, starring Barbra Streisand. He didn’t like the script they gave him and instead, had Oscar nominated David Newman and Robert Newman (writers of Bonnie and Clyde, 1967) and The Graduate (1967) writer Buck Henry compose a different story based on Hawks’ Bringing Up Baby.
A year before O’Neal would star along side his daughter who would become the youngest Oscar winner for her role as Addie Loggins in Paper Moon (1973), a record she still holds, O’Neal joined Peter Bogdanovich to star along side Streisand. It’s difficult to say who steals the show when every member of the cast is worthy of that claim. From Madeline Kahn in her big-screen debut as Eunice Burns, Liam Dunn as Judge Maxwell, or Kenneth Mars as Hugh Simon, the cast brings something to their performances that is as unique as it is ridiculously hysterical.
Upon reading the script, Streisand wasn’t confident in the film and didn’t find it funny. When she saw the audience of Radio City Music Hall screaming with laughter at the film, she told Bagdanovich, “people have strange tastes.” When the film was a box office hit, it continued her sprint as one of the biggest names in Hollywood of the 1970s.
What’s Up, Doc takes place at a San Francisco hotel where four identical overnight bags owned by four different people get mixed up. Each bag contains something of great value for its owner and the confusion surrounding the missing bags leads to misunderstandings and hijinx for the four owners. The film follows the mild mannered Ingenious rock collector Howard Bannister. He and his overbearing fiancé, Eunice Burns, are in town for a music conference. While at a nearby drug store, Howard meets Judy Maxwell, a witty and charming woman that he'll eventually fall in love with.
The film is a tribute to the screwball comedy era and celebration of the works of Howard Hawks. After the film was released, Streisand agreed that it was in fact funny, although she told the Hollywood Reporter that she “didn’t understand what was going on with the story half the time and just trusted Peter’s vision”. One of the film's writers, Robert Benton, went on to say that Bogdanovich “did the modern version of Bringing Up Baby, and nobody’s tried to do that again. Peter was the only one who could do it.” What’s Up, Doc became the third highest-grossing film of 1972 and went on to win numerous awards and receive countless praise. Streisand stated, “I never knew it would become a big hit because I was always confused about which suitcase was which!”
The Prisoner (1967) Review
January 28, 2025.
the schizoid man. the chimes of big ben. the girl who was death.
on the surface the prisoner is the ultimate british spy show. the star and creator, patrick mcgoohan, even turned down the role of james bond and suggested sean connery instead. mcgoohan was truly at the helm of the series, writing, producing, and directing. the final two episodes are extremely autobiographical for mcgoohan, exploring the actors early life and career. while giving him the well-deserved recognition and praise, the smaller voices in the crew deserve credit for the shows glory as well. art direction from jack shampan is a critical reason as to how the show has remained beloved 60 years later. after further viewings and investigations into the show, the layers are peeling back and there proves to be much more than meets the eye.
george markstein, the script editor, said the show was a sequel to mcgoohans earlier role of john drake in the series danger man. mcgoohan denied this. whether that’s true and they just didn’t want to pay for it, it doesn’t change the greatness of number six as a character, or john drake for that matter. it’s possible that disagreement had something to do with markstein quitting the production after the 13th episode but who can know for sure.
the series asks an array of questions from where is he, what do they want, and whose side are they on. these are just the questions asked in the opening scene. furthermore, why does the village have shops, clubs, and restaurants but no church? why is there no alcohol served in the village? number two answers the questions of number six by saying “questions are a burden to others; answers are a prison for oneself” [dance of the dead].
like most great works of art the answers are there, you just have to look closely. mcgoohan stated, “if whatever we wanted to say is not already contained within the episodes of the series then i failed in the production of them and any amount of chit-chat now will not make good that omission.” this can be seen in the fourth episode, ‘free for all’, where number six is nearly elected into the position of number two, although he never actually declared he would run. the result of the election demonstrates that democracy is a sham and voting ultimately has no relation to political freedom. this is a message that is further stated in the final minutes of the show.
mcgoohan once said the ending was intended to be interpreted differently by each viewer. this ambiguous ending, unlike the majority of ambiguity seen in the endings of tv and movies to come after, builds on the themes of the show and works so well that it couldn’t be done any other way.
the series culminates in the off-the-wall, mind bending finale titled: ‘fall out’. number six is on the verge of meeting number one and having his number removed as we hear the beatles ‘all you need is love’. the sequence plays out as metaphors are hidden behind nonsense. the ending provides more questions than answers with each fan having their own theories that you can sift through in the numerous books, youtube videos, or reddit threads. mcgoohan describes the ending as a parallel between number six and number one, without pandering to a low mentality that would miss what he had to say.
throughout the 17 episodes we are put in number sixes place, trying to decipher which side of the iron curtain the village sits on. the series was meant to create a feeling of unrest through an abstract warning of what may happen to our freedoms of choice and thought. the overarching question it provokes is: what responsibilities does a citizen have over the laws of their country? its a question i find myself asking more now than ever.
