I actually loved that third part, giving the character a deserved chance at happiness.
And for me it is the rare series which improves with each sequel.
3 Likes
Incredibly funny moment – after I realized what I said. Had to laugh so hard. Thing is, nobody else was there to witness, so I thought I’d share… 
Caught a glimpse of Die Hard on TV the other day – in between commercial breaks from something else – and had myself thinking: that guy who plays Deputy Chief Dwayne T. Robinson, Paul Gleason, I know him from some other movie… I googled, and when I saw the result, I shouted out loud, like Dan Aykroyd and Eddie Murphy did in Trading Places (when they both simultaneously recognize him on TV): “Clarence Beeks!!!” – it took me three seconds until I realized that I just involuntarily copied one of my favourite movie scenes 
5 Likes
The Holdovers (2023 film shot to look like it was filmed in the 1970s): My husband was in one of his “What’s so-and-so up to these days?” trips down various rabbit holes. He looked up Paul Giamatti and found this film.
Giamatti is brilliant as an overly strict classics instructor at a boys prep school. Even though it is not his turn, he is coerced by another faculty member into staying over the Christmas holiday to oversee the “holdovers” who can’t go home for Christmas. The film features a remarkable first film performance by Dominic Sessa. Da’Vine Joy Randolph is wonderful as the school’s cook struggling with a tragic loss.
The Holdovers reunites Giamatti with Alexander Payne, who also directed him in Sideways (a 2004 film my husband remembers, but I don’t). I highly recommend this film. Despite its bleak atmosphere, it somehow manages to be a feel-good movie without ever feeling saccharine.
4 Likes
“Horizon”
AKA “How the West Was Won '24”
Imagine if “Dances with Wolves” was made in such a way that John Dunbar was only 1 of 4 different stories being told. That’s “Horizon.”
I’m not one to write longer, thoughtful reviews we are lucky to get here - I’ll just say that I enjoyed it despite its flaws. It’s solid, but unspectacular.
There are just too many characters and subplots going on. It looses focus. You get to know a character and get invested in their story, then they move on to something else for 45mins. Costner doesn’t even appear until an hour in.
Whether it’s a movie for you to invest 3 hours in probably depends on your interest in the subject of the American West and whether you like westerns. If you do, there’s enough here to enjoy. If you don’t, this will probably be tedious.
Technical credits like photography, costumes, music, etc, are all exemplary.
2 Likes
I‘m still looking forward to it and the planned four film arc.
And I think it’s saying something about our molded expectations that many viewers are irritated by Costner‘s character not carrying the whole narrative.
We are so trained to enjoy the hero‘s journey that we reject anything else.
I bet Hitchcock today would be criticized for starting a film with a star and then killing her halfway through.
2 Likes
That post doesn’t remotely describe the reasons for me making the point I made.
I did not arrive at my opinions because of molded expectations or having been trained a certain way. I arrived there because I have my own thoughts and opinions on how the narrative was structured because, having actually seen the film, I thought it was a flawed way to present the story.
It is a legitimate point to make.
2 Likes
I did not mean to criticize you, and I absolutely respect your opinion or anybody else’s.
I picked up on your criticism of Costner‘s character appearing only halfway through, which was criticized by many, and that’s what I gave my opinion on.
And since I said „we are trained“ I included myself.
2 Likes
2 Likes
My impression is that HORIZON and its planned companion pieces is an enormously ambitious venture; a painting so huge and epic that even a three hour film reveals only a glimpse of a first cautious idea of what the finished work - rather more mural than picture - might look like.
I keep my fingers crossed for Costner and would like to see his project succeed, even with our modern day scepticism towards ambitious visions that brush our expectations against the grain.
On the other hand one can’t help wondering whether this scale is truly serving the concept. Costner is a passionate creative and burning for this opus. The theme runs deep throughout his career and he’s proven his expertise over and over again. Would be a shame if this epic re-examination of the pioneer saga and mythology didn’t find its way to the big screen because big screens are going the way of the pioneers 100 years ago.
1 Like
It surely seems like an experiment which might take too long for today’s attention span.
Although it is curious that audiences have no problem following a decade long developing tv show but seem to balk at a series of movies.
And didn’t the many protagonists of the Marvel series ask for a lot of patience until they paid off in the last two Avengers-films (with the first one ending unresolved and the second one following after a year)?
It seems that the main problem for Costner is that the often ugly history of the American settlement is not attractive for most (younger) viewers.
And certainly the unjustified blame he was given for the Sheridan-caused blunder of the last „Yellowstone“ season gave lots of keyboard warriors ammunition to gleefully hope for and then applaud the commercial failure of this film.
The fact Costner invested a lot of his own money made the schadenfreude even louder. Weird.
