Showing posts with label one battle after another. Show all posts
Showing posts with label one battle after another. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 17, 2026

Winning the final battle

Look I can't complain about One Battle After Another winning best picture.

It was technically only my third highest ranked best picture nominee at #18 for the year, behind Sinners and Train Dreams. But you also know that I struggled with not having it ranked higher, even watching it a second time to see if I could push it up further. I couldn't, but what are the chances, ten years from now, that I'll think those other two films are better?

I won't know for ten years. For now, though, I know that I've just seen one of the really good Oscars in the past few years, where most of the humor landed, most of the speeches were good, and some really good films won some big awards. 

I only started watching around 9, so I need to go to bed, but let me just include my live thoughts as I jotted them down, as I always do on this blog, sometimes with context, some without:

- The opening Weapons bit was funny. Truly inspired, and who doesn't love a good use of the Beastie Boys' "Sabotage?"

- Beautiful stage!

- Ryan Coogler said "Damn."

- The best achievement song was the perfect length, unlike last year's "I Won't Waste Time."

- Amy Madigan's narrative arc is pretty miraculous. She basically went from having essentially no career for the past couple decades to winning an Oscar. Not half bad. Also, I had no idea she was married to Ed Harris. Since 1983!

- Conan is merciless on Trump. Merciless! 

- Great use of Jane Lynch! 

- Surprised about K-Pop Demon Hunters. I'm officially 0-2 on my guesses. (I had Teyana Taylor winning best supporting actress.) Nice to see the one filmmaker encourage her collaborator not to be bullied by the play-off music.

- Great recreation of the best scene in Sinners, just for a nominated song performance! Loved the appearance of Jack O'Connell and the other two actors as well. Miles Caton! 

- Did I mention how great the stage looks?

- The Ventura Crossroads bit, making movies smaller and taller, made me LOL.

- The Frankenstein costume win leaves me 0-4. (I guessed Sinners.) Haven't even gotten to bust out my highlighter yet.

- And the same movie's makeup win makes me 0-5. 

- I was already a bit suss on the casting Oscar. The amount of time they're spending on it makes me more so. But at least I've finally picked a winner correctly. 

- Kumail Nanjiani's bit about turning famous movies into their abbreviated titles is something I wish I'd written. (Remember, I'm the guy who does the movie portmanteaus every year.)

- I'm with you, The Singers winner. I didn't know a tie was a thing either. (And to continue my terrible predictions, I didn't guess either winner.)

- So Sean Penn is a three-time Oscar winner. He's managed to piss me off each time. The first was when he beat out Bill Murray for Lost in Translation. The second was when he beat out Mickey Rourke for The Wrestler. And now it's for not showing up. 

- Oh and just as a reminder, I've only gotten one guess correct so far. 

- It's ironic that Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans gave out the best screenwriting awards because their banter was not well written. (But at least I got both of those right.)

- GOAT Oscar host Billy Crystal shows up to remember Rob Reiner. Pretty great. I was just thinking what a terrible 2025 it was for Crystal. At the start of the year, the house he'd been living in for some 45 years in Pacific Palisades burned to the ground. At the end of the year, his best friend was murdered. Yet he's still here. Brings a tear to your eye. 

- Diane Keaton gets a special segment from Rachel McAdams too. 

- And then finishing with Redford. Duvall probably would have had a good claim too. 

- Speaking of past Oscars hosts ... here's Jimmy Kimmel! 

- As a sign of the increasing obscurity of the documentary feature in the cinematic landscape, I had only even heard of one of the nominees, which I also saw (The Perfect Neighbor). Well, I did guess the one that won, even though I didn't see it. 

- Happy to see the Bridesmaids crew. They are in good form. 

- So glad that her loss for The Substance last year didn't mean Demi Moore's last appearance at the Oscars.

- Autumn Arkapaw's win is a landmark one, but it does make me wonder about Rachel Morrison, who she name-checked and who shot Creed and Black Panther. Wither Rachel? Wait a minute -- she only shot Black Panther. Maryse Alberti shot Creed. What is it with Coogler and the female DPs? Good on him. 

- Lionel Richie looks great for 76.

- Boo on playing off the poor Korean guy who won best song. 

- Okay the PTA win sets up OBAA for best picture. 

- I knew the odds had shifted for Michael B. Jordan, having paid enough attention to hear that buzz in the last few days. Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. Richly deserved for my second favorite film of the year, which has probably just gotten its last Oscar. (Also, though I am only vaguely aware of Timothee Chalamet's relentless Oscars campaign, I'm glad whatever the try-hard things he was up to did not get rewarded.)

- Happy for Jessie Buckley, even though I did not like Hamnet

- A little Ewan and Nicole for a 25th anniversary for Moulin Rouge! And even better news, Nicole Kidman looks normal. 

- And it was right at this time that the 7+ app on my TV said I had been idle too long and I had to exit the app and re-enter. Fortunately, it let me do that while still being able to resume in the exact spot I left off. But what bad timing! 

- As expected, One Battler After Another -- the consensus film of the year, despite Sinners' record 16 nominations -- wins the top prize. And yes I did guess that one right. I didn't really know PTA's persona before now, and I thought he came off great. 

- And one last bit with Conan! All his choices worked. 

Really good show! 

On to the next one. 

Saturday, January 24, 2026

Fighting the battles of 2025






Too similar to my 2024 wrap-up post? Here, you can have a look if you don't remember. 

Alex Garland's Civil War and Paul Thomas Anderson's One Battle After Another are, in many ways, speaking to the same divisions in the current American sociopolitical landscape. In fact, I referenced the former in my review of the latter. So is it a sign of progress that this one at least has a second identity as a comedy? 

Few of us were laughing this year as Donald Trump ran roughshod over the constitution and continued to flood the zone with so much scandal that it was not possible to meaningful prosecute him for any of it, and even in some cases, to remember it two weeks later. 

But One Battle After Another was the movie of the year -- not in my rankings but in the zeitgeist -- because it was the best of a lot of movies that are starting to try to deal with the very real form of fascism taking hold in the U.S. It's too soon to have gotten many/any films that were conceived of wholly after Trump won his second presidency, but art tends to reflect the times around it, mirroring what we're going through even when the timelines for its creation don't match up with current events. This was such a big year for cinematic attempts to topple fascism that by the end of the year, we were kind of rolling our eyes at them, since so many lazy versions were thrown at us in the hopes that we'd mistake them for vigorous ones. 

In everything from Wicked: For Good to Zootopia 2 to The Penguins Lessons to The Secret Agent to The Long Walk to The Running Man to The Assessment to The Electric State to Eddington to Tron: Ares to Bugonia, our dictatorial overlords were on the run, and so what if not all of those movies were good? Actually I do like most of those. The point is, if Trump can flood the zone with nonsense, filmmakers can flood the zone with reminders of the dangers of oppression and silence, and maybe eventually, it will sink through our first few layers and prompt action -- at least at the polls.

