BEHOLD YOUR FINAL FOUR: |
 |  |
 |  |
Traditionally, as we all know, I should pit these four incredible women together in a battle to eliminate down to the best 2, and then determine the final winner from that. And I thought about it, I really, really did. And you know what I realized?
I DON'T FUCKING WANT TO.
While I think I may have picked a few different women for the Elite Eight, these are the exact women I would choose to be in the Final Four, and honestly, their films perfectly encapsulate the 4 major elements of what I really look for and love in an excellent film:
Is it compelling?
Exceptional use of language and dialogue, or lack thereof. Is the story "good," meaning: is there a sense of urgency or importance? Do I give a shit about this? Are we headed somewhere? What are we fighting for? It can be a subtle or internal fight, but there has to be some chutzpah.
Is it worthwhile?
Are the characters - especially the female ones - compelling, detailed, & believable? Are they fully fleshed out, with enough detailed, meaningful, or pertinent information that I am invested in them? Do I care about what they care about; do I care what happens to them? Regardless of morality or ethics, do I believe that THEY believe in what they are fighting for?
Is it surprising?
I do not require shocks or twist endings, but I ought to be surprised at least once. Not necessarily by the plot, but perhaps by how they choose to tell the story: for example, I was surprised in Birds of Prey by how the director chose to let the women get bruised and sweaty in a believable manner, and I was surprised again by how deftly she avoided luxuriating in the moments when they were the victims of violence. Deciding to include the harsh reality without exploiting/desensitizing the gaze was a surprising and well-executed choice.
Is it beautiful?
Exceptional Cinematography, Production Design, & Costumes; bonus points for an element of whimsy that serves the story: folklore, fantasy, or parable.
AND THE MOTHER FUCKING WINNER IS...
Ultimately, I don't want to choose. And I don't have to. I have known who the winner was going to be about 20 minutes into watching her. She stood out, quietly, and rose above the rest, affecting me in a way that I have not been by a film in years. Truly unparalleled, exceptionally executed, and pristinely flawless. She is, without a doubt, an absolutely perfect film. BEHOLD YOUR MATRIARCH!!!!!!!
Portrait of a Lady on Fire was, without a doubt, the most flawless film of this entire bracket. Sciamma deftly shaped and executed every detail with meticulous genius and I simply cannot recommend it enough. Over two hours long, a cast of FOUR, sparse dialogue, no music, in a foreign language, and I was on the edge of my seat and holding my breath for every single minute of it. It is not an exaggeration to say that this film changed me, and changed the way I will view film forever.
Other Honorable Mentions...
Who Should've Been in the Elite Eight:
1. Sciamma, Portrait of a Lady on Fire
2. Babbit, But I'm A Cheerleader
3. Campion, The Piano
4. Matsoukas, Queen & Slim
5. Amirpour, A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night
6. Caro, Whale Rider
7. de Wilde, Emma
8. Wilde, Booksmart
 |  |
Best Aesthetics: Production Design & Costumes
1. Portrait of a Lady on Fire
2. But I'm A Cheerleader
3. Emma
4. Clueless
5. Birds of Prey
6. Queen & Slim
7. A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night
8. Jennifer's Body
 |  |
 |  |
Best Performances:
1. Noémie Merlant & Adèle Haenel, Portrait of a Lady on Fire
2. Hilary Swank & Chloë Sevigny, Boys Don't Cry
3. Holly Hunter, The Piano
4. Melissa McCarthy & Richard E. Grant, Can You Ever Forgive Me
5. Daniel Kaluuya & Jodie Turner-Smith, Queen & Slim
6. Tilda Swinton, We Need To Talk About Kevin
7. Keisha Castle-Hughes, Whale Rider
8. Kaitlyn Dever & Beanie Feldstein, Booksmart
 |  |
 |  |
BOW BEFORE ALL THESE HOLY MATRIARCHS, AND MAY WE SEE YOU ALL BEHIND THE CAMERA AGAIN SOON!
0 Comments
We are wasting no time here. The Battle for the Final Four is nigh!
An Iranian graphic novel adaptation, a groundbreaking French film, a queer cult classic, a children's movie, a delicious Jane Austen adaptation, a visually iconic Bonnie & Clyde reinterpretation, the FIRST film to ever receive an Oscar nomination for a WOMAN DIRECTOR, and Sofia's luckiest project to date - these films span from 1993 to 2020 and couldn't be more different.
May the Greatest Matriarchs Win!!!
An Iranian graphic novel adaptation, a groundbreaking French film, a queer cult classic, a children's movie, a delicious Jane Austen adaptation, a visually iconic Bonnie & Clyde reinterpretation, the FIRST film to ever receive an Oscar nomination for a WOMAN DIRECTOR, and Sofia's luckiest project to date - these films span from 1993 to 2020 and couldn't be more different.
May the Greatest Matriarchs Win!!!
I fucking love Persepolis and you should too, but I will NEVER RECOVER FROM HOW THE FLAWLESS, SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE THAT WAS Portrait of a Lady on Fire.
The winner is... Celine Sciamma
What a weird set of movies to compare, huh? I see you, Baby Gay Lohan, but what Babbit did with But I’m A Cheerleader transcends filmmaking and falls into the beloved, cherished, and envious bracket all of its own: the cult classic.
The winner is... Jamie Babbit
This one is NOT easy. Emma was - dare I say it? - brand fucking new. Yes, you’re going to see sprinkles of Wes Anderson and a heavy dash of Coppola’s Marie Antoinette, but de Wilde managed to make a WHOLE NEW THING with her take on Jane Austen, something that I am not generally impressed with. Do yourself a favor and please watch the sheer deliciousness that is Emma.
And if you REALLY care about yourself, about unparalleled filmmaking, about #BlackLivesMatter (oh yeah, I went there) and about women who are about to fucking take over Hollywood, watch Queen & Slim fucking immediately. I do not say this lightly: it is a masterpiece.
And if you REALLY care about yourself, about unparalleled filmmaking, about #BlackLivesMatter (oh yeah, I went there) and about women who are about to fucking take over Hollywood, watch Queen & Slim fucking immediately. I do not say this lightly: it is a masterpiece.
The winner is... Melina Matsoukas
I feel like an asshole admitting this, but you know what? I’m a little relieved Coppola’s reign has finally come to an end. YES she is a great director, YES she makes good movies, but YES she is also just the *tiniest* bit overrated. You know who is NOT overrated? Jane Campion, one of the many women who literally paved the way for this entire bracket to even happen. I bow before the sacred, timeless beauty that is The Piano, and you should too.
  |   |
SO THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING:
I have TWO FILMS LEFT in this INCREDIBLE but NEVER-ENDING bracket. Both feature pretty iconic, unforgettable performances. Both really rough films, centered around a fuck ton of violence towards women. I have already seen both of them. And honestly? Once was kind of enough.
I can already tell you who the winner is: It's Mary Herron, because she managed to turn OG Sub-Reddit Incel-Porn into a brutal and horrifying cautionary tale.
So I am doing myself a favor, and I am not re-living the trauma of watching either of these movies again. Hopefully ever. Sorry, not sorry.
Which means we are down to the GODDAMN WIRE HERE, FOLKS. Below are the 16 winners of ROUND ONE, and there are only THREE ROUNDS LEFT. Behold your Sweet 16, and keep reading to find out who our Elite Eight are!
The Battle for the Elite 8:
How the hell do I compare a documentary about the modern slavery of the American prison system with an animated film about an Iranian teenager? 13th is a movie that absolutely everyone should see. It was educational and beautiful and brutal, meticulously curated by the capable hands of DuVernay, and has stuck with me. ...But there was just something about Persepolis that will always hold an incredibly sentimental place in my heart.
The winner is... Marjane Satrapi
I have seen Fish Tank twice now, and I think it's safe to say that I'll probably never watch it again. It is devastating and brutal and relentless and powerful. Those are all good things. But I could watch Portrait of a Lady on Fire on loop for the rest of my goddamn life and feel nourished every single time.
The winner is... Celine Sciamma
This is the only one of the Sweet 16 bracket that is actually crushing me. How the HECK am I supposed to compare these two? It’s satire vs. folklore, coming of age vs. coming of age. I love both of these movies deeply, for very different reasons. I would watch either of them again in a heartbeat. They are both masterpieces in their own right. …But this is a directing battle, not a “favorite movie” bracket, and one of these films included just a *hint* more chutzpah than the other, an extra layer of flavor and color and intentionality. I might be crucified for this, so all I ask is that everyone wears hot pink plastic raincoats and daisy chains to my funeral.
The winner is... Jamie Babbit
There is exactly ONE of these movies that I’ll ever be watching again.
The winner is... Nancy Meyers
de Wilde vs. Wilde!! Okay I lied, this one is also going to hurt. Comparing two women’s directorial debuts is tough, especially when they’re both so aesthetically specific. Wilde, you did a hell of a job, and I will be the first in line to see your next feature. But goddammit, de Wilde’s was just the *tiniest* bit more delicious.
The winner is... Autumn de Wilde
One of these was good, one was great. One of these was an incredible accomplishment, one of these was a fucking masterpiece.
The winner is... Melina Matsoukas
Okay I really lied, this one deeply hurts my feelings too. Amirpour literally created A NEW GENRE, and deftly wielded a woman as a weapon in a way that was somehow achingly familiar and brand new all at one. But I’ll be damned if The Piano - even with it’s problematic faults - was anything less than a near-perfect film.
The winner is... Jane Campion
It is literally impossible to compare Lost in Translation and American Psycho, so I can only say that while Herron literally defied the seemingly inevitable incel-porn that this could’ve been and instead created a filmic icon, I am going to have to go with “which one would I watch again.” ...And as previously discussed, I adamantly do NOT plan on watching Christian Bale murder women ever again, thank you very much.
The winner is... Sofia Coppola
A failed actor, a failed writer; grumpy, broken people who have a hard time making friends... This bracket personally attacked me in ways I was NOT expecting. However, I must point out that while I previously thought these two movies had nothing in common, I realize now how wrong I was: what an EXCELLENT example of two universally known "comedic" actors flexing their extremely capable, impressive, and hauntingly memorable "dramatic" muscles. The Oscar goes to Bill Murray & Melissa Fucking McCarthy.
Lost In Translation (2003)
Written & Directed by: Sofia Coppola
Starring: Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Giovanni Ribisi
IMDB Synopsis: A faded movie star and a neglected young woman form an unlikely bond after crossing paths in Tokyo.
Starring: Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, Giovanni Ribisi
IMDB Synopsis: A faded movie star and a neglected young woman form an unlikely bond after crossing paths in Tokyo.
Sofia Coppola...
“The unexpected connections we make might not last, yet stay with us forever."
 |  |
You know, it's funny, because I remember when this movie came out and everyone lost their shit over it. I remember seeing it and thinking it was beautiful, weird, and like nothing I'd ever seen before. It was quiet but not boring, it was subtle but it was funny. There was deep sadness and deep yearning but it never crossed a line and it had a pitch-perfect ending.
