Vincent Delmar

“Vicky Cristina Barcelona” served not only as a great introduction to Woody Allen’s filmography - which makes me slightly upset, given how much I dislike the filmmaker as a person - but also as a “breath of fresh air” of sorts in comparison to the films I have watched recently. It is perfectly time, extremely well written, acted, filmed and directed, and, above all, it shines in its balance between simplicity and complexity. With this in mind, I couldn’t help but felt as thought, in its own right, very much echoed the same sense of urgency and intensity as Dostoevsky’s “White Nights” (one of my favorites books) in the best way possible. Even though, after watching this movie, the question of whether you can separate the art from the artist very much hanged over my head, it is undoubtedly a phenomenal piece of art.

“Goodfellas” is a solid example of the best of Martin Scorcese’s work: a very fluid and easily engrossing story made up of strong performances. And it was very enjoyable to see Ray Liotta in a major role for the first time, delivering a very charismatic performance as Henry Hill, as well as all the actors I have previously watched in “The Sopranos” (in particular, Lorraine Bracco as Karen Hill). However, and while I can’t quite put my finger on what it is, I felt that there was just something missing for me.  Even though I would objectively rate this movie as a 4 out of 5, since it does show all the traits of what I would define as an “solidly good” film, and while I completely understand why it is revered in the world of cinema, I believe I just didn’t connect with the movie as much as I wish I did. Perhaps this just goes to show that, while I can appreciate and enjoy the mafia genre, it is very clearly not my favorite or one I can feel drawn to emotionally speaking.

"The Odyssey" is a phenomenal technical achievement in the world of cinema which does leave somethings to be desired, but is very clearly not worthy of all the hate it has received. I was slightly hesitant going in to watch this movie, as I had heard copious amounts of criticism about it. However, now that I have watched, I can very confidently say that I see the majority of it was either extremely exacerbated or simply forced. The main point of focus of this criticism was the casting of Elliot Page as Sinon and Lupita Nyong'o as Helen of Troy (who also played Clytemnestra). And while I can understand it might come from a point of wanting historical accuracy, I didn't see a problem with it given the fact that they're roles were incredibly small, they did them justice and, above all, due to the fictional nature of the work of art. In fact, I find the fact that, for a Hollywood-produced Greek story, there wasn't a single significant character played by a Greek actor or even an attempt at Greek accent by any of the cast members the biggest reprehensible factor of this production. Furthermore, I think another great flaw of the movie is that is "too celebrity/Hollywood" as they call it, particularly in the beginning when we are being introduced to the characters. It did take a while for me to assimilate it and become immersed in the story, and this only goes to show how this could've and should've been done with lesser-known actors. Not only to give others a chance, as a lot of people are growing tired of always seeing the same faces in every movie, but also to allow the audience to connect more with the story itself. Especially since I didn't think there was a single "truly outstanding" performance in. Even though every actor, from the main stars to the supporting ensemble members, did a good job, none delivered anything near award-worthy, which does feel odd for a Nolan movie. In regards to the film itself, it is a really long one and another example of this recent rising trend across movies of all genres of making overly long movies. However, in this particular case (which is an exception), I must say it did feel appropriate. While I felt physically tired of seating in the same seat and position (especially since the movie theatre didn't provide the audience a break), I was engaged throughout the entire film, which in itself is a major accomplishment in my books. It was also much more accessible than what I expected, but its writing did become too modern too often and began to feel out of place after a while. In other words, it evidently needed to lean into a more archaic/period-appropriate approach. Additionally, the action sequences and the “heroic journey”aspect of it is great, but the pacing does oscillate a bit and, for a movie of such grandeur, the soundtrack wasn't the most memorable. In conclusion, it does feel weird to rate a movie whose formal execution is simply beyond compare this low on the scale, especially given the fact that I enjoyed it and was really entertained by it. Nevertheless, there were several flaws I was unable to overlook, which ultimately prevent me for giving it a solid rating of 4 out of 5. Or, in the words of Jamaal Burkmar: “this movie is sometimes good, sometimes excellent, and sometimes fine.”

“The Invite” is an earnest comedy-drama that playfully yet meaningfully explores where the line between the genres sits, utilizing the best aspects of each in the process to create a very entertaining reflection on the topics of sex, relationships, acceptance and closure. The set design, the direction and the writing with the comedic timing all work together really nicely to bring this story to life. And I must say this movie genuinely made me laugh in a way I’m only able to do very rarely, so I must give a special props to Seth Rogan for his incredible ad-libs. Each actor played to their strengths and knew exactly what their job was in the movie, which created solid characters that brought forth a great dynamic and sense of chemistry between the two couples both separately and together, as well as each character’s relationship with one another individually. I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie, but I left the theatre feeling very fulfilled.