The real-world reminder of just what a fascist state looks like came most recently when an ICE agent, blissfully unencumbered by any fears of negative consequences to his person, shot an unarmed driver in the face, just because she happened to be actually protesting him or in proximity to those who were. That was actually one week into 2026. Which means we could get another post a lot like this one at the end of this year. 

Best and worst performers of the year

As usual I'm here to shine a light on people who happened to appear in multiple movies I liked, or multiple movies I disliked. "Appear" doesn't have to mean in front of the camera, though it usually does. Because getting a lot of work, and being good or bad in all of it, are the key criteria for inclusion, I'm of course not focusing on people who did one really awesome thing, or one really terrible thing. And I did have a pretty hard time coming up with both lists this year. It's a flawed exercise at best, and yet I can't quit it. 

Three who had a good year

Elle Fanning - There were few slam-dunk choices this year in the sense of actors or other movie collaborators who had multiple movies that were really high on my list. But I'm leading off with Elle Fanning because she's long been a favorite of mine, and 2025 showcased the range of her abilities, some of it quite unexpected. The unexpected part was how funny she was in Predator: Badlands (#5), which is not within the anticipated range of outcomes for a movie series involving a murderous alien that can cloak itself. Typically, there's nary a laugh in these movies, including the great one from a few years ago, Prey, another top ten movie for me. But Fanning, in the dual role of two different androids, made me laugh out loud several times as her legless character rides around on the back of the predator, kind of like a wisecracking C3PO to his Chewbacca. Her exact lines of dialogue are things I no longer remember, but in the moment they tickled me pink. Of course, this movie also requires her to play a more sinister android, the one you see above, and she's great at that as well. Fanning's second 2025 film was not one I was as high on as many people, some of whom just helped Sentimental Value (#49) nab a best picture nomination yesterday. I will say that her character was perhaps my favorite thing about it, and yes, I recognize it's strange to expend that sort of praise on the single American in a movie full of Norwegians. It's more what she does with this character that, again, surprised me. You expect her Rachel Kemp to be set up as a catty rival to the daughter (Renate Reinsve) of Stellan Skarsgard's film director, but Fanning has no interest in playing the role that way (which, it should be said, is also a credit to director Joachim Trier's take on the material). In fact, I found her final scene in the film to be incredibly touching, both as a further departure from the character a lesser movie would have given us, and as a look inside the insecure and broken parts of a successful Hollywood actress. Fanning is the best kind of successful Hollywood actress, continuing to show us her impressive craft without ever having to compromise on her choices. 

Mark Hamill - Speaking of long-time favorites, this is my longest time favorite, considering that Star Wars was the first film I ever saw in the theater. (I may have seen a Disney movie before then, but as far as I remember it, it was Star Wars.) So I had to honor Hamill for his interesting supporting work in two 2025 films that I liked quite a bit, both of which happen to be adaptations of Stephen King stories -- especially since I don't know how many more chances the 74-year-old is going to get at this sort of honor. The first is The Life of Chuck (#14), which isn't going to get a lot more year-end love from me as it fell outside my top ten and isn't something I've otherwise been writing about. Here Hamill plays the grandfather to Chuck as a boy, in scenes that play out of chronological order from several different time periods of the boy's life. It was the sort of role that made me appreciate what an interesting career Hamill has had, from being destined for the sort of career Harrison Ford did end up having, to becoming a man primarily known for voice work, to playing the kind of sturdy grandfather figure we see here, as though he'd been playing grandfathers his entire career. There's nothing particularly outstanding about the work other than how it completes the package of the ambitious whole of Mike Flanagan's film. Although I thought Hamill could have been used a bit more in The Long Walk (#58), it provided a great reminder of the range that, again, we never imagined Luke Skywalker might have. From a kind Peter Falk type in Chuck to a sadistic military leader in Walk, Hamill reminds us that he spent the middle of his career as a villain, voicing the Joker on the Batman animated series. And sure we hiss this figure who is the embodiment of a fascist government that puts on a competition to walk its competitors into the ground, but it's not because Hamill has left him with only the single dimension of villainy. We appreciate the way Hamill has given this malevolent man the nuance to make him human. After starting out more myth than man, Hamill has been playing complex humans like this for the length of a surprisingly durable career.

Emily Mortimer - I don't look back at 2025 and think "What an Emily Mortimer sort of year that was!" But the fact remains, she was in two movies that finished in my 21 to 30, and in one of them, she had a role that went beyond just being an actor. In the other, I didn't even realize it was her at first, which is how seamlessly she fit in. So when I was looking into Sally Hawkins, to see if she had this kind of good year based on her performance in Bring Her Back, I came to realize that Hawkins had actually bowed out of the Paddington series prior to Paddington in Peru (#29) -- and that she was replaced by, you guessed it, Emily Mortimer. Apparently this did not make some Paddington fans happy, but the fact that I didn't notice the change was a good sign of how well Mortimer fit into the Paddington world. And since this was actually my favorite of the three Paddington movies -- sorry to those of you who are gaga for Paddington 2 -- Mortimer now has a weird claim within the series that, at least for me personally, Hawkins does not have. Her role is very small in Jay Kelly (#30), such that I barely even remember it within the context of the film. But that's because she's doing something different on here, namely, she co-wrote the movie with Noah Baumbach. Now this is not in my top five Baumbach films of all time, but it's a lot better than some Baumbach movies that displeased me over the past decade or so, such as The Meyerowitz Stories and Mistress America. I have one friend who hates this movie, but darned if its cumulative impact didn't get me -- and in that way we can credit the writing. In her first feature writing credit, following only work on two TV series, Mortimer gave us a poignant contemplation of how we can mispend our lives without realizing it -- even if we are not famous Hollywood actors. "If done well," I wrote in my review, "these stories should make us think of our own lives, our own regrets, as you don't have to be an internationally known celebrity to have casually neglected your children until the point it's too late." In 2025, Mortimer took two things that had previously already been good -- the Paddington series and Noah Baumbach's career -- and added something to make them better. Not bad for an actress who, at age 54, should already be closing up shop, by the usual standards of Hollywood. 

Honorable mentions*: Benicio del Toro (One Battle After Another, The Phoenician Scheme), Julia Garner (Wolf Man, Weapons, minus Fantastic Four: First Steps), Keke Palmer (Good Fortune, One of Them Days, minus The Pickup)

* - One or more of these might have made my main list, except I can't expend 300 words on someone who had a bad movie mixed in with the good -- preferably not even as an honorable mention, though beggars can't be choosers. 