Re-watching it, I still felt all of these things, but I couldn't help being struck *just the tiniest little bit* by the Coppola-ness of it all. Don't get me wrong, this is a great movie. But there have been lots of great movies I've seen on this bracket so far, and most of them did not receive the attention and love that Lost in Translation did. As I watched the credits, I saw Francis Ford Coppola's name come up under Executive Producer and I was like, "Oh, right. That's why."
 |  |
This is not to say that Sofia hasn't earned her stripes - she made The Virgin Suicides with nothing going for her name except the bad taste she left in everyone's mouth from her infamously terrible performance in The Godfather III. Yet she proved with her debut that she could actually make great fucking movies, and has earned a place as a well-respected director in her own right. ...But it can't be ignored that she had a lot of help getting there. I don't fault her for that; she didn't choose to be born into one of Hollywood's oldest filmmaking families, and like I said, she's worked hard and proven that she can actually do this.
 |  |
I guess more than anything, it makes be a bit wistful to think of how many talented gems are out there that were just as good as Lost in Translation, but never got their fair share in the limelight because their directors and producers couldn't afford that kind of marketing campaign - or to cast Bill Murray and ScarJo, at the height of "Scarlett Fever" no less.
 |  |
And can we talk for a minute about how Scarlett was ONLY SEVENTEEN during the filming of this movie?! The weight and maturity and depth she brought to a role that easily could've become flighty and superficial cannot be ignored. Likewise, Bill Murray manages to make things funny without so much as moving an eyebrow, and essays could be written about his well-timed sighs.
I 100% think that she deserved her Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, it is a magnificent script. And the lead performances are undeniably unforgettable: literally no one else could have played those parts with such composure and humor and softness and sadness. You'll never see a more beautifully shot, accurate depiction of jet-lag, and with such expertly selected music. It is - dare I say it? - an objectively damn near flawless film, and everyone should see it at least once in their lives.
 |  |
But, for whatever reason, watching it as an adult it just didn't overwhelm me with its splendor the way that it did when I was 14; it just felt like a really good movie that I probably won't watch again for another 10 years. I think it just hits differently as an adult. I was significantly more aware this time around of how hard it is to connect with people, and instead of feeling the intimate preciousness of finding those connections, I was troubled by how sad it is that they're so rare to begin with.
But, for whatever reason, watching it as an adult it just didn't overwhelm me with its splendor the way that it did when I was 14; it just felt like a really good movie that I probably won't watch again for another 10 years. I think it just hits differently as an adult. I was significantly more aware this time around of how hard it is to connect with people, and instead of feeling the intimate preciousness of finding those connections, I was troubled by how sad it is that they're so rare to begin with.
(As I'm writing this, it is occurring to me that *perhaps* watching this in quarantine has something to do with that...)
(As I'm writing this, it is occurring to me that *perhaps* watching this in quarantine has something to do with that...)
Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018)
Directed by: Marielle Heller
Written by: Nicole Holofcener & Jeff Whitty
Starring: Melissa McCarthy, Richard E. Grant, Dolly Wells
IMDB Synopsis: When Lee Israel falls out of step with current tastes, she turns her art form to deception.
Written by: Nicole Holofcener & Jeff Whitty
Starring: Melissa McCarthy, Richard E. Grant, Dolly Wells
IMDB Synopsis: When Lee Israel falls out of step with current tastes, she turns her art form to deception.
Marielle Heller...
"I love Lee. There’s something about characters who say honestly what’s on their mind that is incredibly refreshing. Lee just does not give a fuck about how people respond to her. I think for women there’s a sense always towards being conscious of other people’s feelings and being aware of how we’re perceived.
It’s great to have a character who cares so much more about her intellect than her looks. I found her funny. I relate to her in so many ways, and I think so many of us who are writers relate to the feeling that our work is part of us, a reflection of us, and if we’re not being recognized for our work we’re somehow not valid any more."
 |  |
To be honest, I am struggling to recall much of the artistic or atmospheric direction in this film because all I can fucking think about is the performance Heller gave us through MELISSA GODDAMN MCCARTHY. That Oscar nom was 1000% earned, and I would re-watch this movie in a heartbeat just to analyze her every move again. I don't doubt that McCarthy is capable of incredible dramatic acting in her own right, but it would be remiss not to give a fair share of this accomplishment to Marielle Heller for bringing that out of her.
There was something about watching this movie at this point in my life that just struck me. Before quarantine, I was feeling burnt out, rejected, and defeated; I had tried pursuing a career in freelance production design and it started out great, but then the jobs slowly started getting further and further apart. I was especially burdened with the practical, social aspects of the job - so much of work in that industry is based on who you know and networking, things that I am really bad at curating organically. I was feeling like a failure, not just as an artist but as a person incapable of doing the necessary things like small-talking and making superficial connections and friendships to help further my career. Now I am living in quarantine, desperately trying to write a memoir that I'm fairly convinced no one wants to read (or if they do, they certainly don't want to pay me for it). I know I'm a good writer, but I'm once again feeling like a failure in the more mundane aspects of the job: reaching out to people, being open to criticism, having a community to support me. I am nowhere near in the position that Lee Israel was - I like to think I'm only half the bitch she was - something I say with enormous solidarity and compassion in my heart; Resting Bitch Face and social anxiety are real fucking things, and they're incredibly hard to overcome. Also, I mean, come on, her only friend was her cat. I felt like I was looking into an extremely sad but very plausible potential future for myself.
There was something about watching this movie at this point in my life that just struck me. Before quarantine, I was feeling burnt out, rejected, and defeated; I had tried pursuing a career in freelance production design and it started out great, but then the jobs slowly started getting further and further apart. I was especially burdened with the practical, social aspects of the job - so much of work in that industry is based on who you know and networking, things that I am really bad at curating organically. I was feeling like a failure, not just as an artist but as a person incapable of doing the necessary things like small-talking and making superficial connections and friendships to help further my career. Now I am living in quarantine, desperately trying to write a memoir that I'm fairly convinced no one wants to read (or if they do, they certainly don't want to pay me for it). I know I'm a good writer, but I'm once again feeling like a failure in the more mundane aspects of the job: reaching out to people, being open to criticism, having a community to support me. I am nowhere near in the position that Lee Israel was - I like to think I'm only half the bitch she was - something I say with enormous solidarity and compassion in my heart; Resting Bitch Face and social anxiety are real fucking things, and they're incredibly hard to overcome. Also, I mean, come on, her only friend was her cat. I felt like I was looking into an extremely sad but very plausible potential future for myself.
 |  |
And then there's the heartbreaking way this story tackles "success." Much like Lee Israel, I am also an ardent lover of Dorothy Parker's witticisms (who isn't?), and I can really vibe with the liberation and tragedy of being able to express yourself anonymously... Like maybe if I was a completely different person - dead, or a man, or just a cuter and happier and more chill person to be around - then I would be more successful.
The more I think about it, Lost in Translation and Can You Ever Forgive Me actually have so much in common: they're both about lonely people struggling to make a connection, and include the rare depiction of non-sexual intimacy between a man and a woman. It's so fucking hard to meet people you can actually connect with, and our baggage, flaws, and the unpredictable circumstances of life can get in the way of them so quickly. Richard E. Grant's performance as the aging gay "Artful Dodger" felt both fresh and familiar, and was a perfect foil to McCarthy's grumpy, given-up-on-life Brooklyn dyke.
While Bill Murray and ScarJo gave us "past-his-prime actor gets a breath of fresh air with a young but sad woman struggling to find her way," Grant and McCarthy gave us "old gays teetering on the edge of poverty use alcoholism, razor sharp wit, and petty crime to remind us that resilience is really is a girl's best friend." I honestly don't know which story I like more, or which one was the "better" movie.
 |  |
I'm inclined to say that Lost In Translation beats Can You... as far as aesthetics go, but that's not entirely fair. Heller curated a very distinct and cohesive atmosphere to this film; the pacing of the script, the development of the characters, and the little details that let us into their lives were just as detailed and nuanced as Coppola's, just in a totally different flavor.
 |  |
Coppola has spoken before about how she likes to "direct her movies from a distance," and you can feel that. There is a lot of space in Lost in Translation, a lot of things left unsaid (or whispered), a lot of room to fill in your own blanks. But she fills those little voids with color and feeling and music and exceptional memorable characters, and you walk away feeling sad but nourished. If Coppola was a painter, she'd be a Monet: huge, abstract, watery, but when you look closer you can see the edges of detailed water lilies and sleepy willow trees.
Heller works in a microcosm, creating layers upon layers of details and textures and smells. Her focus was primarily McCarthy's character and the world through McCarthy's eyes, but that doesn't mean that the rest of the film suffered for it. That being said, it's impossible to say that Can You... was as "beautiful" as Lost in Translation, but beauty was not a part of the story she was trying to tell. Should it have been? If Heller was a painter, she'd be that one Renoir painting of all the people having lunch outside (you know, the one from Amelie?), where everyone looks like they're lost, living in their own little worlds, doing whatever they can to cope.
I feel so conflicted. I feel like it would be criminal not to pick Coppola - she was nominated for a Best Directing Oscar, after all, and Heller didn't even snag a nomination! But was that just because of Coppola's name? Because Can You Ever Forgive Me was a lovingly invented little film featuring deep and astonishing performances. Did the Academy think that McCarthy and Grant just directed themselves?
And the winner is...
I can't say I 100% feel great about this choice, and much like the last bracket, I sincerely hope it does not affect anyone's decision to watch the film that didn't "win." (Seriously, just because A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night is incredible doesn't mean that Jennifer's Body isn't awesome in her own ways!) For whatever reason - and perhaps it is my own, Academy-brainwashed bias?? - there was something just a little *extra* about Lost in Translation. It sort of transcended Coppola, Murray, and ScarJo. It's a timeless, beautiful film and ought to be praised as such.
HOW-FUCKING-EVER. I do NOT say this lightly, but if this was a battle of performances between Bill Murray vs. McCarthy, I actually think she would have won - and Lost in Translation might be the greatest performance of Bill Murray's career. If you value witnessing incredible performances from unlikely places, please, PLEASE do yourself a favor and watch Can You Ever Forgive Me. Melissa McCarthy is sensational, and I genuinely hope she continues to hand-pick her dramatic roles because her screen presence is a goddamn TREAT.
HOLY SHIT ONLY 2 MORE MOVIES LEFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Jennifer's Body" (Karyn Kusama) vs. "A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night" (Ana Lily Amirpour)
5/8/2020
"Men looking over their shoulders as they walk down dark alleyways" might just be my new favorite film genre, whether they be the halls of high school or the labyrinth of an Iranian-Western-film-noir dystopia. Time to dig out your skateboard and your teenage crush on Megan Fox because this bracket was FUCKING FUN.
Jennifer's Body (2009)
Directed by: Karyn Kusama
Written by: Diablo Cody
Starring: Megan Fox, Amanda Seyfried, Adam Brody
IMDB Synopsis: A newly possessed high school cheerleader turns into a succubus who specializes in killing her male classmates. Can her best friend put an end to the horror?
Written by: Diablo Cody
Starring: Megan Fox, Amanda Seyfried, Adam Brody
IMDB Synopsis: A newly possessed high school cheerleader turns into a succubus who specializes in killing her male classmates. Can her best friend put an end to the horror?
Karyn Kusama...
"I'm a director first and foremost, and I hope that the fact that I'm female is just one of the many things that informs my unique perspective on the world."
 |  |
It is impossible to talk about how AHEAD OF ITS TIME and ICONIC this movie is without including one of my favorite ladies in the conversation, the wildly talented and accoladed writer, Diablo Cody:
 | "Karyn Kusama did such a killer job directing that movie, and I think it was so unconventional, and so specifically about the girls in a way that excluded a lot of people – and in a way that I love, because I’m all about specific art. I would rather make something that ten people adore than make something that 100 million people like enough to buy a ticket to. So I just think it’s a very specific piece. ...At the time, there was a lot of negativity around the movie, because I was very outspoken at that time, Megan Fox was very outspoken at that time… I love that she was speaking her mind. But she was punished for it. People don’t like women with big mouths, and there were a lot of them on that project. So, you know, let’s chalk it up to misogyny." |
And now let's talk about why this movie came about 7 years too early:
The Megan Fox of it all. The way I remembered the situation was that she was only famous for being in Transformers, and then was only famous for calling Michael Bay "a nightmare to work with," and then got fired from Transformers and Michael Bay replaced her character with a literal Victoria's Secret Angel. At the time, everyone thought Fox was being a spoiled brat, biting the hand that fed her.