2024 Movie Picks
Dahomey (Mati Diop)
Rap World (Danny Scharar, Conner O’Malley)
The Room Next Door (Pedro Almodovar)
Queer (Luca Guadagnino)
It’s Not Me (Leos Carax)
Oh, Canada (Paul Schrader)
Anora (Sean Baker)
Challengers (Luca Guadagnino)
Flow (Gints Zilbalodis)
Pepe (Nelson Carlos De los Santos Arias)
Lupin the Third: The Castle of Cagliostro (1979) Review
November 7, 2024.
The origins of Lupin III trace back to the early 20th century French pulp novels about Arsène Lupin, a gentleman thief and master of disguise created by Maurice Leblanc in 1905. Arsène Lupin was a charming rogue, equal parts criminal and hero, who used his wit, elegance, and sense of justice to outsmart detectives, rob the rich, and sometimes help the innocent like Robin Hood. Hugely popular in France and abroad, Leblanc’s stories helped define the archetype of the suave antihero. Decades later in 1967 Japanese manga artist Kazuhiko Katō created Lupin III, a fictional grandson of Leblanc’s character. Katō’s manga reimagined Lupin for a modern audience: bawdier, funnier, and full of wild, pop-art-style action, while still retaining the original’s cleverness and flair. The manga’s success led to an anime adaptation in 1971, Lupin the Third Part I, which initially struggled in ratings but found a second life in reruns. With key episodes directed by young talents Hayao Miyazaki and Isao Takahata, the show gained a cult following, spawning a long-running franchise of television series, feature films, and specials, including Miyazaki’s own 1979 directorial debut, The Castle of Cagliostro, which reimagined the thief with a more romantic and heroic lens.
Though this was Miyazaki’s feature film debut, he arrived already fully formed, with over a decade of experience as a key animator and director on several influential anime series. The biggest among these was the Lupin the Third Part I show, where Miyazaki (alongside Isao Takahata) had already left a distinctive mark. By the time Cagliostro was released, Lupin was a cultural institution in Japan. The original manga painted Lupin as a rakish, lewd, almost amoral anti-hero. Part James Bond, part Bugs Bunny, but Miyazaki had something else in mind. Over time he became more roguish, more charming, more capable of nobility. Miyazaki took that softened version and pushed it further. His Lupin was not the predator but the romantic rogue, not the cynical con artist but the idealist in disguise.
From its opening frames Lupin and his partner Jigen speeding away from a casino heist gone too well. The film plays like a caper, but it unfolds like a fairy tale. The chase leads them to the fictional European country of Cagliostro, a fog-shrouded principality perched among mountains and moss-covered ruins. There, Lupin stumbles upon a mystery involving a kidnapped princess, an ancient conspiracy, and a forged currency operation that may stretch back to centuries of European history.
Miyazaki, never content with the mechanics of plot alone, lingers on the physical spaces in which these characters move. The film’s art direction, led by Yasuo Ōtsuka, a mentor to Miyazaki and a master of mechanical animation, is drenched in romanticism. Cagliostro's crumbling aqueducts, Gothic castles, and shadowed catacombs set the scene. The architecture is both ancient and impossible, designed not for realism, but for a dream. It’s in these spaces that Lupin is humanized, not just as a master thief, but as a melancholic romantic, perhaps even a weary idealist. The animators, many of whom would go on to form the core of Studio Ghibli, render the world in soft, painterly tones, using a subdued color palette uncommon for late '70s anime. Watercolor backgrounds give the film a storybook quality. Unlike the harsher lines and bold colors of many contemporaneous productions,The Castle of Cagliostro is rich with texture and atmosphere.