Three who had a bad year

Paul Rudd - Paul Rudd works for me in everything. He didn't work for me in anything in 2025. In fact, he so didn't work for me that he appeared in three different films that didn't work for me, two of which saw him as the prospective prey of large, vicious creatures, only one of which is traditionally considered large and vicious. That last is the worst of his 2025 films for me, Anaconda (#169), in which for the first time I found Rudd's character actually unlikable. The movie's only been out for a month so it may not be right to spoil it already, but sending his friends into a dangerous jungle to make a movie he doesn't have the rights to make was just a bridge too far in terms of my rooting interests in him not becoming snake food. This idea was there on the page, it just wasn't there on the screen. Then there was the idea that was never even on the page, it was only on the t-shirt -- you know, that t-shirt you've seen where a majestic unicorn is impaling someone through the chest with his horn. That t-shirt seemed to be the only inspiration behind Death of a Unicorn (#139), a film I wanted to love that just sat there and did nothing for me. I'm not sure in what way I expected this to be glorious, but the movie missed the mark on any attempt to reach that neighborhood. But I was probably most disappointed not to get on the wavelength of Friendship (#149), especially since I consider myself a certified lover of Tim Robinson's I Think You Should Leave and consider Ben Stiller's The Cable Guy a foundational text. I wanted to be the guy who shook my head in sympathetic yet mildly superior pity at the plebes who didn't get what was so funny about this movie, but instead, it was me who didn't get it, and Rudd's inconsistently portrayed character was a big part of that. Maybe Tim Robinson is best in the small doses of three-minute sketches, since the gaps of silence between laughs were deafening here. Even one of the most charming ageless wonders in Hollywood can have an off year, and Rudd certainly had it in 2025. 

Eva Longoria - Anyone who had been missing Eva Longoria got their fill of her in 2025. Truth is, she never went away -- but you had to see the right things in order to find her. Or in 2025, the wrong things. And I really don't like to include her here because I watched season 4 of Only Murders in the Building only a month ago -- which was not from 2025 in addition to not being a movie, so it can't count here in her favor -- and really enjoyed her playing herself in that season. But the truth is I saw three Eva Longoria movies that came out in 2025 and not a one of them finished higher in my rankings than #156. The first was the worst, and by that I mean, the worst of the year. In War of the Worlds (#184), she plays one of the characters impossibly captured on one of the screens in front of an inert Ice Cube -- inert both physically and emotionally -- who sees an alien invasion through an ever-changing live stream of video feeds, many of which have no logical cinematographer. I won't get sidetracked on a rant about all the terrible things in War of the Worlds, but obviously the failure of the movie is not the fault of one of its supporting characters. That theme continues with the Christmas movie Oh. What. Fun. (#172), where Longoria has the small role of a TV talk show host modeled after Oprah, who gives hope to the main character (Michelle Pfeiffer) that she might win a mother-of-the-year contest. Again, guilt by association with this truly garish Christmas movie that was, sadly, the only Christmas movie released in 2025 that I watched during the Christmas season. And I don't actually remember her role in the "best" of these films, The Pickup (#156), which was, I suppose, a mostly inoffensive buddy action movie on one of the streamers, of which there were so many in 2025, this one starring Eddie Murphy and Pete Davidson. I'm sure I enjoyed Longoria's presence in it well enough, as she really has maintained that effervescence that she always had back in her glory days. But the movie was mid as hell. Since Longoria does keep popping up in several projects a year, a pretty good feat now that she has turned 50, maybe I'll have better luck randomly avoiding them rather than randomly hitting them in 2026. 

Rachel Brosnahan - Let me start with a completely irrational bias against Rachel Brosnahan. I have never watched a minute of her show The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, but I got the impression there was something too clever by half about that show that made me skeptical about the value of its lead performer -- especially since I didn't know her from anything else, and I guess I'm prone to snap judgments about things that involve a lot of hype but that I'm not a part of. Unfortunately, in the first year I really grappled with her film career, she did nothing to disabuse me of that notion. I didn't love the opening argument between Lois and Clark in Superman (#181) the way some people did, but I was open to the particular spitfire energy she brought to the role. By the time the movie had totally devolved for me, which happened pretty quickly, she's flying around spaceships and blending into the movie's chaotic wallpaper, something worthier of spitting out than calling spitfire. (As I mentioned yesterday, I hate to side with Superman haters who are on the opposite side of the political aisle from me, but at least we dislike the movie for different reasons.) But the Lois Lane here is woman of the year compared to the retrograde, and very brief, role she plays in the truly odd spy movie The Amateur (#170). Retrograde in what way? Well, spoiler alert, she gets fridged! Did you know wives still got fridged to help fuel their husband's quest for vengeance in movies made in 2025? Apparently they do, at least in this one. Rami Malek's unconvincing performance as a "normal guy" -- Malek can never play a normal guy -- was more to blame for the failure of this movie certainly than Brosnahan, and yes, it's possible there are people in my honorable mentions who are more deserving of this third spot. But I felt I could better explain why Brosnhan didn't work for me in her movies than why they didn't work for me in theirs, or at least that's what I'm telling myself now that I've written this. (And besides, I didn't think it was fair to dump on either of Ice Cube's terrible movies, Anaconda and War of the Worlds, a second time after I let those movies have it with Rudd and Longoria.)

Dishonorable mentions: Ice Cube (Anaconda, War of the Worlds), Brandon Sklenar (The Housemaid, Drop), Ayo Edibiri (Opus, After the Hunt

The year I stopped liking animation

Do you know what's been a constant about my movie lists for about a million years in a row? And yes, I realize that is approximately 999,970 more years than I've been doing this.

I have an animated movie in my top 25, that's what. At worst my top 40. 

Do you know what my highest ranking animated movie in 2025 is? 

It's Predator: Killer of Killers, all the way down at #69. 

Now you might say this is just because I didn't watch as many animated movies as I have in some years. That's true. But I did watch four others and they are all lower than that: Elio (#96), KPop Demon Hunters (#107), Death Does Not Exist (#116) and Zootopia 2 (#117). 

So even with two of those five being adult-oriented animation, I still could not hit on anything I really loved. (Killer of Killers is quite good, but it just got steadily pushed down as the year went on.)

And the ones I did skip?

Dog Man - If I had kids a few years younger, we would have gone to this. 

Plankton: The Movie - I think there were at least two Spongebob movies this year. I don't do Spongebob.

Smurfs - I completely forgot there was a Smurfs movie this year.

The Bad Guys 2 - We did see the original (and I didn't care for it), but again, my kids have moved on. 

And then some other stuff for babies, as there always is.

So I guess the question is, did my tastes change, or did my kids' tastes change? Or are the animated movies just not good anymore?

Actually this sort of seems to be the year animation went international. I saw one of those in KPop Demon Hunters, but I did not see the year's highest grossing movie, Ne Zha 2, in part because of its length. But on that international front, you know they were digging deep when niche stuff like Demon Slayer: Kinetsu No Yaiba the Movie gets nominated for a Golden Globe. At least Chainsaw Man: The Movie - Reze Arc, which someone reviewed for my site, didn't make the cut.

So my 2025 in animation is probably a combination of all of the above factors. What remains to be seen is whether I can get my love back in 2026. I guess one of the first up will be Goat. We'll see how it goes. 

A year without tears

I don't cry in a lot of movies, but there are almost always one or two each year that get me. And more often than not, I end up making that movie my #1 of the year. (It's happened twice already in the 2020s, in any case.)

But 2025 was a dry year. 