I re-visited those headlines to look at them through some adult, post-#MeToo-era glasses, and WOW IT WAS ACTUALLY SO MUCH WORSE THAN THAT. You know what Fox actually said, the quote that spurned Michael Bay's wrath and stalled her career for years?
“[Michael] wants to create this insane, infamous mad-man reputation. He wants to be like Hitler on his sets, and he is. So he’s a nightmare to work for but when you get him away from set, and he’s not in director mode, I kind of really enjoy his personality because he’s so awkward, so hopelessly awkward. He has no social skills at all. It’s endearing to watch him. He’s so vulnerable and fragile in real life and then on set, he’s a tyrant.”
And do you remember what Bay's response was?? He literally enlisted the entire crew of Transformers to write an "open letter" to her that was then published in every magazine and website on the internet. Just a quick little excerpt:
"When facing the press, Megan is the queen of talking trailer trash and posing like a porn star. And yes we’ve had the unbearable time of watching her try to act on set, and yes, it’s very cringe-able. So maybe, being a porn star in the future might be a good career option. But make-up beware, she has a paragraph tattooed to her backside (probably due her rotten childhood) — easily another 45 minutes in the chair!" - Loyal Transformers Crew
 | In the other 6 ridiculous paragraphs, she is also referred to as "Ms. Sourpants," "unfriendly bitch," "dumb-as-rocks," and told that she should "smile more." AND ALL OF THIS BECAUSE SHE SAID HER DIRECTOR WAS "SOMETIMES A LITTLE AWKWARD." Sure, she was 23 and a little snarky and maybe calling him "Hitler" was a bit much. But Jesus Christ, did she really deserve all that? This from the same man who cast her as an extra in Bad Boys II when she was a minor, of which Fox has said: “They said, you know, Michael, she’s 15 so you can’t sit her at the bar…so his solution to that problem was to then have me dancing underneath a waterfall getting soaking wet. At 15, I was in 10th grade. So that’s sort of a microcosm of how Bay’s mind works.” |
So yeah, Jesus Christ, no wonder the world wasn't ready for an angry, horny, vulgar teenager girl to go around eating boys. Which is a shame, because Megan Fox does SUCH A GOOD JOB OF IT. To be fair, this is no Juno - Diablo Cody's Oscar-winning masterpiece - but there are still some pretty fucking memorable quotes in it, not just from Fox - and her equally hilarious counterpart, the always-perfect Amanda Seyfried - but from the myriad of hilarious ancillary characters, reminding me of all the reasons why you couldn't pay me to go back in time to high school (or any place where I'd have to dress like it was 2009 again).
 |  |
(My personal fave)
  |  |
 |  |
(My second fave)
The whole premise of the film is totally ahead of its time too: a teen girl from a small town gets mistaken for a virgin when a struggling indie band attempts to make a sacrifice to Satan in exchange for fame and glory. Jennifer, who "isn't even a backdoor virgin," gets accidentally turned into a blood-sucking demon in the process.
But beneath that hilarious and progressive take on the anti-slut-shaming movement, the deeper story is about two teenage girls in a toxic, manipulative friendship, and how hard it is to "break up" with your mean high school girl friend. There is a lot of thinly veiled sexual tension between them (part of what makes this film a cult-classic amongst the gays today), highlighting the age-old question of "do I want to be her or be on her?", something all queer teens struggled with as youths. Diablo Cody's razor sharp, internet-flavored wit keeps this from becoming a salacious, blood-and-tits gore show for teenage boys, and instead curates it as the iconic, gut-wrenching and gut-eviscerating horror comedy for teenage girls that it was always intended to be.
But beneath that hilarious and progressive take on the anti-slut-shaming movement, the deeper story is about two teenage girls in a toxic, manipulative friendship, and how hard it is to "break up" with your mean high school girl friend. There is a lot of thinly veiled sexual tension between them (part of what makes this film a cult-classic amongst the gays today), highlighting the age-old question of "do I want to be her or be on her?", something all queer teens struggled with as youths. Diablo Cody's razor sharp, internet-flavored wit keeps this from becoming a salacious, blood-and-tits gore show for teenage boys, and instead curates it as the iconic, gut-wrenching and gut-eviscerating horror comedy for teenage girls that it was always intended to be.
“The movie was really the movie I wanted to make and the movie that Diablo Cody wrote. In regards to its marketing, it was an epic misstep and they sold it to boys instead of to the girls who it was written for, and by, and about." - Karyn Kusama
A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night (2014)
Written & Directed by: Ana Lily Amirpour
Starring: Sheila Vand & Arash Marandi
IMDB Synopsis: In the Iranian ghost-town Bad City, a place that reeks of death and loneliness, the townspeople are unaware they are being stalked by a lonesome vampire.
Starring: Sheila Vand & Arash Marandi
IMDB Synopsis: In the Iranian ghost-town Bad City, a place that reeks of death and loneliness, the townspeople are unaware they are being stalked by a lonesome vampire.
Ana Lily Amirpour...
"As an artist, and for me personally, my biggest fear is categorization. I hate the idea that I would become someone who says that "this is what I do and now that's what I am." What I really feel like is an explorer. I want to continue exploring my brain cave and see what's there, you know? And I don't want to just stay in one cave."
 |  |
An Iranian, black-and-white Western about vampires: you know, the obvious combination of all genres. Despite the similarities between these two films - horror movies that reimagine their villains as literal man-eaters - it feels impossible to compare them when they have such radically different strengths. Jennifer’s Body offers laugh-out-loud funny, razor-sharp witticisms, and A Girl is all but silent.
Instead, Amirpour carefully brews a tantalizing portrait of a dark and seedy town in desperate need of some vigilante justice, which comes in the brilliant shape of a vampiric heroine. The story is quiet and pulsing with tension, and the subtle thread of romance is pleasantly nuanced. Ironically, nothing is (morally) black and white in this little film noir masterpiece, and I don’t want to say anything more about it because it’s definitely one of my favorites of the entire bracket and everyone should watch this movie and support my massive crush on the skateboarding, androgynous, shape-shifting icon that is Ana Lily Amirpour.
I’m struggling to pinpoint exactly why I like Amirpour so much, and why her subtle, slow-burn style works for me whereas other, arguably similar filmmakers don’t. There is definitely a case to be made for at least a few similarities between A Girl and something like, say, Winter’s Bone: they both follow a young woman around the seedy underbelly of a broken home town, incapable of ignoring the chance to right a wrong when she sees one. But one of those was fucking awesome, and the other one only had Baby J. Law going for it (sorry).
The aesthetics are an undeniable component - I really fucking dig a well done gothic vamp story, and the weirder it is, the better. I will never tire of films about women destroying bad men (however literally), and I appreciate it when those stories include generously fleshed out male characters that can serve as a substantial foil. The music and costumes (Natalie O'Brien) were perfect, the cinematography was exceptional (Lyle Vincent). It was moody without being overly sentimental, violent without being gratuitous, and morally ambiguous enough to teeter deliciously on the edge between a feminist vengeance thriller and a heartbreaking film noir tragedy.
In short: this movie fucking rocks.
The aesthetics are an undeniable component - I really fucking dig a well done gothic vamp story, and the weirder it is, the better. I will never tire of films about women destroying bad men (however literally), and I appreciate it when those stories include generously fleshed out male characters that can serve as a substantial foil. The music and costumes (Natalie O'Brien) were perfect, the cinematography was exceptional (Lyle Vincent). It was moody without being overly sentimental, violent without being gratuitous, and morally ambiguous enough to teeter deliciously on the edge between a feminist vengeance thriller and a heartbreaking film noir tragedy.
In short: this movie fucking rocks.
And the winner is...
Don't get me wrong, Jennifer's Body is fucking FUN and if you've never seen it (or haven't seen it in a while), trust me when I say she's worth the re-watch. But ultimately, when you're dealing with the nuanced genius that is Amirpour, brilliant beats fun.
ATTENTION: ADDENDUM
Yes, I'm making ANOTHER last minute change to my bracket because it's MINE and I fucking can. This whole thing was supposed to be about watching new movies and exploring the wide world of under-appreciated talent when it comes to women directed films, and during the re-branding I made a lot of edits to include some more familiar titles. Unfortunately, that meant putting a handful of movies that I have already seen on the bracket, and this last stretch has had the most re-watches yet.
So, while it made PERFECT SENSE to match up Sofia Coppola's Lost in Translation with Lulu Wang's The Farewell, I am replacing the latter with Marielle Heller's Can You Ever Forgive Me. I haven't seen Lost in Translation since, like, high school, and it seems impossible not to include someone as iconic as Coppola on a female director list. I watched The Farewell when it came out around 6 months ago, and while I thought it was a heartfelt story with a really great, subtle performance from Awkwafina (love her), I can't confidently say that it was worth a re-watch. Heller is someone who's film choices increasingly fascinate me, and I have been wanting to watch Melissa McCarthy's surprising turn in a serious role (and Oscar nominated!) for awhile, so THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING, FOLKS.
So, while it made PERFECT SENSE to match up Sofia Coppola's Lost in Translation with Lulu Wang's The Farewell, I am replacing the latter with Marielle Heller's Can You Ever Forgive Me. I haven't seen Lost in Translation since, like, high school, and it seems impossible not to include someone as iconic as Coppola on a female director list. I watched The Farewell when it came out around 6 months ago, and while I thought it was a heartfelt story with a really great, subtle performance from Awkwafina (love her), I can't confidently say that it was worth a re-watch. Heller is someone who's film choices increasingly fascinate me, and I have been wanting to watch Melissa McCarthy's surprising turn in a serious role (and Oscar nominated!) for awhile, so THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING, FOLKS.
During the re-branding, I intentionally put these two movies against each other at this point in the bracket: I naively thought that it would be an easy, obvious, quick decision, because The Piano was one of my absolute FAVORITE movies when I saw it as a senior in high school, and while Angelina Jolie was my first serious girl crush, I had heard such mixed things about By The Sea that I never saw it (and I legitimately fell asleep during Unbroken). So surely Jolie is not as good a director as she was an actor in the late 90s, right? Right??
By The Sea (2015)
Written & Directed by: Angelina Jolie
Starring: Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie
IMDB Synopsis: A couple tries to repair their marriage while staying at a hotel in France.
Starring: Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie
IMDB Synopsis: A couple tries to repair their marriage while staying at a hotel in France.
Angelina Jolie...
"Your artistic journey always coincides with life, and, if you're lucky, your life remains more full than those characters onscreen."
 |  |
Some context: I was obsessed with Angelina Jolie in high school. She was the Oscar-winning, wild child, punk rock girl of my dreams, and I didn't know if I wanted to be her or be on her. When it came to Brangelina, I was #TeamAngie all the way, and was a little more crushed than I care to admit when they divorced.
By The Sea is not the version of Jolie that I grew up watching and crushing on; much like her Oscar-nominated role in Changeling, she channeled a lot of her mother. It's a facet of her that always makes me a little uncomfortable to watch: it feels terribly authentic, painfully intimate, bordering on voyeurism (which is a reoccurring theme in the film).
“I’m glad we did By the Sea because we did explore something together. Whatever it was, maybe it didn’t solve certain things, but we did communicate something that needed to be communicated to each other.”
First, the things in this that really, really worked: costumes, cinematography, and the painful but brilliant way Jolie captured vulnerability.