Critics at the time of release were mixed, especially die-hard Lupin fans, who saw Miyazaki’s version of the character as too kind, too noble, too “off-model” from the original mischievous rogue. In hindsight, it’s precisely this interpretation that has given The Castle of Cagliostro its enduring legacy. Seen today, The Castle of Cagliostro is less of an oddball entry in the Lupin franchise and more the prologue to Miyazaki’s canon. Its DNA can be traced through Porco Rosso (1992), Spirited Away (2001), and even Howl’s Moving Castle (2004). The playfulness, the love of machines, the obsession with flight and adventure, and above all, the kindness found in his characters.
Selected Sounds That Inspired the Short Film Ave Rat
featuring love comes in spurts (richard hell), pastichio medley (smashing pumpkins), i wanna be your dog (sid vicious), pennyroyal tea (nirvana), subpop rock city (soundgarden), this is love (pj harvey), sister ray (velvet underground), oh shit (the pharcyde), at the movies (bad brains), beginner (cashier), megaton b (handsome boy modeling school), shut ‘em down (public enemy), and much, much more
Ave Rat /averat/ n. 1. The street kids of the U-district were looked down upon. Kicked out or rejected by their families some as young as 10-12 for being homosexual, transgender, the wrong religion, artists, musicians, etc., ran away because of abuse or neglect and barely escaped, or were abandoned. They all ended up on the streets through no fault of their own. Shelters and organizations turned a blind eye because they didn't meet the "criteria '' (blame the Becca bill) and other organizations requiring an address. In the early 90's they sought each other out, banded together for safety and survival and began to clean up their street home. They did what the police couldn't do, lured out the pedophiles and drug dealers, for the police to take away and drove out the scum, not just for themselves, also, for the other inhabitants. Pooling together with house friends they set up communal homes to be used by all for safety, warmth, food and to care for the sick and injured. They formed a community with their own rules and used society's cast offs and abandoned resources for survival. They did not rebel to be different, society had turned its back on them. As the Ave Rats have grown and become productive members of society, cops, lawyers, techs, engineers, etc. They still come together to catch up on each other's lives, help each other, and help the new street kids, (dubbed "Ave Mice'' by many of the original Ave Rats) who are struggling to survive every day, and the Ave Rats are trying to help.
Urban Dictionary
By Pyxey February 27, 2016
self portrait in brooklyn heights
February 10, 2024.
self portrait in hollywood
Janurary 5, 2024.
2023 Movie Picks
Past Lives (Celine Song)
The Holdovers (Alexander Payne)
The Zone of Interest (Jonathan Glazer)
Oppenheimer (Christopher Nolan)
The Iron Claw (Sean Durkin)
May December (Todd Haynes)
Perfect Days (Wim Wenders)
Evil Does Not Exist (Ryusuke Hamaguchi)
Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese)
Poor Things (Yorgos Lanthimos)
self portrait in calabasas
March 20, 2023.
2022 Movie Picks
The Banshees of Inisherin (Martin McDonagh)
Babylon (Damien Chazelle)
All the Beauty and the Bloodshed (Laura Poitras)
EO (Jerzy Skolimmoswski)
Mad God (Phil Tippett)
RRR (S. S. Rajamouli)
Godland (Hlynur Palmason)
Pinocchio (Mark Gustafson, Guillermo del Toro)
All That Breathes (Shaunak Sen)
The Fire Within: Requiem for Katia and Maurice Kraft (Werner Herzog)
self portrait in bellingham
May 13, 2022.
Daisies (1966) Review
April 19, 2022.
Director Vera Chytilová didn’t set out to tell a feminist story for western audiences and never agreed that Daisies was a feminist film. Later in her career, however, the film proved to be the ideal candidate for exactly that. A leader of Czechoslovakian new wave movement, Daisies follows two female protagonists. Dubbed ‘the Maries’, these characters don’t promote good behavior. Throughout the film, the Maries are focused on destruction, spoiling everything around them, and creating chaos as a form of enjoyment.
Daisies can be seen as a commentary on selfishness, greed, obsessive consumption, and political apathy. The film operates independently of any commentary on feminism, while being a cornerstone of feminist cinema. The position of women in society is studied throughout Chytilová’s career and Daisies is no exception. The Maries exhibit themes of radical self-expression and refusal to corroborate with what is expected of them. They indulge in luxurious meals, waste food, destroy expensive objects, and treat the world around them as a game. This excessiveness highlights issues with expectations that were present in the 1960s and remain today. Moreover, the film is critical of Czechoslovakian government action. The film's surreal and subversive nature pulls from dadaism and can be seen as a rejection of the strict ideological conformity that was enforced by the government as well as the upper class socialites of the time. In the latter scenes of the film, where the protagonists ineffectively clean up their dinner, their dialogue is openly parodic. They whisper “we’re happy because we’re hard working.” This, combined with the cleaning — a representation of unhelpful reform — is an apt metaphor for Chytilová's narrative and formal practice, which at once adheres to conventions and grotesquely deforms them.