Hamnet (#148), one of my final viewings of the year, had a chance to dampen things up a bit. That is, if I did not consider it overwrought and emotionally manipulative. Not only did I not get close to crying, I didn't even really feel sorrow. The title character's death scene is kind of like something out of a demonic possession movie, and since it comes only halfway through, it's timed poorly within the narrative to make the tears happen. By the time the movie actually ends, we've been living with Chloe Zhao's attempts to make us cry for almost an hour.

Did the exhausting year that it was just ring me out? Or is this just proof of how difficult it is to actually pull this off? 

I only cried once in 2024, in Wicked, and in 2023, when my #1 was also not a weepie, there were three movies in my top five that pushed me to the brink of tears -- and whether I squeezed out any salty ones or not, I count that as an emotionally rich year.

That emotional richness didn't find me in the movies of 2025. Much as I loved my top ten -- maybe a little less than I usually love my top ten -- none of them had me wavering between misty and dry eyes. I liked them for different reasons than that they penetrated through to my emotional core.

If there was one thing that I could have seen happening, it was spectacle tears for Sinners (#2), during "the scene" -- because I was just so thrilled by what Ryan Coogler had decided to do, and what he was currently in the processing of pulling off. But I can't lie -- I didn't actually cry.

Given the paucity of examples -- even when my #1 of 2021 and 2022 made me cry, they were among the only ones those years -- I do suspect it's just because that's the hardest thing in movies to do. I said as much in the opening paragraph of my review of Hamnet ... and I only mentioned it in the review because of how hard Zhao was trying, not how close she came to succeeding. 

Ranking the directors with two 2025 movies

In my "three who had a good year" and "three who had a bad year," I'm usually looking particularly hard for directors who made more than one movie in the just-completed year. That relieves the segment from just being a way to talk about actors who happened to be in movies I liked or didn't like. This year, I had so many options on that front that I actually specifically excluded those directors from consideration in the above segment, just so I could talk about them here.

That's right, there were five directors who directed two movies I saw in 2025, and if I'd done my due diligence and watched the other two movies beyond Sex that were released by Norwegian director Dag Johan Haugerud -- there were called Love and Dreams, and might have been hard to come by unless I'd also seen them at MIFF -- then I would have also had one who directed three. 

So without any further ado, here is how those five ranked, from highest average of their two films to lowest. 

1. Richard Linklater 
Movies: Blue Moon (#27), Nouvelle Vague (#31)
Average: 29
Comment: Yes I paid $14.99 to rent Blue Moon as my final viewing this week ... and it was worth it. A director making two movies in the same year is even more impressive when they are as different as these two are, and still both well within the top 20% of my rankings.

2. Dan Trachtenberg
Movies: Predator: Badlands (#5), Predator: Killer of Killers (#69)
Average: 37
Comment: On the surface this is the opposite of Linklater in terms of range ... until you consider how different these two Predator movies are from each other, and from the previous films in the franchise. I mean, the predator isn't even consistently definable as either a villain or a hero across the two movies.

3. Osgood Perkins
Movies: The Monkey (#17), Keeper (#165)
Average: 91
Comment: Perkins wins the "range of outcomes" award here. When I loved The Monkey like I did, I was all ready to declare Perkins "back" after Longlegs was my worst movie of 2024. Then last week I saw Keeper and it was ... not good. 

4. Steven Soderbergh
Movies: Presence (#100), Black Bag (#143)
Average: 121.5 
Comment: I'm not sure why people were falling all over themselves talking about how clever Black Bag was ... unless this is just my dislike for spy movies rearing its head again, which wouldn't surprise me. I loved the concept of Presence, I just wanted more from it in the final analysis. 

5. Paul Feig
Movies: The Housemaid (#121), Another Simple Favor (#160)
Average: 140.5
Comment: When did the director of Bridesmaids become Hollywood's preeminent purveyor of overheated domestic thrillers involving catty women? That is a major step backward. His average would have been even lower except that The Housemaid did some things in its second half to win me back a bit ... before ultimately leaving me cold by the end. 

Ten best non-2025 movies

Once again this year, listing alphabetically the ten best movies I saw in the previous year that were not released in the previous year.

Carrie (2013, Kimberly Peirce) - During my October of horror remakes, I never would have guessed that one of them would elbow out many other worthy candidates to make this list, but the ingredients of Carrie came together for me in just the right way to make that so. 

Fail-Safe (1964, Sidney Lumet) - One of my three five-star non-2025 movies made it in just under the wire among my final viewings of the year, as the kid who grew up with WarGames as one of his favorite films was terrified by this one, mostly for its sheer plausibility -- and that unforgettable final montage of images. 

I'm Still Here (2024, Walter Salles) - The only 2024 best picture nominee I didn't rank last year ended up being worth the wait, with an unforgettable look at the casual malevolence of an oppressive Brazilian government kidnapping its citizens. 

Lake Mungo (2008, Joel Anderson) - A found footage horror movie, still resonating with me in 2025? I can't even remember all the reasons I was so taken with this one, but it reminded me of when this genre was once a goldmine of potential chills. 

The Lion in Winter (1968, Anthony Harvey) - When I wrote about this I called it "Shakespeare for dummies," but I meant that in the best possible sense, as I was struck dumb by the performances and the Shakespearean-lite language used to bring this part of British history to vibrant life. 

Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979, Werner Herzog) - Make that two horror remakes among my best ten movies not released in 2025. Herzog's visionary retelling of this familiar tale is a triumph of cinematography and score. 

Poetry (2010, Lee Chang-dong) - This was on my radar due to a recommendation by Filmspotting guest host Michael Phillips way back at the time it was released, and finally seeing this intimate portrait of a Korean woman fighting the onset of Alzheimer's and a truly shockingly behaved grandson, I found it well worth the wait. 

The Right Stuff (1983, Philip Kaufman) - The best previously unseen film in my Understanding Editing series, this filled in a long-time blind spot for me as a Gen-Xer, as apparently many of my compatriots were regularly watching it on cable. I can see why they adored it, and it surprised me by also being very funny. 

Shoah (1985, Claude Lanzmann) - Yes I watched this 566-minute Holocaust documentary all in one day on June 21st as my 7,000th movie of all time, and it packed every bit of the wallop I expected it to pack. 

Yi Yi (2000, Edward Yang) - It took me some time to embrace Yang's nearly three-hour movie about a contemporary Chinese family, which had eluded my attempts to watch it for a quarter century, but by the end, this too was well worth the wait. 

Statistics 

Here's how many movies I saw, and what sort, by the numbers. 

Movies by star rating on Letterboxd: 5 stars (1), 4.5 stars (17), 4 stars (38), 3.5 stars (35), 3 stars (33), 2.5 stars (23), 2 stars (17), 1.5 stars (10), 1 star (7), 0.5 stars (3)

The big difference from last year is the jump in 4-star movies, from 27 to 38, allowing this to be the first year that something other than 3.5 stars was my most number of rankings. I think this is consistent with me starting to think of 3.5 stars as not a strong enough rating for a movie I enjoyed quite a bit, when it really should be. I'll have to work on that. 