Costume Design was done by Ellen Mirojnick, the genius behind The Greatest Showman and Maleficent, and they took on a life of their own. I am still trying to figure out how the hell Jolie's character packed all those exquisite hats in that Louis Vitton luggage without ruining them, but I don't care - she looked phenomenal... Which, I'm sad to say, was a necessary distraction because Angelina Jolie was deathly thin in 2015. While it definitely served the fragility of her character, it was at times painful to look at.
This movie was visually gorgeous. I suppose it would be impossible to make an ugly film in Malta - against the backdrop of cobalt blue water, antiquated cafés, and poetically dangerous limestone cliffs, everything looks like a painting.
While Jolie undoubtedly had a talented cinematographer (Christian Berger), there was something incredibly intimate about her directorial choices that honestly surprised me. She meticulously built this oppressive, heavy space between her and Pitt, which is impressive considering they spend most of the movie in the same room together. The layered, nuanced history between them as a couple was palpable; juxtaposed with these incredible wide shots of the cold marble in the hotel room, the overwhelming expanse of the sea, and the arid landscape of the cliffs beneath them, you felt as connected to the beauty surrounding them as you did to the dysfunction rotting inside.
What didn't work as much for me was the weight of the ending - for the duration of two hours, you're waiting for an explanation as to why this marriage is falling apart, because it's been so heavily indicated that there was a significant event or moment that started their demise. Was it an affair? The death of a child? In the last 10 minutes we finally discover that it's because Jolie's character is barren. They tried to get pregnant, and she suffered through two miscarriages - that's why she so diabolically sets out to destroy all the happiness around her.
Honestly, it fell short for me. I think it would've been more impactful if they had addressed the era they were living in: this was supposed to take place in the 1960s, but as beautiful as the costumes were, she just as likely could've been a fashion enthusiast with an appreciation for vintage couture. If the era had been a more oppressive structure in their narrative - she was a retired dancer, and being barren would presumably make her feel like a failure as a woman and a wife - then I would've understood the weight of the realization more. But it was easy to forget that this was the 60s, and I couldn't help thinking that as tragic as it is for a woman who desperately wants to be a mother not being able to carry a child, it wasn't a strong enough explanation for all of her antics. Or maybe they just built it up too much, making it seem like the big reveal was going to be something much more insidious or sensational.
They really could've had no reason at all for her emotional stability and it likely would've worked just as well. If the pressure for the big twist had been removed, I would've fully believed that they were just two crazy kids with some weird kinks who couldn't quite make things work.
Honestly, it fell short for me. I think it would've been more impactful if they had addressed the era they were living in: this was supposed to take place in the 1960s, but as beautiful as the costumes were, she just as likely could've been a fashion enthusiast with an appreciation for vintage couture. If the era had been a more oppressive structure in their narrative - she was a retired dancer, and being barren would presumably make her feel like a failure as a woman and a wife - then I would've understood the weight of the realization more. But it was easy to forget that this was the 60s, and I couldn't help thinking that as tragic as it is for a woman who desperately wants to be a mother not being able to carry a child, it wasn't a strong enough explanation for all of her antics. Or maybe they just built it up too much, making it seem like the big reveal was going to be something much more insidious or sensational.
They really could've had no reason at all for her emotional stability and it likely would've worked just as well. If the pressure for the big twist had been removed, I would've fully believed that they were just two crazy kids with some weird kinks who couldn't quite make things work.
That being said, the delicately handled nuance of their voyeurism-as-foreplay was a very welcome surprise. I love watching freaky people figure out that they're not alone, and that was probably my favorite part of the whole film. The entire time I was watching, all I could think of was this Brad Pitt quote from an interview a few years before their divorce... Sometimes life really does imitate art:
“My girl got sick. She was constantly nervous because of problems at work, personal life, her failures and children. She lost 30 pounds and weight about 90 pounds. She got very skinny and was constantly crying. She was not a happy woman. She had suffered from continuing headaches, heart pain and jammed nerves in her back and ribs. She did not sleep well, falling asleep only in the mornings and got very quickly tired during the day. Our relationship was on the verge of a break up. Her beauty was leaving her somewhere, she had bags under eyes, she was poking her head, and stopped taking care of herself. She refused to shoot the films and rejected any role. I lost hope and thought that we’ll get separated soon… But then I decided to act. After all I’ve got the most beautiful woman on earth. She is the idol of more than half of men and women on earth, and I was the one allowed to fall asleep next to her and to hug her. I began to shower her with flowers, kisses and compliments. I surprised and pleased her every minute. I gave her lots of gifts and lived just for her. I spoke in public only about her. I incorporated all themes in her direction. I praised her in front of her own and our mutual friends. You won’t believe it, but she blossomed. She became better. She gained weight, was no longer nervous, and loved me more than ever. I had no clue that she can love that much. And then I realized one thing: the woman is the reflection of her man. If you love her to the point of madness, she will become it."
"We have got to stop being such assholes."
The Piano (1993)
Written & Directed by: Jane Campion
Starring: Holly Hunter, Harvey Keitel, Sam Neill
IMDB Synopsis: In the mid-19th century, a mute woman is sent to New Zealand along with her young daughter and prized piano for an arranged marriage to a wealthy landowner, but is soon lusted after by a local worker on the plantation.
Starring: Holly Hunter, Harvey Keitel, Sam Neill
IMDB Synopsis: In the mid-19th century, a mute woman is sent to New Zealand along with her young daughter and prized piano for an arranged marriage to a wealthy landowner, but is soon lusted after by a local worker on the plantation.
Jane Campion...
“I would love to see more women directors because they represent half of the population - and gave birth to the whole world. Without them writing and being directors, the rest of us are not going to know the whole story.”
 |  |
In the original bracket, I didn’t even bother including Campion because I remembered how intensely I loved this movie as a teenager and felt certain that it wouldn’t be fair to include it considering my bias. However, it was EXTREMELY interesting to watch this movie as an adult, because WOW teenage Sarah was NOT AWARE of how problematic huge parts of this story are.
I really did not remember how extremely fucked up the whole Keitel/Hunter romance was. For those who have forgotten: Holly Hunter, a mute pianist, moves to New Zealand with her 8 year old daughter (an Oscar-winning Baby Anna Paquin) to marry the vain and possessive White Colonist, Ryan Neill. He meets them on the beach and hires the Maori natives to trek her piles of shit up a literal mountain, but leaves her beloved piano on the sand.
 |  |
Before they can start their weird mail-order-bride marriage, Neill has some real estate business to take care of and disappears for a few days, so Hunter convinces Keitel to take them down to the beach again so she can visit her piano. She plays on the beach and (presumably) Keitel falls a little bit in love with her - how could you not? - and comes up with a genius idea when Neill gets back: Keitel will give a plot of land to Neill in exchange for the piano - and lessons from his new wife.
 |  |
When Hunter finds out, she’s livid - but not as upset as when she finds out that Keitel doesn’t actually want to learn how to play the piano, he wants to watch her play the piano, while he… “does stuff.” What choice does she have? Desperate for her piano back, Hunter agrees. COOL NOT CREEPY AT ALL.
Throughout this extremely problematic arrangement, they somehow begin to kind of fall in love? Here’s where I feel like just a few small details would’ve really altered the ickiness of the plot: if there had been some established sexual chemistry between Keitel and Hunter at the very beginning - like if she’d gotten off the boat and thought that he was her intended, not Neill - then it wouldn’t have felt so goddamn manipulative.
 |  |
Instead, even though Keitel eventually comes to feel remorse for the predicament and calls it off - “It’s making you a whore and it’s making me wretched…” - I’m left wondering if Hunter really was falling in love with him, or if she was just being groomed and manipulated because Keitel had the ONE THING IN HER LIFE THAT GAVE HER JOY (besides her daughter, of course) and since she was a powerless woman in a sexist era in a foreign land (made even MORE powerless by the absence of speech), she had no choice but to play along.
It didn’t feel established enough that Hunter might have been a little bit kinky and kind of enjoyed the arrangement. Don’t get me wrong, her eyeball acting is literally a once-in-a-lifetime performance that must be witnessed (and earned her a well-deserved Oscar), but given how we perceive consent today, I would’ve liked just a little bit more.
 |  |
Despite this minor (glaring) detail, The Piano is still as shocking, tragic, erotic, and gorgeous as I remember it, and remains to this day my Single Favorite Film Score Of All Time Ever. If I could put my heart and body and soul into a musical composition, it would be Michael Nyman’s theme from The Piano. (And coming in second would be his score for The Cook, The Thief, His Wife, And her Lover. I’m a big Michael Nyman fan.)
The takeaway: oh my god, Holly Hunter’s face. The bonnets, the dresses, the music, and even her iconic hairstyle don’t hold a candle to the intensity of Hunter’s internal monologue. She doesn’t stop speaking for a second, and she never says a word. Her composure was meticulous, and she somehow learned how to flare her cheekbones? Hunter is extraordinary, and I truly believe only the right director could’ve nurtured and choreographed such an exceptional performance.
And the winner is...
I love that we're seeing more and more films on the bracket that were directed and written by the same woman. There is something even more pure (and badass) about knowing for certain that this was exactly the story that woman wanted to tell, and trusting that it didn't get mishandled by the vision and prejudice of anyone else.
Ultimately the difference between By The Sea and The Piano for me came down to the power of the internal monologue. Hunter’s is full of rage, arousal, desperation, and resilience, and Jolie’s was just… pain. It was such an open wound it almost didn’t feel appropriate to look at. The beauty of the film gently tricked you into witnessing a very real marriage fall apart, largely because of Jolie’s unaddressed pain. It was palpable, and it hurt. One of Jolie's greatest strengths as a director - her ability to capture vulnerability - ended up eclipsing the rest of the elements in her film. If she could learn to heal from it and harness it the way Campion has, then I will be genuinely excited to see her behind the camera in the future. She has a talent for this, she just needs to keep honing it. Until then...
At first glance, these movies have nothing in common. I will confess that I juggled around half a dozen of the films on the new bracket to try and make some sort of comparative sense out of them, and these were the last two I couldn't quite reconcile. As it turns out, they had way more similarities than I ever could've predicted: saturated technicolor, gas-station couture (my FAVORITE KIND of couture!), and a bold new way to approach the depiction of violence in film.
Birds of Prey: And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn (2020)
Directed by: Cathy Yan
Written by: Christina Hodson, based on the character created by Paul Dini & Bruce Timm
Starring: Margot Robbie, Rosie Perez, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Jurnee Smollett-Bell, Ella Jay Basco
IMDB Synopsis: After splitting with the Joker, Harley Quinn joins superheroes Black Canary, Huntress and Renee Montoya to save a young girl from an evil crime lord.
Written by: Christina Hodson, based on the character created by Paul Dini & Bruce Timm
Starring: Margot Robbie, Rosie Perez, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Jurnee Smollett-Bell, Ella Jay Basco
IMDB Synopsis: After splitting with the Joker, Harley Quinn joins superheroes Black Canary, Huntress and Renee Montoya to save a young girl from an evil crime lord.
Cathy Yan...
"I really wanted to show these women as imperfect human beings, and that they can still be aspirational. They can still be these superheroes, but it doesn’t mean that they have to be perfect. I think that we’re burdened as women with perfection all the time."
- "How Birds of Prey Director Cathy Yan Saved Harley Quinn From Joker and the Male Gaze" by Melissa Leon
 |  |
Birds of Prey is an aesthetically delicious visual masterpiece with a kinky punch in the stomach to boot. It's like a cupcake with a razor blade in it, equal parts glitter and blood. Ultimately Han deserves all the credit for picking her sidekicks, but much like the movie itself, this was a team effort.
