Review: Predestination (2015)

Review: Gone Baby Gone (2007)

Rating: 9.5 of 10

Gone Baby Gone tells the story of Patrick Kenzie (Casey Affleck), a young private detective, who along with his partner (Michelle Monaghan) were asked by a confused and angered couple to help the police finding their lost young niece. Amanda MacCready, the missing child in question were already missing for a few days. The detectives working on the case could not have been more reluctant on letting him in on the case, and so was Helene (Amy Ryan) the drug addict mother. That is the general synopsis but more importantly, Gone Baby Gone tells the story of flawed people in a bruised and battered city, stuck eternally in less than ideal situations.

Ben Affleck, formerly famous as an actor and had just found a new renaissance in directing, put his little brother in this flick and thereby delivered one of the highlights in both of their filming career. Ben Affleck handled the story like a painting; carefully with a swift but firm hand that was only loud when he needed to. He showed incredible restraint as a newbie director, and I think that showed incredible talent. Meanwhile, Casey Affleck was able to give not only a very specific form of authority and dignity, but also a dash of naivety that could only come from a young age and sensitivity that clearly came from strength of character. Casey was able to put those traits into a blender and made a living breathing person, one that is flawed and compelling. Due to its amazing cast, similar praise can be said for the rest of the characters too, from Amy Ryan's Helene to Michelle Monaghan's Angie and Ed Harris' Detective Bressant. Writing-wise, the plotting is tight and unpredictable, and the amount of pathos in this movie is incredible, adding only to its richness.

TL;DR Gone Baby Gone is a gripping drama; is a tense thriller/mystery; is a story of questionable morality and of people lost in conspiracy. And in the end, it is the sort of movie that you'll never forget because it shares with you an unanswerable question: what is a good deed in a bad world?

Review: War for the Planet of the Apes (2017)

Rating: 8.0 of 10

15 years after the breakout of Simian Flu (in Rise of the Planet of the Apes, or “Rise” for simplicity)--which leaves most of human population dead and the apes’ intelligence uplifted, the ape society that Caesar (Andy Serkis) lead is forced to hide in the forest after Koba’s--Caesar’s former frenemy--fateful attempt to wage war against humans (in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, reviewed here). In War for the Planet of the Apes, Caesar still tries to prove that the apes meant no harm. But then, one particularly vicious attack changed him forever.

Based on the title, I fully expected for the movie to be about an all out war between the apes and humans, but I was definitely wrong. In fact, “War” is basically the complete opposite of that. Although the scene began with a brutal attack between apes and humans, the rest of “War” is a very quiet, introspective movie of Caesar’s conflicted mind, and somehow the titular war is actually between two factions of human groups. But I figured thematically it makes sense, since “Dawn” was all about the war between two factions of the apes.

Science fiction is the best when it explores humanity through a new lense, and “War” is definitely one of those instances. We see apes dealing with every kind of human emotion, and we see the humans coping with the rise of new intelligent species and possible extinction. “War” is a very interesting study of human and humanity, although I must say it’s not the most fun movie, to say the least.

If there’s any flaw about the movie, it’s the extremely bleak view of humanity, to the point that it feels forced. Colonel’s (Woody Harrelson) faction of humans are basically the living embodiment of the worst side of humanity, while Caesar continues to make worse and worse decisions. Which is a shame, because “Dawn” used to have a much more nuanced discussion of the matter. I mean, “War” work extremely well as a grand study of humanity, but I do find myself wishing the movie would have chosen a slightly different perspective. 

TL;DR It does make for an excellent sci-fi and a moving movie experience, but I did walk away from the cinema feeling incredibly sorrowful, instead of hopeful for a new day. But it definitely speaks of the strength of the movie that it could move me so much. I still would definitely recommend this movie, although maybe, get the tissues ready.

Review: Room (2015)

Rating: 9.3 of 10

Room is the whole world. At least that's how it is for Jack (Jacob Tremblay) who was born to his mother Ma (Brie Larson), in the whole 5 years of his life. They are, of course, held captive in a 10 ft. by 10 ft. space but Jack doesn't know that. What he knows is that Room is the whole world, there is him and his mother, and then there are the TV planets, and that's it.