Movies by source: Theater (50) (6 by advanced screening), Netflix (31), Amazon Prime (21), iTunes rental (18), Airplane (17), Amazon rental (14), Screener (11), MIFF (7), Disney+ (7), AppleTV+ (6), Stan (1), Kanopy (1)  

The big difference was a dropoff from 44 to 31 in movies watched on Netflix, so obviously I made up for that in other areas, since I saw seven more movies overall. In fact, rentals through Amazon made up the entire difference as this was a new means of acquiring VOD for me this year, where I'd previously relied almost exclusively on iTunes. I guess that means 14 more movies I sought out intentionally rather than having Netflix serve them up to me passively?

Total new movies watched in the year: 288
Total rewatches: 47
2025 movies seen more than once: 7 (Together, Sinners, Echo Valley, CompanionThe Monkey, One Battle After Another, Resurrection)

Another name for ...

The Gorge is ... Echo Valley
Jay Kelly
is ... The Actor
Avatar: Fire and Ash is ... One Battle After Another
The Roses is ... Splitsville
If I Had Legs I'd Kick You is ... Die My Love
Oh, Hi! is ... Sorry, Babe
Oh, Hi! is ... Honey Don't! 
The Old Guard 2 is ... Death Does Not Exist

Discoveries

A$AP Rocky (If I Had Legs I'd Kick YouHighest 2 Lowest)
Chase Infiniti (One Battle After Another)
Eva Victor (Sorry, Baby)
Alfie Williams (28 Years Later)
Kathleen Chalfant (Familiar Touch)

Welcome back 

Pamela Anderson (The Naked Gun)
Orlando Bloom (Deep Cover)
Aziz Ansari (Good Fortune)
Amy Madigan (Weapons)
Cameron Diaz (Back in Action)

Farewell

Udo Kier (The Secret Agent)
Julian McMahon (The Surfer)
James Ransone (Black Phone 2)
Tony Todd (Final Destination: Bloodlines

and of course

Rob Reiner (Spinal Tap II: The End Continues

(We lost plenty of others in 2025, some of whom were memorialized already on this blog, but these were the ones who actually appeared in 2025 movies.)

Lighting round

Highest ranked best picture nominee: Sinners (#2)
Lowest ranked best picture nominee: Hamnet (#148)
Best picture nominee I haven't seen: Marty Supreme 
Film that should never have been a best picture nominee: F1
Sequels I'm glad were not rubber-stamped as best picture nominees: Wicked: For Good and Avatar: Fire and Ash
Appearing in the most best picture nominees: Kerry Condon (F1, Train Dreams)
Most deserving Oscar nomination for acting (female): Rose Byrne, If I Had Legs I'd Kick You
Least deserving Oscar nomination for acting (female): Jessie Buckley, Hamnet 
Most deserving Oscar nomination for acting (male): Michael B. Jordan, Sinners
Least deserving Oscar nomination for acting (male): Jacob Elordi, Frankenstein (though I thought he was good)
Sophomore directing effort that lost me: Celine Song, Materialists (#178)
Sophomore directing effort that won me over: Danny and Michael Philippou, Bring Her Back (#20)
Most surprising director: Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck, Freaky Tales (#42)
Least surprising director: David Ayer, A Working Man (#176)
Low ranking I'll get the most guff about: Superman (#181)
Low ranking I'll get the least guff about: War of the Worlds (#184)
High ranking I'll get the most guff about: Together (#1)
High ranking I'll get the least guff about: Sinners (#2)
Best reboot: The Naked Gun (#19)
Worst reboot: Superman (#181)
Best umpteenth movie in a series: Predator: Badlands (#5)
Worst umpteenth movie in a series: The Conjuring: Last Rites (#168)
Biggest surprise: Wolf Man (#15)
Biggest disappointment: Mickey 17 (#175)
Worst title for a good movie: A Big Bold Beautiful Journey (#24)
Best title for a bad movie: Clown in a Cornfield (#173)
Best head of state: Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister
Worst head of state: Donald Trump (no film listed)
Most heads of state: Idris Elba (A House of Dynamite, Heads of State)
Best movie featuring a revolving restaurant: Final Destination: Bloodlines (#28)
Worst movie featuring a revolving restaurant: Drop (#162)
Best movie named after a Bloom County character: Steve (#93)
Worst movie named after a Bloom County character: Opus (#138)
Best Stephen King adaptation: The Life of Chuck (#14)
Best Stephen King adaptation about walking or running: The Long Walk (#58)
Worst Stephen King adaptation about walking or running: The Running Man (#166)
Best outcome for a dog in a horror movie: Good Boy
Worst outcome for a dog in a horror movie: Together
Most syllables: Vulcanizadora 
Fewest syllables: Him
Best movie with a season in the title: When Fall is Coming (#99)
Worst movie with a season in the title: I Know What You Did Last Summer (#163)
Title that best describes my ranking process: Highest 2 Lowest
Title that second best describes my ranking process: A Big Bold Beautiful Journey
Title that describes how I feel at the end of my ranking process: Last Breath


One more formal wrap-up post tomorrow with my annual portmanteaus post, then a deep-dive into my #1 movie, set to drop on Monday my time. 

Monday, January 12, 2026

Nagging inconsistencies in One Battle After Another

I teased you yesterday that I might not reveal, at least not before I reveal my rankings in ten days, whether One Battle After Another rose in my estimation after a second viewing. 

Clearly there was a part of me that wanted it to rise, to jump into the upper half of my top ten so my feelings would be consistent with those of the rest of the critical community, to say nothing of the audience community. After all, I did watch it for the first time on the same day I returned from Europe, which could have muted my appreciation of the film for all sorts of different reasons. 

Well, I held off on revealing this for exactly one day. 

And I'm writing about it because I do want to air some of the nitpicks that prevent me from embracing it quite as warmly as some other people do. (I do embrace it, just not as much as they do.)

Let's start with Leonardo DiCaprio's Bob Ferguson, a.k.a. Ghetto Pat, a.k.a. Rocketman. 

The thing people seem to relish most about the character -- and I would argue the movie, at least from a comedic perspective -- is his ongoing tete-a-tete with Comrade Joshua, who refuses, over the course of two different phone calls, to give Bob the rendezvous point because Bob can't answer the question "What time is it?"

Bob's anger over Joshua's apparent pettiness is funny, though Joshua is only doing what he's been told to do, based on prudent precautions, especially at a time when their whole network is threatened. That's not what bothers me. It's Bob's attitude toward these safeguards that is problematic, given his own recent behavior toward his daughter, Willa.

Bob was the one exercising possibly superfluous caution, when his daughter left for the dance, what, an hour earlier? Even though this was just an ordinary Tuesday at their house -- okay probably a Friday, since they don't usually hold school dances on Tuesdays -- Bob had to give her his whole song and dance about taking the trust device with her. You know, the thing his fellow revolutionary programmed to play a tune when in range of another such trust device.

