THE RUNNING MAN (2025)

 

Directed By: Edgar Wright 

Written by: Michael Bacall and Edgar Wright 

Based on the book by: Stephen King 

Cinematography: Chung-Hoon Chung

Editor: Paul Machliss 

Cast: Glen Powell, Josh Brolin, Michael Cera, Colman Domingo, Alyssa Benn, Sean Hayes, Lee Pace, Katy O’Brian, William H. Macy. Emilia Jones  

A man joins a game show in which contestants, allowed to flee anywhere in the world, are pursued by "hunters" hired to kill them.

————————————————————————————

Where to begin with this one? First off, let me say that I am a huge fan of director Edgar Wright. Though I have to say this is his most disappointing film from a personal standpoint.

Though it is not his fault, but throughout the film, the only time the film seems to have his madcap energy and directing prose is really in the scenes with Michael Cera. Which is where the film feels fun and unpredictable. Which is what you are kind of expecting the whole film to be.

This version plays supposedly a little bit more to the original book by Stephen King then the previously filmed the version of it starring Arnold Schwarzenegger.

I can’t really say because I’ve never read the book .

Though while this story seems like it would do well on the big screen I prefer the previous version of the film maybe because while not sticking exactly to its material it does play well as a satire Moore in the 1980s of what the future might be 

Whereas watching this version of the film, the satire feel somewhat dated and beat you over the head with a message that I think or would hope most viewers already enough and furthermore, this film just feels like it didn’t need to be made. It just feels like such a big budget Entertainment but yet it lacks the death.

Worst of all, even though Edgar Wright, cockroach and directed the film other than the Michael Cera scenes this film felt like it could’ve been made by anybody any director worth their weight as that is how uninspired the story and visuals come across it just all feels colorful yet basic 

Now don’t get me wrong the film is perfectly entertaining for a popcorn movie but again if you’ve already seen the original from the 1980s, this is just a retread that has been updated and seemingly to have more action instead of inside of a studio more in the world and the villain has changed from the game show host to the CEO behind the scenes 

Most of the major actors seem more like they’re doing cameos that were done all for the paycheck and we’re finished in a day or two, though they are stitched into the film and storyline to be major players

The lead played by Glenn Powell does try but this feels like a film that definitely needs a known star who has a history within the action genre so you already know they can pull it off whereas Glenn Powell is a star who is somewhat known but does not have a big screen personality he is more of an actor so this every man surviving comes across more as a concoction, and then letting the audience believe it also, even though his character is supposed to be this angry man full of rage and that’s why he keeps surviving. The problem is that Glenn Powell comes across as such an affable guy you can understand his anger, but you don’t believe that he has that much built up inside of him that is just keeps pushing him ahead. He just seems like your average decent guy now whereas in the past, that would work for an action hero to be identifiable here it makes it seem all the more implausible.

Now while the film is never truly boring, it doesn’t run a bit long and could’ve easily been shortened by 20 minutes as it feels like the film just wanted to give you more action and that’s really the only reason for the length of time whereas the story could’ve been told a little bit shorter.

Especially when they have scenes devoted to a seemingly satire of the Kardashians throughout, which seems there as alternative programming for viewers in the film to watch, as it is at least more innocent and less violent than most of the game shows that are presented as well as to just make fun of reality shows in general in the end feels unnecessary

Throughout this review, trying not to compare the two but also the introduction of a third act character who truly proves integral to the whole film feels random at best  and at worst like lazy storytelling that had to be put there because it was part of the story of the original and in the book. Has even as it seemed to pre-date AMERICAN GLADIATORS at least the villains. The hunters had personality whereas here, though they could be compared to ice they feel a bit more random and mysterious again, typical villain, who each seem to have a look, but only to come across in costume.

This one tries to be different and while it is much different then the original screen version and manages to set itself apart. It’s not necessarily for the better. When it’s difference really doesn’t help it and makes the co promised version we got, just a bit better. Even if it let the book’s fans down and not one of its stars favorite films. As he feels the movie is filmed too flat.