 K.K. Barrett (Production Designer) |  Erin Benach (Costume Designer) |  Christina Hodson (Writer) |
So what do you get when you combine the Production Designer who gave us this....
 Marie Antoinette (2006) |  Lost in Translation (2003) |
...With the Costume Designer who gave us this? (That's right, Benach is the woman responsible for Ryan Gosling's ICONIC silver scorpion jacket from Drive).
 Drive (2011) |  Neon Demon (2016) |
You get something truly fantabulous, that's what:
Han was highly praised for her depiction of violence in the film, and rightly so - no, not the 10,000 (or more) bone-crunching, leg-breaking, knee-knockers (seriously, SO many legs and balls were broken in this movie that I legit lost count) - but her deft hand when it came to dealing with violence against women. It's a razor sharp line between sensationalizing brutality against women and allowing room for equal-opportunity violence, especially when you're a woman (and WOC at that) making a super hero movie.
On the one hand, these women are badass and we WANT to see them get bruised and dirty and sweaty, otherwise it's not a fair fight and there's no point watching. On the other hand, I do not relish the thought of being forced to see a woman get the shit beaten out of her by a group of the super villain's henchman, especially if they're going to try and make it look sexy. The solution? A DANCE NUMBER, OBVIOUSLY.
The first time I saw a move like this was in 2011's Sucker Punch - right before the first hit, cut to your heroine dancing in a larger-than-life, dazzling musical masterpiece. We'll know the beating is done with the music ends, and not only is this a psychologically accurate depiction of the disassociation that often accompanies moments of violent trauma, it lets the audience know what's happening without forcing us to desensitize ourselves while watching it.
What a brilliant, creative, and powerful way to tell a necessary part of the story. Because there's nothing sexy about a woman getting beaten up... But there is something very sexy about a woman who's gotten beaten up having her revenge.
On the one hand, these women are badass and we WANT to see them get bruised and dirty and sweaty, otherwise it's not a fair fight and there's no point watching. On the other hand, I do not relish the thought of being forced to see a woman get the shit beaten out of her by a group of the super villain's henchman, especially if they're going to try and make it look sexy. The solution? A DANCE NUMBER, OBVIOUSLY.
The first time I saw a move like this was in 2011's Sucker Punch - right before the first hit, cut to your heroine dancing in a larger-than-life, dazzling musical masterpiece. We'll know the beating is done with the music ends, and not only is this a psychologically accurate depiction of the disassociation that often accompanies moments of violent trauma, it lets the audience know what's happening without forcing us to desensitize ourselves while watching it.
What a brilliant, creative, and powerful way to tell a necessary part of the story. Because there's nothing sexy about a woman getting beaten up... But there is something very sexy about a woman who's gotten beaten up having her revenge.
And what a BALLSY move to have Robbie sing "Diamonds Are A Girl's Best Friend!" Not only did it make totally Quinn-esque tongue-in-cheek sense, it both paid homage to and reinvented Nicole Kidman's similar number in Moulin Rouge! Not an easy feat to pull off, but it would appear that walking the line is Cathy Han's super power.
Queen & Slim (2020)
Directed by: Melina Matsoukas
Written by: Lena Waithe & James Frey
Starring: Daniel Kaluuya & Jodie Turner-Smith
IMDB Synopsis: A couple's first date takes an unexpected turn when a police officer pulls them over.
Written by: Lena Waithe & James Frey
Starring: Daniel Kaluuya & Jodie Turner-Smith
IMDB Synopsis: A couple's first date takes an unexpected turn when a police officer pulls them over.
Melina Matsoukas...
"I didn’t really feel like I grew up seeing two dark-skinned people fall in love on screen. I had never really seen that connection between two people who looked like our Queen and Slim, like Jodie and Daniel. I really wanted to be part of redefining what black beauty – well, beauty – means. I also think about when I went to film school and they said: “Hey, casting a black woman as your lead won’t be profitable.”
- Interview with Melina Matsoukas by Simran Hans, The Guardian
 |  |
Never heard of Matsoukas before? Chances are, you've seen her work: this was her first feature, but she's been directing music videos for years. Matsoukas was the visionary genius behind Rihanna's We Found Love and Beyoncé's Formation (for which she won a Grammy), amongst others. And while I'm singing the praises of under-appreciated womxn genius, a moment of highly deserved acknowledgement is due to the other creative goddesses on this project: (LENA WAITHE I AM SO FUCKING IN LOVE WITH YOU OH MY GOD)
 |  |  |
Starting this bracket has made me extremely analytical (and self-conscious) about paying attention to what I really like in a movie. Each time I've watched a film like this, I instinctively yell out at least half a dozen times: "See! I do like slow movies! I am not a Michael-Bay-watching-ADD-rube!" I don't mind a slow pace, as long as what I'm looking at is visually beautiful, and as long as I know that we are going somewhere. By all means, take your time getting there: but don't fucking take me on a road trip to nowhere (MEEK'S GODDAMN CUTTOFF). That being said... I've never watched a movie quite like this.
The way the characters were revealed through small but meaningful details, the way they were racing to a destination while taking their time, the way tension was built slowly and brutally towards an inevitable and tragic end... It all just worked for me. The music, the lighting, the color, the texture, they all richly wove this quiet masterpiece together. You can definitely see the influences of Matsoukas' music video background, but to quote de Wilde: "Why shouldn't a sad movie also be beautiful?"
Apparently Matsoukas received some criticism for her handling of violence in this, but I completely disagree. When you're discussing police brutality, it would be a disservice to the audience and the story if it were anything less than brutal. That being said, there is a world of difference between the gratuitous depiction of brown and black bodies being victimized (something Katheryn Bigelow's Detroit was condemned for; you'll notice she is nowhere near my fucking bracket) and meticulously crafting a story that includes violence as a narrative thread but does not condone, glorify, redeem, or sensationalize it. Matsoukas does not negotiate with violence, nor does she deny where it comes from.
It was smart (and ballsy) for Waithe to write a story in which a black man uses violence as self-defense against a white cop, and then also include: a black cop who helps them out, a white veteran who tries to help despite his wife's resistance, a black cop who gets shot, and a black man who sells them out. Make no mistake, this was not a socially defensive tactic - there is not one fucking echo of "Not All Cops" or "All Lives Matter" here (nor should there fucking be). Waithe is an emotionally intelligent and intensely passionate writer who fully bears the burden of how multi-layered an issue this is.
But at the same time, the "issue" isn't that complicated at all: if a white couple had been pulled over by that cop, there wouldn't be a movie at all. That truth remains constant, and burns long after the movie is done.
It was smart (and ballsy) for Waithe to write a story in which a black man uses violence as self-defense against a white cop, and then also include: a black cop who helps them out, a white veteran who tries to help despite his wife's resistance, a black cop who gets shot, and a black man who sells them out. Make no mistake, this was not a socially defensive tactic - there is not one fucking echo of "Not All Cops" or "All Lives Matter" here (nor should there fucking be). Waithe is an emotionally intelligent and intensely passionate writer who fully bears the burden of how multi-layered an issue this is.
But at the same time, the "issue" isn't that complicated at all: if a white couple had been pulled over by that cop, there wouldn't be a movie at all. That truth remains constant, and burns long after the movie is done.
And the winner is...
These just keep getting harder and weirder. How do I compare a ring pop with a pack of cigarettes? A hyena with a turquoise Catalina? Two broken legs with a shot in the heart? Roger Ebert can't help me here, because I already know full well that both of these films accomplished EXACTLY what each of them set out to do. In that respects, they are equals.
...But in every other category that matters, Queen & Slim was an unparalleled masterpiece. This one will stick with me for a long, long time.
Holy shit, only 8 more movies left!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIRST OF ALL: I just have to say that I am A HILARIOUS GENIUS for pairing these two movies together because they're actually both incredibly similar and serve as iconic time capsules for their respective eras. They both have a LOT going for them, so this is going to be another really hard (and sad) bracket to break down. WHY DO I DO THIS TO MYSELF?
A League of Their Own (1992)
Directed by: Penny Marshall
Written by: Kim Wilson, Kelly Candaele, Lowell Ganz, Babaloo Mandel
Starring: Tom Hanks, Geena Davis, Lori Petty, Madonna, Rosie O'Donnell
IMDB Synopsis: Two sisters join the first female professional baseball league and struggle to help it succeed amidst their own growing rivalry.
Written by: Kim Wilson, Kelly Candaele, Lowell Ganz, Babaloo Mandel
Starring: Tom Hanks, Geena Davis, Lori Petty, Madonna, Rosie O'Donnell
IMDB Synopsis: Two sisters join the first female professional baseball league and struggle to help it succeed amidst their own growing rivalry.
Penny Marshall...
"I have a strange combination of fearlessness and massive insecurity."
 |  |
So I don't even know how this is possible, but I have SOMEHOW NEVER SEEN THIS MOVIE?! It was SO good! I don't even know where to begin! Just kidding, I do:
1) LORI FUCKING PETTY!!!!!!!!! If you know anything about me at all, it should be that I FUCKING LOVE TANK GIRL. So yeah, I lost my shit when I found out she was the HEART AND SOUL OF THIS MOVIE. I get why they had to put Geena Davis and Madonna on the poster, but come on! It's Tank Girl!!!!
 |  |
2) Rosie O'Donnell and Madonna being HILARIOUS!!! And surprisingly sex-positive for '92??
  |  |
3) ...Like that moment when Madonna goes to church and blows the priest's goddamn mind! 😂
 |  |
4) Geena Davis being a straight up BDE BABE, including her palpable sexual tension with Tom Hanks (which I wanted more of! Leave Bill Pullman! Play baseball forever! Marry your drunk coach! Wow I'm projecting here!)
  |  |
5) DRUNK TOM HANKS!??!?! HAHAHA!!! Why has he never played a character like this again??? He is SO GOOD AT IT!!! I know I'm supposed to be focusing on the ladies and feminism of it all, but TOM HANKS STOLE MY HEART AND THE SHOW.
This movie was truly very well made. It managed to utilize all of the expected and familiar sports movie tropes, while still managing to feel fresh, funny, and relevant (even now!). It occasionally drifted into the territory of early-90s over fraught sentimentality, but it's hard not to when you're making a movie about a real event and those events happen to be sentimental. I loved that each of the women - even the more minor characters - were fully formed and believable and lovable; they were feminine and awkward and promiscuous and loud and brash and they felt like real women. And yeah, I loved that the little sister got to win (BECAUSE YOU NEVER SEE THAT! Can you tell I'm a little sister?).
Hustlers (2019)
Written & Directed by: Lorene Scafaria
Starring: Constance Wu, Jennifer Lopez, Keke Palmer, Lili Reinhart
IMDB Synopsis: Inspired by the viral New York Magazine article, Hustlers follows a crew of savvy former strip club employees who band together to turn the tables on their Wall Street clients.
Starring: Constance Wu, Jennifer Lopez, Keke Palmer, Lili Reinhart
IMDB Synopsis: Inspired by the viral New York Magazine article, Hustlers follows a crew of savvy former strip club employees who band together to turn the tables on their Wall Street clients.
Lorene Scarafia...
"That was part of the beauty of making this movie. I was excited to look at these women close up — from the neck up — and in ways that maybe we aren’t used to looking at them."
 |  |
If I had one complaint, it would be with some of the writing. There were a few lines that were just a little too contrived, and the relationship between Constance Wu and the journalist (Julia Stiles) became a little awkward as the plot moved forward. Wu keeps interrupting herself to say things like, "I shouldn't even be telling you this! You're going to perpetuate the stigma that strippers face every day! I'm not gonna say one more thing." Then Stiles would blink and Wu would be like "You're right never mind where was I..."