Obviously this bit is just for our benefit in the audience, but it does play awkwardly within the reality of these characters' world. For one, it's been 16 years since Bob fled with baby Willa, and they have no reason to think, on this particularly Tuesday, their years of quiet and successful hiding was about to be overturned. He wouldn't need to specifically tell her to bring the trust device; bringing it or not bringing it would just be part of their standard routine. They wouldn't be discussing it this night, one way or another. 

Given that Bob does, however, make a big deal out of it, it's hard to then yield him the moral high ground an hour later when he takes the same eyeball-rolling perspective toward Comrade Joshua that his daughter is taking toward him. We meet Bob as a defender of these methods of identifying simpatico souls, so it's hard to fully be on his side when he repeatedly tears Joshua a new one for requiring the same standard of caution. (Or for us to be on the same side as the other comrade, who ultimately gets Bob approved, but who then makes Joshua apologize, genuinely and profusely, just for doing his job.)

Bob specfiically talks about how he doesn't remember the "code speak," but didn't he tirelessly teach his daughter the same code speak? When she's confronted in the high school bathroom by Deandra -- that trust device sure came in handy quickly -- she repeats back the necessary phrases without any difficulty. She could only do this, of course, if Bob had taught them to her. Not only taught them, but repeatedly drilled them in, so she would never forget them. Which she did not. (Incidentally, you'd think having the trust device would probably be enough, but I guess Deandra wanted an additional level of proof -- even if this 16-year-old standing in front of her could not possibly be working for Steve Lockjaw, and looks exactly like Deandra would expect her to look.)

I think I might be even more troubled by the callback to this code speak in the finale. I probably don't need to issue a SPOILER ALERT but let's just get it out of the way just to be sure.

So after Willa has dispatched the Christmas Adventurer, who could not respond properly to her listing of the names of the three TV shows, she applies the same standard on Bob as he timidly creeps into range of her weapon. I believe the first time she calls out the names of the shows, she hasn't yet clearly seen him. She's obviously amped up and on high alert after just killing a man. 

But the second time she asks for the names of the shows and wants Bob's response, she's already heard his voice, already seen the unmistakeable shambling shape of his bathrobe, and yet she's still not certain this isn't just some exceptional Bob impersonator. I think we are meant to believe she's shell-shocked, but Anderson is trying to create a legitimate worry in the audience that she might shoot Bob, to increase the tension of the moment. I just don't buy it. She's been so eager for a final delivery from this nightmare scenario that it just reads as false that she would be genuinely questioning Bob's identity.

And while we're on the topic of contrivances, I've got a few more:

1) After all is said and done, they just return to living in the same house again? Yes they believe Steve Lockjaw is dead -- he is, but not in the way they think -- but that only means the end of his own pursuit of the pair. Aren't they still wanted for domestic terrorism? Aren't there others who would still be coming after them -- especially at their last known address?

2) The only reason Willa even gets to the end of the movie alive is because the Native American tracker hired by Lockjaw has second thoughts and decides not to leave her in the clutches of the murderous mercenaries, who will kill her without blinking. We are meant to believe that this man does things for pragmatic reasons only. We know he has enough of a code of honor not to kill children, but we also know he knows he's actually playing a role in Willa's imminent death by delivering her to the murderous mercenaries. What did he see about them that would have caused him to change his mind? Did one of the guys have too many tattoos for his liking? So this man, who exists pragmatically and consorts with dirty characters like Steve Lockjaw, decides to his endanger his own life to free Willa, and indeed, does pay for it with his life. I'm tempted to say the only reason he does this is that he's a Native American and the film is squeamish about portraying him negatively, but I think there would have been a cleaner and more plausible way to write this.

3) The only reason Bob even gets to end of the movie alive is because of the extremely poor chain of custody once he's arrested in Baktan Cross. You can almost see Anderson waving his hand through this sequence of events, where two hospital workers conspire to get him out of his handcuffs and down a fire escape. Given that Bob is specifically listed as a target by Lockjaw when he lays out the mission parameters to his team -- a target they planned to "bag and tag," no less -- it seems incomprehensible that there would not have been someone, even Lockjaw himself, overseeing this man in a bathrobe taken into custody after falling off a roof. The arresting officer would not mention this suspicious bit of behavior, especially by a guy who was clearly not an illegal immigrant? How could Lockjaw's team, always portrayed as ruthlessly efficient, botch this one so badly?

My feelings about One Battle After Another did not go up after a second viewing, but they did not go down either. The movie is sitting in the exact spot in my rankings where it sat before I watched it a second time, which you will see, in a few weeks, is quite high.

But I don't think these are just nitpicks. They are, in some cases, genuine plot holes. I didn't even mention the contrived nature of Lockjaw's villain ranting as he hands Willa over to the tracker. If he truly wanted the tracker to believe that she was a "bad hombre" who wouldn't be missed, someone guilty of genuine if unspecified crimes against the U.S.A., why would he indulge in a final rant about how if things had gone differently they could have gotten to know each other? You would not talk about the missed opportunity of getting to know a drug dealer. Who knows how much this contributed to the tracker's ultimate decision to free Willa.

Films heaped with the kind of praise that One Battle After Another has gotten should not have as many questions like this as One Battle After Another has. People are saying it's perfect, when clearly it is not.

So now I have a link I can send to anybody, any time they wonder why I ranked the movie "only" in the spot where I'll end up ranking it. 

Sunday, January 11, 2026

A bad back = more movies

Around this time of year, I tend to take my Letterboxd watchlist, which I've been cultivating all year, and refine it further by writing down a bunch of titles I still realistically plan to see before my ranking deadline, on a piece of paper in my notebook. Then I'll go through and cross them off. Hey, there are fewer and fewer reminders of the way we used to do things in this world. I'll opt in on any I can.

I might be going through more of the realistic titles than I expected to, thanks to a bad back. 

I don't know how it happened, but on Friday, getting up from my desk, I felt a quick, sharp pain in my back. It's important to tie it to that exact moment, because that's the moment something could have "happened," if something did indeed happen. However, I assure you, there was nothing unusual about this rise from my desk chair to my feet. Maybe this is just old age rearing its head.

But I've spent much of the 48 hours since then wondering if it might be something much more serious. 

I wasn't limited in my actions for the rest of the day on Friday, and I even went in our pool -- for the first time this summer -- with my son. (It's been a cool summer, and only just got really hot in the past week.) By dinner time, though, the pain and stiffening in my lower right back got worse, and I took myself up to my bed to watch The Naked Gun. Unfortunately, I started it way too early to have it be the last thing I did that night, but also too late to try to watch something else after it finished. Around that 10:45 finish time, it was all I could do to keep my eyes open. (Loved The Naked Gun, by the way, and hope to write about it separately at some point.)

That early sleep time left me awake at 3:30 a.m., wondering if I might have appendicitis. 

Now, I'd already googled the symptoms the day before. For appendicitis, the pain is supposed to start in your belly and then move to your lower abdomen. There's also supposed to be fever, nausea and vomiting. I had none of those symptoms. However, I also googled whether back pain could be part of appendicitis and of course it can be. AI will confirm any worry you have if you just phrase it correctly.