As by now there have been so many copycats, we borrowed from this story in plot and managed to do better and impress, and also do mean and go to the worst offenses of exploitation It’s pretty much hard to impress or top at this point.

It’s quality entertainment as long as you don’t have your hopes up .

Grade: C+

PARTHENOPE (2024)

 

Written & Directed By: Paolo Sorrentino 

Cinematography: Daria D’Antonio 

Editor: Cristiano Travaglioli 

Cast: Celeste Dalla Porta, Silvio Orlando, Gary Oldman, Peppe Lanzetta, Dario Aita, Marlon Joubert, Luisa Ranieri, Isabella Ferrari

A woman born in the sea of Naples in 1950 searches for happiness over the long summers of her youth, falling in love with her home city and its many memorable characters.

————————————————————————

Director Paolo Sorrentino knows how to make things beautiful. He knows how to bring out natural beauty and what others might overlook this film, which looks more like a commercial at times with its images and characters, reminding one a film such as Terence Malik in this world there’s a visuals could be distracting , but also seem to be part of the storytelling as this film seems to more be about atmosphere and culture than anything else.

While this film is an epic in itself. It’s not as flashy as his previous films. As it is broad but feels a bit more modest and gritty. 

The lead character Parthenope played elegantly by Celeste Dalla Porta. which also has the name of the title was born in the sea. She seems to represent Naples, Italy itself, naturally, beautiful, and island separated from the rest of the world who either stare or wish to be near she must pay a price for her beauty as it causes Corruptions breakdowns, false promises, flirtations all around her as it tries to be itself, but at times can’t be selfish or all consuming not knowing its own power and strength and influence over others

The film provides many metaphors, but like it subject, it feels shallow and a bit too in love with itself as there is substance that doesn’t feel like it digs deep enough? As the audience takes us along its many paths. Though seems to get lost in itself. 

The subjects of the film, the director has explored before and deeper so much more so that this film that tries to be artistic comes across a little bit more mainstream, even with all of its indulgences

Gary Oldman is a selling point in his small role is writer, John Cheever, who you hope would help shape the story or being an interesting chapter as she would become amuse of his, but he seems more to help the film’s box office and as the only American character going with a recognizable screen presents Though seems more there as a memento or a devotion, a testament to the times

The lead actress is certainly beautiful and has a passing resemblance to actress Mia Sara she does what is expected of her as she continuously looks glamorous in bikinis and evening dresses, but through her journeys and some growth, you wish the film brought into focus more of the side characters like her acting teacher who shows up to give lessons, but truly proves to be nothing but smoke and mirrors

It feels like the film  MALENA by Giuseppe Tonratore as the film continuously focuses on her beauty, even when trying to show her as a full character whereas in that film, it humanized the title character, but we more got to see her from others point of view here the title character gets all these opportunities and meet so many influential characters because of her beauty and youth and constantly trying to figure everything out around her which also leads too many tragedies as she know so many

So that this film becomes a historic look at a beautiful woman overtime as well as the changing of the times of Italy that serves as a fictional biography of sorts. A romantic look back that surprisingly has little sex and isn’t as exploited as the directors previous films could be, but there does feel Like for all the access in this film. There’s also an emptiness to it.

Still a film to see, but not needed to be so lengthy when there isn’t that much to say 

Grade: B- 

FEDORA (1978)

 

Directed By: Billy Wilder

Written By: Billy Wilder & I.A.L. Diamond 

Based On a Story By: Tom Tyron 

Cinematography: Gerry Fisher 

Editor: Stefan Arnstein and Frederic Steinkamp 

Cast: William Holden, Marthe Keller, Hildegard Knef, Jose Ferrer, Frances Sternhagen, Mario Adorf, Stephen Collins, Henry Fonda, Michael York 

Famous film star Fedora has died. At her funeral, movie producer Barry Detweiler recalls how only two weeks previously, after much difficulty, he approached her and asked her to star in a movie of his. The encounter revealed some disturbing things about her life, and now more will be revealed after her death.