I get that the whole plot was centered around Wu's flashbacks while she was reiterating them to the journalist and therefore had no choice but to keep talking to her/ the audience, but methinks the lady doth protest too much. Scarafia kind of wrote herself into a corner on that one.
But besides that? This movie hit a lot of key points. Scarafia managed to create the Big Dick Energy of vintage Scorcese at his best, with the fur coats and the diamonds and the hookers and the blow - but this time it's from the hooker's point of view.
I was paying very close attention, and I believe there is only one moment where you ever see just a close-up part of a woman's body onscreen. Scarafia was meticulous when it came to training the audience's eye: you never forgot that these bodies were attached to faces, that these women were people too. Unlike every salacious music video I ever saw growing up in the 90's, it was impossible to objectify these characters as mere disembodied parts.
 |  |
Also... JENNIFER FREAKING LOPEZ IS FIFTY AMERICAN YEARS OLD and her pole-dancing scenes (there are exactly 2 of them) must not be undermined as simple eye candy or gratuitous T & A: they are remarkable, astounding, Olympic feats of strength and grace. Is it sexy? Of course it fucking is, it's a pole dance routine! It's supposed to be. But this is the Anti-Slut-Shame Movie of the Year, and you never forget who's in charge. Her body, her choice, y'all:
And the winner is...
I'll tell you what, these sure aren't getting any easier. A League of Their Own is a timeless classic and it is so, so good. And Hustlers might not stand the test of time as an iconic movie I want to show my nieces someday, but it started a conversation about The Female Gaze (and contributed to the vital one about sex-positivity) that I think we will begin to see more and more of as long as we keep putting women behind the camera. Marshall paved the way for it, and filmmakers like Scarafia will just keep taking it further and making it bigger.
In retrospect, it would've made more sense for this to be a challenge between Lady Bird and Booksmart (a Beanie Feldstein double feature, hell yeah!). But I've seen Lady Bird at least 4 times and I HADN'T EVEN SEEN THE NEW LITTLE WOMEN yet, so it had to be this way.
That being said, prepare to be shook...
That being said, prepare to be shook...
Little Women (2019)
Directed by: Greta Gerwig
Written by: Greta Gerwig
Starring: Saoirse Ronan, Emma Watson, Florence Pugh, Eliza Scanlen, Laura Dern, Timothée Chalamet
IMDB Synopsis: Jo March reflects back and forth on her life, telling the beloved story of the March sisters - four young women, each determined to live life on her own terms.
Written by: Greta Gerwig
Starring: Saoirse Ronan, Emma Watson, Florence Pugh, Eliza Scanlen, Laura Dern, Timothée Chalamet
IMDB Synopsis: Jo March reflects back and forth on her life, telling the beloved story of the March sisters - four young women, each determined to live life on her own terms.
Greta Gerwig...
"I've never had a plan. I've always done things from instinct."
 |  |
Before I can talk about Gerwig's Little Women, it is paramount that I adequately express how critically fundamental this story was to my upbringing: I am the youngest of three daughters. I grew up obsessively watching The Original (I know there are a dozen versions, but this is how I will refer to the 1994 one starring Winona Ryder). Jo March invented the iconic "Tomboy Writer" that I spent the rest of my adolescence trying to emulate, and she was my goddamn hero. I cannot emphasize this enough. To be honest, I really put off watching this one because 1) I really like Gerwig, and 2) The Original holds such a dear and significant place in my heart that I was extremely reticent to believe any reiteration could possibly hold so much as a candle to it.
Please observe Exhibit A: Is that Baby Sarah playing Jo March in the high school play??? OH YOU KNOW IT IS.
 |  |
So prepare the tar and feather, folks, because I'm sorry to say I was right. Gerwig's might've been better than my sophomore debut, but it did not succeed my expectations. NOW LET ME EXPLAIN: This was ALWAYS going to be a battle of Gerwig vs. The Original. So let's break it down as such.
What Worked For Me:
1) Emma Watson as Meg: I'll tell you what, I had to look up who even played Original Meg (it's Trini Alverado?) because except for the iconic hair-curl incident (SO glad they kept that) I don't remember her at all. Watson was, as always, fresh and bold and interesting. She was more than just the example of domesticity, she was a woman who consciously chose "love in a cottage," as Aunt March puts it, instead of the simpler (and safer) choice of marrying for money (and what a great foil this is for the other sisters).
I love that Gerwig chose to show us how this was not always easy for Meg - she still struggles with wanting more - but that those struggles come with a desire that is more pure and more complicated than just immature vanity. And despite how hard it is at times, she is still ultimately glad with her choice.
I was actually reminded of Julia Stiles in Mona Lisa Smile, when Julia Roberts confronts her that being barefoot and pregnant isn't the "feminist" choice: "Isn't that kind of the point of feminism, though? That the woman gets to choose what she wants? Because this is what I want."
I love that Gerwig chose to show us how this was not always easy for Meg - she still struggles with wanting more - but that those struggles come with a desire that is more pure and more complicated than just immature vanity. And despite how hard it is at times, she is still ultimately glad with her choice.
I was actually reminded of Julia Stiles in Mona Lisa Smile, when Julia Roberts confronts her that being barefoot and pregnant isn't the "feminist" choice: "Isn't that kind of the point of feminism, though? That the woman gets to choose what she wants? Because this is what I want."
 |  |
2) Beth! God bless Baby Claire Danes, but Gerwig did succeed in actually giving Beth a personality (albeit a exhaustively precious one. Why is she playing with dolls when she's like 16??). She was more than a cardboard cutout, even if it was only in her significance to other characters. Hardly a Bechdel success, but then again I've never been the biggest Claire Danes fan (I know, I know, we can tar and feather me for that later. Sorry, but chin wobbling is not an emotion!) And after watching Eliza Scanlen in the Sharp Objects adaptation, I am excited to see where this little firey one goes.
 |  |
3) Amy, Amy, Amy. This one is kind of a tie, because NO ONE can compete with Baby Kirsten Dunst setting fire to Jo's book. And I'm sorry, but WHERE was the clothespin on the nose, Greta?? Where was it??
 |  |
That being said... I simply cannot get enough of Florence Pugh. I could watch her lick envelopes and be on the edge of my seat. She is unique and fascinating and I am obsessed with her round face and husky voice and regal composure and captivating, never-ending inner monologue. I actually didn't mind that Gerwig chose to make them all teenagers much closer in age in the "past" scenes - it certainly made the Amy/Laurie romance later on significantly less awkward, abrupt, and off-putting than the '94 version - but I wish Pugh (who was 23 during filming) had played her like more of a 15 year old instead of a 12 year old. For that reason, Baby Amy award goes to Kirsten, but Pugh blows Dunst out of the goddamn water with her take on Adult Amy. I enjoyed how Gerwig played Amy and Jo off each other - both constantly thinking the other has it better - and their competition was perfectly layered with the genuine affection and jealousy that real sisters share. And my god, Pugh earned that Oscar nom with every syllable of that two-sentence speech on marriage and economics.
4) Now a name that might not be as familiar to you but definitely should be... Jacqueline Durran. She was the Oscar-winning Costume Designer, and you might recognize her other work from such films as Atonement, Pride & Prejudice (2005), Anna Karenina, & Beauty and the Beast (to be clear, I don't think being nominated for or winning an Oscar is the end-all be-all pinnacle of success... but it's hardly the worst indication of exceptional talent either).
Period costumes can be tough. They are little works of art, and it takes a delicate nuance to make them feel realistic and lived-in; beautiful, but not distracting. These costumes were orchestrated to look like real outfits, and Durran succeeded in making the actors actually look comfortable in them. They didn't sit on their bodies like high-end couture or ill-fitting community theatre hoop skirts; they looked natural AND beautiful, which is one of MY FAVORITE COMBINATION OF THINGS. (Also of note: the delicate and fresh score by Alexandre Desplat).
  |   |
5) Finally, the aesthetics in general were gorgeous. From the costumes to the music to the cinematography (Yorick Le Saux), this film was undeniably beautiful. Along that note, the way in which Gerwig and Le Saux worked together to capture the sheer frenzy that exists in a house full of girls was so spot on. The constant chatter, the whirl of clothes and costumes, the bickering, the wrestling, the giggling, the warmth; it was familiar and beautiful and straight up Gilmorian in the best way possible.
  |  |
What Did Not Work For Me:
1) I am TRYING TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND, I really, really am. But there is one and exactly ONE Marmee in my universe and her name is Susan Goddamn Sarandon. Her voice. Her demeanor. Her eyes. Her ESSENCE is Marmee. I appreciate and enjoy watching Laura Dern, but she has such an intense, prickly energy about her that whenever she tries to play someone maternal or soft it just comes across as... fake. I just don't buy it. Marmee's aggressively Enneagram Type 2 qualities are supposed to be warm and inspiring, but coming from Dern they just feel exhausting and martyr-y. Yeah, martyr-y, I said it. (By the way: Amy is a 3, Meg is a 1, Beth is a 9, and Jo is a hard 8, in case anyone was wondering.)
 |  |
2) Again, I know this shouldn't be a direct compare/contrast with the 1994 "Original," but Timothee Chalamet was NOT the obvious choice as Laurie for me. To be sure, there are parts of Laurie's character that Chalamet totally nailed: he has the wherewithal to be a selfish, lazy, ridiculous fop. But that's not ALL Laurie is! He's also kind and lonely and bored and restless and aggressive and spunky. He should be able to keep up with Jo. Some might argue that Chalamet did all those things (this one really just comes down to personal taste) but I feel like all he did was amplify Laurie's worst qualities and highlight none of his redeeming ones. His essence is all wrong. He's too delicate. For god's sake, the kid doesn't look old enough to babysit. He's 12 years old and weighs about 7 pounds and 8 ounces. He is a baby. Laurie is supposed to be a man. A hotheaded man-child, sure, but not a delicate porcelain man-baby.
You know would've made a great Laurie? Either Josh Hutcherson or Tom Holland would've made a lot more sense to me. I would also accept Justin Chatwin or Nicholas Hoult. Like, someone pretty, but not prettier than Ronan. And he has to look old enough to drive a car, for Christ's sake.
 |  |
3) Let's get one thing straight: I adore Saoirse Ronan. I do. And on the surface, this casting made perfect sense. Of course Gerwig would cast her, of course she would play Jo. I'm still trying to pinpoint exactly what my grievances are. It's not that she wasn't good - she's always "good" - but there was something about her interpretation that just never quite settled into place for me. Even without the comparison to Winona.
Again, I am super disappointed that I feel this way. I was so excited to see Gerwig nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay after her Directing snub (as I am always glad to see women nominated in fields I aspire to), but after having watched it... I'm sorry to say that I get it. I think this excerpt from a really great article on the movie nails part of it:
"Gerwig is one of the most original actors of her time; now she’s directing movies that evoke her own experience, but she doesn’t have actors similar to herself to portray characters who are like herself. Ronan displays, in both movies, conspicuous skill and admirable precision—but not the spontaneity, the creative imagination, the impulsivity that Gerwig herself displays onscreen. Ronan becomes a vessel for characters endowed with Gerwig’s creative fire, but not for the fire itself. (It’s unclear whether this is due to the nature of her own art or to its interface with Gerwig’s direction.) As a result, Ronan is not a powerful presence as Jo March: the character, famous for her anger, for her “temper,” comes off as unduly moderate, both inwardly and outwardly—not in conflict with herself, not repressing that rage, but merely claiming one that’s hardly in danger of bursting forth."