This all might have been less worrisome if my wife were in town, but she's not. She's visiting her mother in Tasmania and won't be back until the 18th. So it was on me to decide if I had appendicitis and then if I needed to take myself to the hospital, and how soon. Could I wait for my younger son to wake up, between 7 and 8? Did I dare wait for the older one to wake up, between 11 and 12? Or should I go right now?

I did eventually fall back to sleep, and the symptoms had not worsened by the time I finally got out of bed. So I decided to just monitor them.

They never got any worse, but it was to the point where I couldn't properly bend over, and any action that required any sort of support from my right hip/lower back was only accomplished with pain and great difficulty. So I knew that instead of taking the kids out to go clothes shopping that day, I would spend the day in bed, hoping that this was the right means of tending to the issue, which I was now thinking of more as a slipped disc. However, I'd also be attuned to any worsening, spreading, or indeed, the onset of nausea. 

So yes, I watched two more movies yesterday than I would have. I might have eventually scratched them off my long list, but the daytime viewing slot for my first movie -- On Becoming a Guinea Fowl -- guaranteed its inclusion on this year's list, when the Zambian film might otherwise have fallen into the "too hard bucket" if I'd left it for one night after work.

I found myself frustrated with this film for reasons having to do with frustration with the characters. I think the point of this film is that the patriarchy in this village is poisonous, dismissing the concerns of the female characters, many of whom have been abused in some way by the man who has just died, Uncle Fred, whose funeral celebrations seem to go on for more than a week. I think it was the director's point that the memorializing of this awful man is way out of scale with what he actually deserved, but this was a case where I felt like I demanded a justice that this film was not ready to give us -- or at least not in any clear, traditional manner. The actual ending of the film is open to interpretation. 

I also split this movie in half, thinking I'd have the chance to watch the whole thing before the Celtics game, but then needing to take a nap. I suppose that did not help it.

The next movie I watched all the way through, but this is one that I didn't need to scratch off my list because I'd already seen it. Yes, I had my second date with One Battle After Another, which was another thing that could have fallen by the wayside, this time because of its length. But I did want to give the movie one more shot at being higher on my list -- where it was already set to receive a very respectable ranking. Whether that happened or not, I will save for another time.

Finally I finished with Splitsville, probably a good thing to watch while my wife was out of town, given its subject matter involving open marriages. Really liked this one as well.

I might have gone into more about all of these movies except the purpose of this post is mostly to just tell you that I'm here and still watching movies. It had been a few days since I last posted, which is unusual in January, where I'm usually so overflowing with content that I have twice, in recent years, had streaks of more than 30 consecutive days with a post at this time of year. That ain't happening this year. Again, 2025 has been a challenging one.

And now, at least if I do suddenly pass from a ruptured appendix, you'll have one last post from me before I go. 

Thursday, December 11, 2025

My battle with One Battle

I think One Battle After Another is a very enjoyable movie.

It's funny, it's entertaining, it's full of spark, it's made incredibly well, it has good performances and it has a definite resonance within the cultural and political moment in which we currently find ourselves.

But ... 

... it's only barely in my top half of Paul Thomas Anderson's films. That's saying more about the man and his filmography than it's saying about the movie, but it's worth noting.

And ... 

... I can't help feeling that there was something about it that I didn't fully, all the way, 100% connect with.

And also ... 

... I did watch it jet-lagged, on the day I got back from Europe, though it's really saying something about the movie's excitement level that I never fell asleep.

And yet it seems to be the consensus best film of 2025, with a few other contenders potentially staking a claim, but most of those being movies that fewer people have seen or in some cases have not really fully been released yet. 

At the moment, it doesn't have a place in my top ten of the year, and if I'm not careful it will fall out of my top 20.

How concerned should I be about this?

When I got together last Friday night for a gathering with three other ReelGood writers for what we call the ReelGood Christmas Party -- usually just drinks out somewhere, though last year I did host it at my house -- I asked them to come up with top fives, hearkening back to our days when we used to podcast and when that would be part of our year-end show. No one else prepared a list, but I told them they didn't really have to, so I don't feel unsupported or anything.

But I told them my top five of 2025 nonetheless, a work very much in progress as you know, since I will not be finalizing it until January 22nd. And of course, One Battle After Another was not in that top five. It wouldn't have made the top ten, as I've said, and it's only just barely in my top 20.

When one of the other guys thought about his own answers to this question extemporaneously, he said One Battle would definitely be in it ... and had a hard time thinking of many/any others. 

This doesn't surprise me of course, and I mention it as just the most recent example of the overwhelming love directed at OBAA this year. Another example is the many Golden Globe nominations it just received, nine all told, with five acting nominations among those. (All deserved, I should say.)

Am I doing this wrong by not loving it more than I do?

And does OBAA still stand head and shoulders above the other contenders in a year with more genuinely beloved films? Or is this so good that it's just one of the best films of any year?

Suffice it to say that all the love is definitely rubbing off on me, in both positive and negative ways. On the positive side, it's forcing me to reassess and remind myself of the many things I did love about the movie. On the negative side, it's getting my hackles up a bit.

I have nits to pick with the movie, but I do, for sure, find it entertaining, provocative, exciting and fun. It's all the things you want a movie to be.

Except for me that translates to a solid four stars, not the 4.5 or five stars usually attained by my best movies of the year.

Well, this battle will have one more skirmish before all is said and done. I've determined to watch it again before I finalize my list, which will be good because I know my wife wants to watch it too. It'll have one more day in the sun. 

And we'll have to see, then, if I do love it enough to promote it ... or whether I promote it just out of the insecurity of being so obviously wrong in not loving it as much as everyone else does.

Wednesday, October 8, 2025

Leo checks another off his list

Given that Leonardo DiCaprio has made six films with Martin Scorsese, and he doesn't exactly have the highest output among working actors, he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who might be steadily working his way through the A list of directors not named Scorsese.

But One Battle After Another marks the latest in that somewhat stealthy quest to cheat on Marty.

Now that he's added Paul Thomas Anderson to his war chest, it's time to really consider that war chest. Here are the other top-flight directors he's worked with over the years:

Baz Luhrmann (twice)
Quentin Tarantino (twice)
Christopher Nolan
Steven Spielberg
Ridley Scott
Danny Boyle
Woody Allen
James Cameron
Sam Raimi
Sam Mendes
Clint Eastwood
Adam McKay
Alejandro G. Innaritu

Seriously, is this a track record that can be matched by anyone else? Either working or retired? Or dead?  

I know not everyone thinks DiCaprio is a good actor, even though he's won an Oscar. I count myself among those who found his performance excessively mannered in Killers of the Flower Moon, just as one example.

But don't tell that to the 15 directors mentioned above, who account for some of the most beloved and acclaimed movies of the nearly three decades that DiCaprio has been a movie star. (He's been an actor for at least a decade longer than that. In fact, he has a credit going all the way back to 1979.) 