The eccentric reality of the film adds to a surrealist atmosphere, operating outside of traditional reality. The Marie's life in their own reality embraces the irrational and illogical, breaking free from the constraints of traditional society. The scene depicting the characters cutting each other apart in their room (following a destructive fire) engages with the impossible and the repetitive theme of destruction. Daisies is an incredible commentary on the expectations of a woman, that lends itself to a thematically radical, rebellious perspective on traditional norms, government-induced violence, and subsequent reform.
2021 Movie Picks
Drive My Car (Ryusuke Hamaguchi)
Flee (Jonas Poher Rasmussen)
The Worst Person in the World (Joachim Trier)
C’mon C’mon (Mike Mills)
Marcel the Shell with Shoes On (Dean Fleischer Camp)
The Tragedy of Macbeth (Joel Coen)
The Velvet Underground (Todd Haynes)
Licorice Pizza (Paul Thomas Anderson)
Titane (Julia Ducournau)
Val (Leo Scott, Ting Poo)
self portrait in joshua tree
December 16, 2021.
2020 Movie Picks
The History of the Seattle Mariners (Jon Bois)
Lovers Rock (Steve McQueen)
On the Rocks (Sofia Coppola)
Minari (Lee Isaac Chung)
Dick Johnson Is Dead (Kirsten Johnson)
Mangrove (Steve McQueen)
Nomadland (Chloe Zhao)
The Hand (Wong Kar-wai)
David Byrne’s American Utopia (Spike Lee)
Crip Camp: A Disability Revolution (Nicole Newnham, James Lebrecht)
2019 Movie Picks
The Last Black Man in San Francisco (Joe Talbot)
Varda by Agnes (Agnes Varda)
Parasite (Bong Joon Ho)
Uncut Gems (Benny Safdie, Josh Safdie)
Bacurau (Juliano Dornelles, Kleber Mendonca Filho)
Marriage Story (Noah Baumbach)
To the Ends of the Earth (Kiyoshi Kurosawa)
The Lighthouse (Robert Eggers)
Premature (Rashaad Ernesto Green)
The Farewell (Lulu Wang)
2018 Movie Picks
Wildlife (Paul Dano)
Roma (Alfonso Cuaron)
The Great Buster (Peter Bogdanovich)
Border (Ali Abbasi)
Beautiful Boy (Felix van Groeningen)
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (Joel Coen, Ethan Coen)
The Favourite (Yorgos Lanthimos)
Minding the Gap (Bing Liu)
In My Room (Ulrich Kohler)
Cold War (Pawel Pawlikowski)
2017 Movie Picks
Call Me by Your Name (Luca Guadagnino)
Phantom Thread (Paul Thomas Anderson)
Faces Places (Agnes Varda, JR)
If You're Not in the Obit, Eat Breakfast (Danny Gold)
The Florida Project (Sean Baker)
Okja (Bong Joon Ho)
I Am Not a Witch (Rungano Nyoni)
Good Time (Benny Safdie, Josh Safdie)
The Meyerowitz Stories (Noah Baumbach)
First Reformed (Paul Schrader)
2016 Movie Picks
Moonlight (Barry Jenkins)
Sing Street (John Carney)
David Lynch: The Art Life (Jon Nguyen, Rick Barnes, Olivia Neergaard-Holm)
Everybody Wants Some!! (Richard Linklater)
The Handmaiden (Park Chan-wook)
Tiny: The Life of Erin Blackwell (Martin Bell)
Swiss Army Man (Daniel Kwan, Daniel Scheinert)
Jackie (Pablo Larrain)
Paterson (Jim Jarmusch)
La La Land (Damien Chazelle)
2015 Movie Picks
The Lobster (Yorgos Lanthimos)
No Home Movie (Chantal Akerman)
Ingrid Bergman: In Her Own Words (Stig Bjorkman)
Carol (Todd Haynes)
Tangerine (Sean Baker)
Anomalisa (Duke Johnson, Charlie Kaufman)
Mistress America (Noah Baumbach)
Youth (Paolo Sorrentino
Brooklyn (John Crowley)
De Palma (Noah Baumbach, Jake Paltrow)