————————————————————————

This was unfortunately Billy Wilder’s last produced film. Where he had his long time co-writer I. A. L. Diamond riding with him. What a film to go out on though. 

Surprisingly, it’s not a comedy. It’s actually a drama that works as a companion piece with his classic Sunset Boulevard for some people. The movie will not rise to the occasion or reputation of that film, even with both films having William Holden as one of the main stars. 

Fedora is a different animal as it’s kind of a detective story and a mystery yet not the traditional one where we do into the past and current state finding out about a character in their history as well as a film that has something to say about Fame stardom Hollywood movies character And identity as well as beauty

Just like Sunset Boulevard a love letter to the industry that at that point for Billy Wilder was passing him by and putting him out to pasture, but he wanted to show he still had what it took and wanted to take or tell a grand powerful story while also having a cynical side 

This film is more intimate, even though it’s sad Moore in the Greek islands so while it should be epic and scope, he manages to make it feel a little more personal, a little more private, even when dealing with a Hollywood star 

That is what also sent to Sunset Boulevard, as we have an aging legendary actress who has become reclusive and might be delusional, who still believes her own Fame and the people around her, enable it, even though it might lead to her destruction mentally 

And also involves William Holden‘s character, desperate to find the star and trying to hang his own Fame or come back on her cocktails, though through investigation and revelations becomes a lot closer than he ever expected to come to her, and she has quite her own story to tell that he must discover Rather than it being told directly

It works like a detective, nor even though most of the scenes take place and playing daylight in the way that the Moor investigates in the more that he thinks he knows the more is actually revealed sometimes directly, but also sometimes subtly for the audience to discover just as he does so in that way, it feels kind of interactive, but it also feels like an ode to glamour that at the time was disappearing, they send off to classic films, classic Hollywood and thinking behind it. It actually ends up being a perfect swan song for Billy Wilder, who still even after this film, was trying to get films made in this new Hollywood, but couldn’t get hired no matter how eager he wants to work, used up and thrown away, which can be set of the main character in this town that’s the theme feels more autobiographical

For him 

It’s a beautiful prince of filmmaking that feels like it’s from a timeless bygone era. As they do my make films like these anymore 

Grade: B+

CONTEMPT (1963)

 

Directed By: Jean-Luc Godard

Written by & based on the novel “IL DISPREZZO” By: Alberto Moravia

Cinematography: Raoul Coutard

Editor: Agnes Guillemot 

Cast: Jack Planace, Brigitte Bardot, Fritz Lang, Michel Piccoli, Giorgia Moll

A French writer's marriage deteriorates while working on Fritz Lang's version of "The Odyssey", as his wife accuses him of using her to court favor with the film's brash American producer.

————————————————————————

Tortured Myself again, by watching another Jean Luc-Godard From my Criterion Collection, sight unseen.

I know how dour that already sounds. You just have to know that me and Jon Luc Godard films have had a love-hate relationship. I have actually liked and enjoyed some films that I didn’t expect while other films that are considered classics I found rather boring noteworthy for different reasons.

I like the ideas of Jean-Luc Godard, in his style though the films not necessarily as much at times they work, but usually not at least for me as they become statements which might have worked at the time as bold but now come across as pretentious, cinematic, theatrical games, there is a living quality to them in an absurd quality, as they are usually quite beautiful, but leaves the audience lost to find their own way, which is commendable, if not having

I will say watching the movie is like reading a classic book you don’t like and wonder why so many do as it feels more like an assignment that you’re determined to finish 

This is one of those movies where you’re going to come up with your own theory or understanding of it so I’m only gonna present my interpretation.

Now it’s always entertaining watching a younger Jack Palance in a film, as well as young women, riding bicycles in skirts. Though watching Fritz Lang steal the movie in his scenes was worth it

It is another movie of Brigitte Bardot being torn supposedly between Teague lovers neither of which is seem a good choice, but one is better than the other and her never having chemistry who is the one who is older, has more money and seems more want her only physically.