Still, he doesn't have everybody in his war chest -- not yet anyway. Here are ten more big directors he hasn't gotten to yet, but I could see it happening.

Wes Anderson - We know Leo can play a Character with a capital C, whether or not he always pulls it off. That could make him a natural to wind up in one of Anderson's ensembles. Hey, you didn't necessarily think Tom Hanks would show up in an Anderson movie either, but now he's been in two of them. 

Joel & Ethan Coen - Sort of the same logic there. George Clooney and Brad Pitt have both played the sorts of roles for the Coens that DiCaprio could also play for them. Whether they will actually make any movies again together, after a total of three solo projects in the past couple years, is a separate question.

Darren Aronofsky - Considering that a friend of mine likened One Battle After Another to an Aronofsky movie, and Aronofsky came of age pretty much exactly alongside both Andersons and Nolan, with Tarantino only a couple years ahead of them, this seems like a logical fit at some point in the future.  

David Fincher - Another guy who has come along in parallel with the guys above, though I think of his most similar rival as Nolan. Couldn't you see Leo throwing himself into the type of role that Jake Gyllenhaal played in Zodiac

Sofia Coppola - Have to get a woman in here, right? Even though it does not appear Leo has actually ever been directed by a woman. Although DiCaprio's performance style seems anathema to the sort of films Coppola makes, they do have the Italian thing in common. I think of her father as the main rival, at least back in the day, for Leo's mentor Scorsese. 

Spike Lee - This one might be a stretch, but go with me. Like Scorsese, Lee is a director who shows loyalty to certain actors. Lee's Highest 2 Lowest is his fifth collaboration with Denzel Washington, for example. And though Scorsese has never worked with Washington -- nor DiCaprio with Washington, for that matter -- perhaps these two could work out a "muse trade" and make two really interesting films from it. 

Bong Joon-ho - Bong has now worked with both Gyllenhaal and Robert Pattinson, both of whom can be thought of as heartthrobs who worked to be taken seriously as actors. Nothing could more perfectly describe DiCaprio, whom Titanic made into an instant worldwide heartthrob, after which it took him 18 years to finally win his Oscar. Gyllenhaal and Pattinson are still looking for theirs. 

Richard Linklater - If DiCaprio could list a career he might secretly want to emulate, it might be that of Linklater collaborator Ethan Hawke. Now, I think DiCaprio likes the spotlight too much to take the sort of lower profile roles that Hawke takes. But I think DiCaprio thinks he wants a quirky independent career like that, and Linklater could be the type to usher him in. 

Roman Polanski - DiCaprio already made a movie in which he prevented Polanski's wife, Sharon Tate, from being killed by the Manson family. Polanski is still making movies -- or at least he made one as recently as 2023. Why not? 

Kathryn Bigelow - We need another woman. DiCaprio gets in there through the Cameron connection. Those two are still friendly, right? And hey, just when you thought you hadn't heard from Kathryn Bigelow in a while, she's got a new movie coming out on Netflix later this month: A House of Dynamite

If you see DiCaprio doggedly run through this list in the next 10-15 years, you'll have me to thank. 

Before I leave you, I thought I should check IMDB to see Leo's films in pre-production, to see if any of these last ten directors are covered. They aren't, but did you know that there are no fewer than five future Scorsese projects with DiCaprio attached? That's cute that he thinks he can get to them all, but hey, don't die any time soon Marty. One of those is a biography of Teddy Roosevelt, and then he's also supposed to be playing Ulysses S. Grant in Spielberg's Grant biopic. 

DiCaprio does, however, have one more big director picked out to add to his war chest, one I didn't consider: Damien Chazelle. He's currently set to star in Chazelle's Evel Knievel biopic. So while his future commitments mean DiCaprio may not be going after, may not have the time to go after, most of the people I mentioned, his quest to collect all the A list directors does continue. 

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

Slim pickings for Greek cinema

At one point, I thought I'd be writing a blog post from Greece to tell you about taking one bus after another (two total) to see One Battle After Another on the island of Crete, where we are concluding our trip. (Specifically, in Stalos, which is just outside Chania, for those of you who know the island.)

But Paul Thomas Anderson's new film plays only twice a day at the so-called Mega Place amusement center in Chania, and both those times are problematic for my schedule. One is at 7:30, which takes me right out of dinner with my family, and the other is at 9:30, which leaves me stumbling out of the cinema at well after midnight, not really knowing if either of the buses needed to take me back to my Air BnB will still be running at that time.

So, I'm forgoing what I hoped would be the third and final theatrical viewing on my six-week holiday. I had hoped to fit in one every two weeks, but I guess I should be glad that I worked out the first two without bending my wife's good will out of shape. I'll probably catch it the day after I get back, this Sunday. 

Instead, let me tell you about a movie I watched with Greek subject matter, which I decided to do a couple nights ago when I couldn't figure out anything else.

I'd tried to watch Before Midnight, whose Greek coastal setting has given me some of my ideas of what Greece might be like when I got here. But it's not on Neflix, and I'm somewhat arbitrarily limiting myself to Netflix on my tablet while I'm gone. I could probably figure out how to fire up Amazon Prime but I just haven't bothered. 

So then I searched for Greek content on the streamer, and I gotta tell you, there ain't much.

Most of what's offered are TV shows. However, Netflix does carry a series of movies in a franchise called Loafing and Camouflage, most of which are from the last decade or so, but the first of which actually came out in 1984. A Greek language movie from 1984? Sure, why not?

The only trouble with that one was: No English subtitles! I could put on Greek subtitles, but they are obviously for the Greek hearing impaired as the dialogue is also in Greek. So that one was over before it even started.

I landed on a movie from 2012 I'd never heard of, despite the presence of three prominent actors: Sebastian Koch, Catherine Deneuve and John Cleese. I assume you know the second two. If you aren't familiar with the first, Koch is the German actor who starred in The Lives of Others and Never Look Back. Turns out he can also speak English, which is indeed the default language of this film, as you might expect with Cleese as a star.

The movie is called God Loves Caviar, which should also indicate that there is a Russian aspect to it. And might suggest, from that title, that it's a comedy, but it is not. A little bit of a bait and switch there.

Koch plays Ioannis Varvakis, a real Greek man who straddled the 18th and 19th centuries and stumbled into a way to preserve caviar, allowing it to be shipped around the world and making him a fortune. There are some slightly whimsical scenes surrounding that comparatively small aspect of the story. For the most part, though, this is a fairly sober film about a man who abandoned a daughter and her mother (not his wife) to travel the world and spent most of that time on the high seas in service of the Russians, though he also returned to fight for Greek independence near the end of his life. Independence from what? Well, I don't remember that part.

It's not a bad movie. But I think I was hoping for a bit more of a comedy, given that part of the bait and switch is that John Cleese's role in it is not a comedy role in the slightest. And it did seem like a fairly minor historical figure on whom to base an entire biopic.

What did I tell you about slim pickings for Greek cinema?