- The Compromises of Greta Gerwig's "Little Women" by Richard Brody, The NY Times
I am so anxious to vocalize my feelings about this because I know that at least amongst my peers, I am in a minority. After a lot of reflection and analysis, I have a two-part theory about why Ronan and the movie as a whole just didn't vibe for me.
First... How many really true distinctions can you name between Ronan's Jo March and Lady Bird? I seriously wracked my mind and all I could come up with was that Lady Bird was a little sassier and a lot hornier. But besides those two qualities (and their outfits) THEY WERE PRETTY SIMILAR CHARACTERS. And that's a bummer. Ronan can do that better that, so I have to chalk this up to a directorial blunder.
First... How many really true distinctions can you name between Ronan's Jo March and Lady Bird? I seriously wracked my mind and all I could come up with was that Lady Bird was a little sassier and a lot hornier. But besides those two qualities (and their outfits) THEY WERE PRETTY SIMILAR CHARACTERS. And that's a bummer. Ronan can do that better that, so I have to chalk this up to a directorial blunder.
 |  |
And Two... The most general grievance I take with this version comes down to the script. I watched it with my partner who has never seen any iteration of the story, and they were SO CONFUSED. I had to keep pausing to explain the jumping back and forth, and to be honest it even tripped me up once or twice. This is Little Women not Lost, people. She chopped up the script until it was barely legible, and unless you were REALLY familiar with the story (or just incredibly talented at observing changing hairstyles) it was confusing to follow. There was nothing in the splicing of the timelines that seemed to actually serve the story, except that it set it apart from any other version of the movie. That's not a good enough reason to do it. Even that one great shot with Marmee at the table juxtaposing when Beth was sick the first time and when Beth was sick the last time (you know the one), I couldn't help feeling that that moment would've been significantly more powerful if it had been spread out.
There was something more subtle, more brash about Ronan's Jo that I didn't hate... what sticks in my mind the strongest is a moment with Marmee when she confesses that even though she doesn't want to marry and she wants to be a self-sufficient, self-made, independent woman, she is so, so lonely. I get that. I really fucking get that. That moment is exactly why the character of Jo March is so close and personal to me. It really sucks feeling exhausted by your own passions because there is no one there to support you in them. I loved her frizzy hair and her tired eyes and the way she moves her hands and her nose gets ugly and red - I love it so much that it makes me angry, because that means Ronan is capable of that and has just been sitting on that the whole time. Where was that when Amy burned her book? Where was that when she turned Laurie down? I wanted more of Lonely Jo, more of Vulnerable Jo. There is a natural reservation to Ronan that I think Gerwig imagines she can circumvent by the sheer existence of Ronan's piercing blue eyes. But just like Claire Danes' wobbly chin, it registers onscreen as a simmer - I want the fucking fire, and I know it's in there. (So, in all fairness to that NY Times quote, I actually speculate that maybe it's not Ronan who isn't living up to Gerwig, maybe it's Gerwig holding back Ronan.)
Ultimately, I really think Gerwig just wanted to make a mini-series about Louisa May Alcott, and I so wish she had! There was NO REASON for this to be 2+ hours long (and this isn't an attention span thing, because my favorite films of 2019 were Parasite and Portrait of a Lady on Fire, and those both clock in over the 2 hour mark). Gerwig's vision did not seem to fit into the feature format, and I wish she hadn't tried to squeeze it all in. I felt like I was looking at a beautiful scrapbook but the all the pages were out of order. Like the pieces were all there, but they just didn't quite fit right. There is plenty of interest and prestige in mini-series now, so surely that could've been done.
And did we really need it to be just another new version of an old classic? I would've LOVED to see a Ronan-starring drama about Louisa May Alcott's real life, interspersed and parodied against the fictionalized version of Little Women (also how Atonement-y would that have been?!). And I know this would've worked, because in the last 20 minutes or so they seem to kind of try and do that? There's that whole bit with the publisher kind of winking at the camera (fantastic little cameo by Tracy Letts) and saying that "her character" should chase after The Boy and we could call it "Under the Umbrella" and Ronan is like "But that didn't happen." Was she actually being Jo March in that moment? Or was she being Louisa May Alcott?? Unclear.
Regardless, this should've been a mini-series about LMA's life and you CAN'T CHANGE MY MIND. Also in my version she's gay. Okay, bye!
 | "I am more than half-persuaded that I am a man's soul put by some freak of nature into a woman's body... Because I have fallen in love with so many pretty girls and never once the least bit with any man.” |
4) OH MY GOD WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT I LITERALLY FORGOT MY #1 SINGLE BIGGEST MOST UNFORGIVABLE ISSUE WITH THIS MOVIE HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!
I LITERALLY SPAT OUT MY WINE, STOOD UP, AND SCREAMED:
"BETTER CALL SAUL, WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING HERE?!?!??!?!?!?!??!?!??!?!"
I'm sorry, but the second he came on the screen I gave up on this whole movie. There was absolutely ZERO reason for Bob Odenkirk to be in this movie. He is balls deep in Better Call Saul right now and that is the ONLY thing audiences are going to think of him as right now. Why on EARTH would you pick him?!?!?!? Surely there was A SINGLE LIVING MIDDLE AGED MAN in Hollywood willing to sport some sideburns for TWO AND A HALF SCENES????? He's literally barely even in it, WHY would you cast such an INSTANTLY recognizable face, and one who's automatic association is to "SLEAZY LAWYER"?!?!??!? GERWIG????? WHO CANCELLED ON YOU AT THE LAST MINUTE???? WHAT WERE YOU THINKING????? I will never forgive her for this.
Booksmart (2019)
Directed by: Olivia Wilde
Written by: Emily Halpern, Sarah Haskins, Susanna Fogel & Katie Silberman
Starring: Kaitlyn Dever & Beanie Feldstein
IMDB Synopsis: On the eve of their high school graduation, two academic superstars and best friends realize they should have worked less and played more. Determined not to fall short of their peers, the girls try to cram four years of fun into one night.
Written by: Emily Halpern, Sarah Haskins, Susanna Fogel & Katie Silberman
Starring: Kaitlyn Dever & Beanie Feldstein
IMDB Synopsis: On the eve of their high school graduation, two academic superstars and best friends realize they should have worked less and played more. Determined not to fall short of their peers, the girls try to cram four years of fun into one night.
Olivia Wilde...
"It's really hard to get stories made that are about women. Not just women being obsessed with men, or supporting men. And it's really hard to get men to be a part of films that are about women in a leading role. I'm really interested in how we can adjust that."
 |  |
I actually watched Booksmart for the first time not that long ago, and I remember thinking it was funny, fresh, but ultimately a little clunky and clumsy - a perfectly adequate accomplishment for a first time director, but I couldn't imagine garnering anything new in the re-watch. Boy was I wrong! It's actually somehow even BETTER the second time around. I know I just wrote an entire novel about Little Women so I'll try to keep this one brief...
FOR STARTERS: The minor characters in this were so fucking hilarious and original and absurd and endearing. It's a challenge to write about high school in a way that's relevant to people of all ages without being derivative (and there are so many high school movies to copy from), but between the writers' meticulous balance of caustic and tender, and Wilde's truly incredible instincts, these people were believable and lovable and familiar and NEW all at the same time.
 Victoria Ruesga as the cool, sexually ambiguous heartthrob: "I don't even know if she likes girls." "Cmon, she wore a polo shirt to prom."  Mason Gooding as the hot jock Veep, who somehow manages to be a fuckboi AND respectful (and a Harry Potter fan?!)  BILLIE GODDAMN LOURD, daughter of Carrie Fisher, giving us ICONIC, effortlessly weird, and ingenious comedic timing as the stupid-rich druggie |  Skyler Gisondo as the preciously desperate white gangsta who's secret dream is to design celebrity airplanes and then use the money to fund new musicals?! Lol! "Enough with the revivals already, I just think audiences deserve something new, you know?"  Jason Sudeikis as the hilariously no-fucks-given Principal / Lyft Driver  Jessica Williams as the sexy and hip Miss Fine (lol) |  Molly Gordon as "Triple A," the slut going to Yale, known for her "roadside assistance"  Eduardo Franco as the near drop-out stoner who's skipping college to go code for Google. "I mean it's not Apple, but the salary starts at mid-six figures, so I guess that's chill."  Diana Silvers as the hot, mean, & aloof girl with the sexiest fringe coat I have ever seen in my life |
 And of course our HEROINES: Beanie Feldstein as Molly, the Yale-bound 40 yr old in a high school senior's body, dreaming of being the youngest SCJ... |  ...And Kaitlyn Dever as Amy, the awkward, introverted lesbian who's taking a gap year to teach women in Botswana how to make tampons. |
...And a small moment of appreciation for the WRITERS, a team of FOUR INCREDIBLE WOMEN who not only wrote some of the funniest one-liners, but also managed to make these characters sound like real high-schoolers: awkward, nervous, crass, frustrated, and every other emotion that comes to the surface the night before graduation. The way they managed to capture how HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS actually talk to each other reminded me so much of being that age in an authentic and nostalgic and heartwarming way. This wasn't an after school special but it wasn't American Pie, either.
I remember being so disappointed by Bridesmaids because I had such high expectations for it to prove that Women Can Be Funny, but instead it felt like they were trying to hard to prove it they stooped to the boy's level and I was forced to watch 90 minutes of dick and fart jokes. Which there is a time a place for, but surely women can find other ways to be funny - not because they're women, but because there are funnier things to write about.
What I loved the most about the writing in this is how goddamn well-paced it was. To be sure, some of the jokes didn't quite land, but overall the plot was excellent: they set up all these quirky, bizarre characters early on, and then like a well-timed road trip movie they knock down each domino one by one. People show up at a time and place that makes sense and in a way that still managed to occasionally surprise me.
There were SO MANY GOOD MOMENTS in this movie, and they all deserve a moment of recognition. I will do my best to be brief and just give a Top 10 highlights reel:
1) The way these girls aggressively verbally assault each other with compliments and impromptu dance parties:
2) The outrageous last-day-of-school party in the hallway, and the way Wilde used it in the credits:
3) BILLIE LOURD in EVERY ridiculous moment she shows up:
4) The lighting in the Principal's Lyft and their post-pizza-hold-up (really all of the lighting was just excellent):
5) The INSANELY over-the-top DANCE SEQUENCE through that deliciously technicolor 1970's dreamscape house (and that fucking HOUSE OMG!!):
6) That heartbreaking, slow-motion, underwater ballet that made you go Romeo + Juliet who? And set to the gorgeous backdrop of "Slip Away" by Perfume Genius... It was perfection. (As was the entire soundtrack, as a matter of fact, and if you give a shit about iconic movie soundtracks the way I do, check this one out IMMEDIATELY.)
7) The INCREDIBLE tripping-balls scene?!?!? Oh my god?!?!?! Olivia Wilde!!!!! Who even gave you permission???? To make this scene so fucking bizarre and funny and WORK!?!??!?!? SO GOOD!!!!
8) The way Molly & Amy's fight went into MOS (no sound). I fucking loved that choice. Because that's the thing about fights with your best friend in high school: the words don't really matter.
9) The excellently absurd graduation scene:
10) The final line. I don't know why I loved that so much... probably because it captured the whole essence of the film: dramatic and emotional, interrupted by the hilarious and ridiculous. It was so genuine and surprising and remains one of my favorite subtler endings of a film in this genre.
11) OMG I'M SORRY THIS IS A BONUS ONE BUT the Panda-packing moment with Lisa Kudrow and Will Forte (genius cameos btw) where you can LITERALLY ALMOST SEE BEANIE FELDSTEIN BREAK CHARACTER is one of the funniest things I've ever seen.