This film is a satire film making, but it seems to turn more into a domestic drama romance of a deteriorating marriage.Even as it explores the themes of selling out or staying, true to your principles.

That was it’s a beautiful locations still end up being a hang out movie that is in the middle of paradise yet everyone is oblivious to the beauty of their surroundings or they’ve been there so long that it is normal to them, though the film still manage to showcase the beauty and appeal of Brigitte Bardot and it seems like while everybody in the film can see her beauty she is like the background to them. They’ve grown so used to her that it’s normal, but will still contest her. Well, the film and filmmaker bathe her and loving light as well as give her a meaty challenging role. Though questionable if you might actually like her by the end

One can say that at least she gets to play full character other than just a fantasy or an object of beauty pretty much a bombshell, though she does Grace the poster, so it she did help sell tickets for this phone as next to Jack Palance she’s the biggest name in the film and of course Fritz Lang. No, she seems to be the entrance or introduction for us to the Phil as the camera lingers on her

Throughout the film, we see the games that all the characters seem to be playing weather in love relationships filmmaking financing.

Now one can see where Martin Scorsese got part of his score of CASNO from. It gets  annoying a bit at times watching its source play throughout. The score “ST. MATTHEW PASSION BMV 244/PART TWO: WIR SETZEN UNS MIT TRANEN NEIDER”’By Johann Sebastian Bach 

Which leads me to wonder Did he use it to subconsciously say that all these characters are in this Idyllic Wonderland in that they are alienated from it due to mounting domestic pressures & alienation from one another

Didn’t expect this to become one of Godard Morchella Ching films even though it’s seams like most of them are as the film deals with alien nation. It almost feels more like a Michelangelo Antonioni film only no not as long, and this seem to have more of a cruel, ending the natural ending.

In the end, I have no problem, admitting maybe I didn’t quite get it as much as others did as I loved the concepts and drama that was introduced that lead to discussions and conversations even after you watch the film no again I can’t say I enjoyed it, or necessarily would need to watch it again

IL POSTO (1961)

 

Directed By: Ermando Olmi 

Written By: Ermando Olmi And Ettore Lombardo 

Cinematography: Lambert Caimi 

Editor: Carla Colombo 

Cast: Lordana Detto, Sandro Panseri 

Bursting with big dreams and plans, an Italian teen goes to Milan to work in a big impersonal corporate office, where he becomes disillusioned and drained of all his individualism.

————————————————————————

This classic masterpiece of Italian film is full of great moments. As it seems focused on two characters in particular, thst the film takes its time in introducing individually and to one another, but by the end becomes more of an ensemble.

The film tries more to be a docu-drama to make it feel more realistic which is why there are barely any credits. 

The film definitely paints a picture of a culture, time period and of business. How the film introduces us to individuals but by the end they become part of the system and almost nameless. Even though they all ah e their own conflicts and personalities. Though become defined by their jobs only. Another cog in the bureaucratic machine 

The black and white photography throughout gives the film and the tale a timeless nature. As it is a story we have seen many times but different locations and circumstances. As it tries to tell a tale of what seems like first love as an adult, but will it ever get that far or only stay a flirtation. Like when you see someone interesting randomly I. Travel or at an event. Where you seem to hit it off but will you ever see each other again or get a chance to let one another know how you truly feel about them after a few chance encounters. 

It offers the beginning of a romance that never quite starts. That gets lost amongst the many other responsibilities that are forced upon you. As you enter adulthood. 

The promise of something better thst never quite seems to come. While In The heartless system that seems to have bring them together, but also keeps them apart 

As In The beginning interviews it seems to be the go ahead and the beginning. As they are separated yet full of promise. Which leads to uncertainty. As there are no real duties and have nothing but time filled with hope. As he gets busier he manages to see her again. There is promise when she begs him to be at a New Year’s Eve party that she will be attending.

When we get to the party where him and a bunch of different characters t about heartbreak, but learn how to open themselves up to one another and manage to save the evening. Which leads to an ending of uncertainty and unresolved emotions. Where we hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

Grade: A-