I hope part two scheduled for Venice will at least bring some critics on his side.
1 Like
At least with Marvel the main difference seems to be the event character of these productions. Much like the LORD OF THE RINGS/THE HOBBIT trilogies ten and twenty years before (or the Spider-Man/X-Men productions). These films are effectively nerd territory, niches in pop culture - which managed to become must-see events mainly by clever marketing and tapping into the zeitgeist.
HORIZON, while probably being at the pulse of our social subconscious with its critical view of history, seems to hardly show up on the event Richter scale. Few people outside the industry and its hangers-on were aware of this before the Yellowstone fall-out. And even fewer outside the Costner fan base seem to have been waiting for this film, let alone three more.
The Western genre and its modern iterations - anything from Yellowstone, Joe Pickett and Longmire to more obscure transmutations like Reacher and East of West for example - certainly enjoy a window of opportunity to tell interesting stories and show characters beyond the cardboard. But there is little sense of HORIZON being eagerly awaited or a must-see event. The coverage I’ve seen so far seems to concentrate on how Costner gambles with this dream of his.
But the kind of collective hunger Tolkien and Marvel fans infected the mainstream with in the past, it’s sadly absent.
1 Like
I have not yet seen the entire film, therefore I cannot judge his direction style beyond the few parts the promo material offer. Those bits and pieces no doubt look gorgeous and impressive, but that’s a given with the genre.
A personal belief of mine is that any film exceeding the two-and-a-half hour mark could likely do with some trimming. Critics often suggest HORIZON would possibly make for a much better tv/streaming show. Perhaps the story as a whole might profit from the broader stage in combination with a more episodic interweaving. But I’m not sure that would work without some changes to the storyline(s) - unless you’re prepared to launch a show that doesn’t get into its strides for the first four or five episodes. And I simply don’t see how that would gel with Costner’s vision.
1 Like
Judging from his other directing efforts I never got that feeling you describe.
Costner is definitely a classicist, using framing and editing in a more classical way than his contemporaries, adding a moving camera whenever it opens up the proceedings and giving it a higher tempo.
2 Likes
That is exactly the knowledge that you need. Any time I feel something is off with a movie, the question fires in my brain: “Why is the camera there?” Just as you can tell when the syntax of a sentence is garbled, a consistent film viewer will notice when the syntax of a film is off.
Pauline Kael (in)famously noted that DANCES WITH WO(LVES might have been better titled PLAYS WITH CAMERA.
Have to disagree - but I disagreed with Kael most of the time.
I believe that if you disagree with the camera placement you have a preferred idea of where to put it instead.
2 Likes
So do I. It was one of her phrases that has stayed with me.
Not necessarily. I can recognize klutzy grammar or inelegant dramatic construction without having a preferred alternative in mind. The only idea I come with is for the mise en scene to be expressive.
2 Likes
Camera placement is something I instantly equate with the director’s point of view, so I grant that a lot of leniency - the director apparently wanted the audience to see the proceedings like that.
Editing, however, is something I more easily disagree with if shots don’t work for me as they are put together to convey a situation or a movement. Or if they are just thrown together. Bad editing in the first five minutes usually tip me off: this will not be an expertly made film.
4 Likes
Agreed. But there is also the objective matter of the formal elements of the camera placement beyond what is being conveyed narratively.
I know that Woody Van Dyke wants me to see what he wants me to see, but his framings lack balance and elegance, and the blocking within them is clumsy.
3 Likes
Deadpool and Wolverine. For the first time in a LONG time, I didn’t cringe at the MCU humor. Enjoyable for at least one watch, like a lot of the MCU.
3 Likes
A double feature of polar opposites…
Coup de chance
Woody Allen‘s 50th (!) film, maybe his last, is another of his crime dramas, this time set in Paris and filmed with French actors only.
I must say I felt it was refreshingly what nowadays is called old fashioned because it tells its story about murder out of jealousy so efficiently and unfussy that contemporary audiences will likely find it slight and boring - instead of hyperjuiced melodrama it treats everything in a matter of fact style, even the brutes who do the killing and the disposing of the body. The sly humour in that I found irresistible. And it ends when the story is over, no padding out at all. If Allen indeed will not be able to get any more financing this is a fitting stop. But I will miss his movies. And contemporary cinema will be poorer without him.
John Wick
The first one and my first exposure to this series.
In its way also rather unfussy and focused, with an underlying dark humour and extraordinary action, I enjoyed this revenge thriller a lot, even if Keanu Reeves (whom I like!) at first appears miscast as the feared „boogeyman“ - he just seems so nice! But when he starts his vendetta he is perfect, moving absolutely gracefully and efficiently, like a ballerina terminator.
Now I want to see the other three parts!
4 Likes