And the winner is...
This was NOT an easy choice to make. But when it comes to making difficult decisions like this on razor sharp margins, I refer to Our Patron Saint of Film Criticism, Roger Ebert:
"The star ratings are relative, not absolute. If a director is clearly trying to make a particular kind of movie, and his [OR HER!] audiences are looking for a particular kind of movie, part of my job is judging how close he came to achieving his purpose."
This may come as a shock to some, but Juno is probably in my Top 10 (on the more sentimental side, but still). I watched it in theaters (with my mom! Instead of going to prom! I was SO COOL!) and it blew my mind. I'd never seen a movie adequately capture a girl like me: smart but not a total loser, sexually curious but terrified of the human body; I was a tomboy who wanted to be taken seriously, who has historically just had one close friend at a time (if I even had that). I had a very weird and traumatic high school experience (I mean, who didn't) so there will always be something about this genre that I can't help but be drawn to... watching movies like Booksmart make me feel like I get to relive some of those years with a happier ending. I only bring up Juno because to me, that is the end-all-be-all of Excellent Movies In That Genre. Was Booksmart as good as Juno? No, probably not. It was a different animal (the R rating changes so much), but it was successful at what it set out to do.
And that's what this is gonna come down to: Olivia Wilde set out to make a clever, fresh, funny story about a super intense nerd and her awkward queer friend (don't know who I identified with more). Greta Gerwig said she set out to reinvent a classic with a feminist twist, but I think what she really wanted to make was a mini-series about Louisa May Alcott.
IN A SHOCKING TURN OF EVENTS... I cannot be deterred from my belief that only one of these directors successfully accomplished what they set out to do. Gerwig, if you can ever forgive me, please let me know when you make that mini-series because I will be the first in line to see it.
I too am shooketh.
This is going to be a totally brutal battle of ~lewks~ and I am NOT READY TO MAKE A DECISION! You will notice that I am including a shout out to the Production & Costume Designers of each film because these films are 90% AESTHETIC and these masterminds must be recognized!
Emma (2020)
Directed by: Autumn de Wilde
Written by: Eleanor Catton
Starring: Anya Taylor-Joy, Johnny Flynn, Mia Goth, Bill Nighy
Production Designer: Kave Quinn (Trainspotting, The Woman in Black)
Costume Designer: Alexandra Byrne (Elizabeth, Mary Queen of Scots)
IMDB Synopsis: In 1800s England, a well meaning but selfish young woman meddles in the love lives of her friends.
Written by: Eleanor Catton
Starring: Anya Taylor-Joy, Johnny Flynn, Mia Goth, Bill Nighy
Production Designer: Kave Quinn (Trainspotting, The Woman in Black)
Costume Designer: Alexandra Byrne (Elizabeth, Mary Queen of Scots)
IMDB Synopsis: In 1800s England, a well meaning but selfish young woman meddles in the love lives of her friends.
Autumn de Wilde...
"When her arthritis got so bad that she needed a cane, Autumn de Wilde didn’t just pick one up at the pharmacy. She went to a 19th century Victorian umbrella shop in London and told the shopkeeper: “I need your weirdest cane.”
“Check this out,” she said, unscrewing the top of the French walking stick, supposedly modeled after one once owned by Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec. Inside was a thin vial containing Japanese whiskey, bookended by a couple of shot glasses. “These need a little wash, because we’ve partaken recently. It actually only holds a shot, which is so disappointing. I thought it was so much more when I bought it.”
 |  |
The idea of following standard protocol is anathema to De Wilde. Every day, she dresses in a uniform — some version of a suit with a broad-brimmed felt hat. (She says her style is a mix of Paddington Bear and Oscar Wilde.)"
- Amy Kaufman, The LA Times
This movie was so exceptionally gorgeous, I spent every other minute pausing it to weep. I'm barely exaggerating. Every frame was like a sucker punch to my deepest aesthetic dreams, except the punch was soft and ice-cream colored and somehow smelled good? de Wilde's sense of beauty was so carefully executed it almost hurt to look at - every single frame was a post card, a painting, a wink, a treat.
I honestly don't know which was more delicious, these rose & mint-chocolate chip interiors...
I honestly don't know which was more delicious, these rose & mint-chocolate chip interiors...
Or these impossibly sexy, technicolor pastel exteriors...
Also, sorry/not sorry, but every single time I see realistic lighting executed appropriately in a film from now on, I am compelled to scream out MEEK'S CUTOFF! Because I still haven't forgiven Kelly Reichardt for making me watch half of that movie in the pitch fucking dark. IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE PERIOD-APPROPRIATE LIGHTING AND ALSO STILL LIGHT YOUR ACTORS AND ALSO EVEN BE FLATTERING thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
 |  |
 |  |
“One of the things I was most struck by that seemed very intimately her is her female gaze on men and romance. When you look back through at the men she has photographed, she’s not afraid to take in what’s beautiful about a man’s body — this is how he’s childlike but also tough.... I just think it’s interesting in this moment, when you wonder what have we been missing — it’s a different way to see men. Of course we’ve missed women’s voices and stories, but men have missed out on a certain kind of tenderness that someone like Autumn can give. It’s interesting to think there may be some healing in that.” - Miranda July
 |  |
While I agree with July's assessment, I have a bone to pick with Jane Austen: unpopular opinion, I know, but Mr. Knightley is a dick?? When he finally comes to make his declaration of love to Emma, we get one of the GREATEST lines Austen ever wrote:
"I cannot make speeches, Emma...If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more..."
And then follows it up with one of the WORST lines Austen ever wrote!!!
"...But you know what I am. You hear nothing but truth from me. I have blamed you, and lectured you, and you have borne it as no other woman in England would have borne it."
So, essentially, Mr. Knightley realizes he loves Emma because he's been a huge DICK to her and she's been a real CHAMP about it? Ew! He may as well have come up to her on the playground and said, "Hey I know I keep kicking you and throwing sand on your head, but you've been really cool about it, wanna be my girlfriend?" Being "rich" or "resilient" isn't a justification for cruelty, you're just too lazy to articulate your witticisms in a kinder way. Get the fuck outta here, Knightley.
 |  |
If I had a SINGLE criticism (besides Knightley), it would be those goddamn Handmaids... throughout the film, there is a visual thread of these dozen or so schoolgirls that traipse through the town walking all in a line, like a whimsical marriage of Madeline and the track team from Juno. It's cute, it's quirky, but there is no denying that they look straight out of Gilead.
  |   |
I fortunately discovered this thread on Instagram that explains her choice contextually:
"These coats were very popular in the Regency period for young women to wear (mostly in the country) during the colder months in England. They were out of style by the 1830’s. The following images are the illustrations of Diana Sperling (1791-1862) whose whimsical illustrations of girls out walking in these coats was a great inspiration to the design of their look." - Autumn de Wilde's Instagram
 |  |
...But I still can't help thinking that given the rest of the incredible, ice-cream shoppe hues in the film, de Wilde easily could've gotten away with making these robes either more plum or more raspberry. How cute would a dozen ladies in dark fuschia robes have been?? I get where the inspiration came from, but I'm afraid we live in a post Handmaids Tale era now and there are some looks that get claimed by something and can't ever, ever be duplicated without the audience automatically thinking of the original. I love Lady Gaga to death, but the pointy bra belongs to exactly one artist and it ain't her.
Clueless (1995)
Directed by: Amy Heckerling
Written by: Amy Heckerling
Starring: Alicia Silverstone, Stacey Dash, Brittany Murphy, Paul Rudd
Production Designer: Steven J. Jordan (A Night at the Roxbury, Never Been Kissed)
Costume Designer: Mona May (The Wedding Singer, Zenon: The Zequel)
IMDB Synopsis: A rich high school student tries to boost a new pupil's popularity, but reckons without affairs of the heart getting in the way.
Written by: Amy Heckerling
Starring: Alicia Silverstone, Stacey Dash, Brittany Murphy, Paul Rudd
Production Designer: Steven J. Jordan (A Night at the Roxbury, Never Been Kissed)
Costume Designer: Mona May (The Wedding Singer, Zenon: The Zequel)
IMDB Synopsis: A rich high school student tries to boost a new pupil's popularity, but reckons without affairs of the heart getting in the way.
Amy Heckerling...
"I just wanted to do something about the teenage experience; it's such a wonderful and horrible time of life."
 ...There's something about women directors and hats, right? |  Alicia Silverstone & Amy Heckerling |
Before I can even ATTEMPT to talk about ONE OF MY FAVORITE MOVIES AS A YOUTH, please let your gentle eyeballs kindly absorb the delicate absurdity, the outrageous decadence, the pinnacle of camp itself (!) of these totally bonkers 1990's outfits...
Things I LOVE about this movie (besides the iconic fashion) :
- Cher is a virgin and proud of it? This was a ballsy move for a teen film in the 90s. It was incredibly sex-positive while also avoiding prude-shaming. She wasn't a virgin because of any religious or misguided purity-obsessed reasons, she was a virgin because she was PICKY. That was groundbreaking.
 |  |
- Baby Brittany Murphy!!!! 😭😭 Besides being a wildly underrated talent whose life went tragically awry, I always forget how goddamn pure she was. In fact, there's a lot of wholesome, genuine purity in this movie. I think it was on the Vulture TV Podcast that I heard a writer say, "there's nothing more endearing than ridiculous characters who have no idea how ridiculous they are." And this is a whole movie full of them.
  |   |
- PAUL GODDAMN RUDD!!! This movie is responsible for making Millennial women turn this silly, adorable man into a sex icon. And you know what? He's never shitty to Cher. I forgot what an asshole Mr. Knightley is to Emma in the original, and I'm not into it. Paul Rudd manages to call Cher on her bullshit in a way that doesn't degrade or humiliate her, while also encouraging the good parts he sees in her. Now that's hot.
  |   |
- Stacy Dash!! I love the fact that Cher has a black best friend who is every bit as rich, popular, and ridiculous as she is. She is never tokenized (except maybe with a hat or two...) and her blackness is not her only character trait. For 1995, that was a fairly new accomplishment.
 |  |
I remember watching this movie as a kid and it blowing my mind in a way that it wouldn't be shocked again until I discovered Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It was so rare to me to find an example of girly femininity that was also coupled with spunk, resourcefulness, and (in her own way) scrappy intelligence. She was flawed, quirky, strong, bold, and just happened to like dressing like a Beverly Hills Barbie. Cher was no damsel in distress, and she wasn't a Disney Princess either. She was a whole new thing, and I fucking loved that.
And the winner is...
Clueless will always hold a special place in my heart, but there is no denying the utter deliciousness that was de Wilde's Emma. The way she captures her women, her men, her textures and color and beauty and ugliness... her hands were all over that film and they were careful and reckless and bold and perfect, and I wanted to eat up every moment of it.
“De Wilde, however, views “Emma” as an offering of levity during a period of political unrest that makes us feel “like we’re all being bullied.” And she takes issue with those who view films with ornate scenery — like those of Wes Anderson, one of her creative inspirations — as pure fluff.
"I mean, have people seen ‘Moonlight’? There’s so much color in that movie, and it’s genius. It’s a strange idea that movies about pain and struggle should have color removed from them,” she said. “I don’t know why it’s been assigned to extravagance. I don’t walk into a pastry shop in Paris and go, ‘Why are all these colors here?’ I go, ‘That’s delicious, and I want to eat it.’ How it looks is part of the story.”
- Amy Kaufman, The LA Times
Archives
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
Author
Sarah Ruth(less) Joanou is a Chicago based writer, artist, production designer, actor, & cat mom.