Room guides us in the first half of the movie, as we see how exactly Ma and Jack live their bizarre lives, day to day, while Ma tries to give her son a sense of normalcy. Jack greets their furniture every morning as they are the only friends he has--in tight close-ups that almost feels claustrophobic, but also, in a sense, comforting. In Room, Ma is the one pillar of normalcy that Jack has, and Jack is the only thing left worth fighting for in her life. Brie Larson is amazing in this, continuously displaying strength, desperation, and sadness that a mother should have. She eventually won Best Actress in Academy Awards 2016 for her performance.

After a chilling escape (it's not really a spoiler, it's in the trailers), we finally see how Jack and Ma adjust themselves to the real world. The movie handles this part sensitively and with respectful ambiguity, as we and the characters realize that being free doesn't mean instant happiness. (How okay could you be after 7 years of captivity?) There’s the inevitable media circus, the happy and apprehensive family members, and a real question of whether or not Jack and Ma will ever be able to lead normal lives, and so on. But even so, there's a palpable sense of hope, and an unbreakable sense of love living between the mother and the son.

Unmistakably, Room selects incredible talent from director Lenny Abrahamson (Frank: reviewed here); writer Emma Donoghue (who also wrote the original best-selling book); cinematographer Danny Cohen (The Danish Girl); and also actors Brie Larson (Short Term 12: reviewed here, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World), Joan Allen (the Bourne series), and last but not least, Jacob Tremblay. Jacob Tremblay as Jack displays incredible nuance to his character: wide-eyed, scared, and confused, but exudes hope and innocence. His acting is a bit of an incredible thing to witness, especially remembering he is such a young actor. All of those talents combined in one film, really makes an outstanding, fearless movie with deceptively light touch of the matter at hand.

TL;DR A drama with an unmistakable sense of honesty, Room is the kind of movie that will stay with you for days.

Review: Frank (2014)

Rating: 9.2 of 10

What do you do when you cast Michael Fassbender in your film? Not cover his face for the entirety of the film, unless your film is Frank.

Frank follows the story of an amateur keyboardist, Jon (Domhnall Gleeson), as he becomes the newest member of experimental rock band The Soronprfbs, lead by titular character Frank (Michael Fassbender) who wears a fake big head and never takes it off.

It's a bizzare concept to begin with (which was actually inspired by a true “big head” musician), but the movie, somehow, felt normal. Despite its heavily unusual premise, Frank isn't avant garde at all--it's just a drama about a few weird people intermixed with a few weird songs, and basically that's about it. And it's not a bad thing at all. Frank is honest, a little disarming, but an ultimately charming film. In a weird way, Frank is about what it feels like to be a mediocre artist--and in another way, about how it’s like to be with the mentally ill.

The most important thing to be discussed about Frank, for me, is the acting and/or casting. Domhnall Gleeson is cast quite often as an "everyman" type of character, and for good reason. He's not only got the range, he also is able to infuse unexpected shades of personality into his characters. Jon is wide-eyed as he is misguided, a visionaire as he is a cynic, and hopeful as he is selfish.

But Michael Fassbender as Frank, is definitely something special. We can't see his face, but we emote to him instantly. With every way he stands, sits, talks, and twitch his hands, you'd never once at lost as to how he is feeling. It's a beautiful performance that we almost never think twice about, which is a hard feat considering he wears a literal fake giant head. But my favorite part of him is (mild spoiler alert) actually how his demeanor changes when he doesn't wear the head. It's subtle acting that definitely makes a movie. Even Maggie Gyllenhaal is kind of restrained in her role as the troublemaking band member, Clara.

But acting isn't the only thing that works in this film. Its score was a delight, especially in the early part of the film which sounds so whimsical and airy--almost kid adventure-like--sending Jon off into his journey. In general, the movie Frank is filled with restrained but effective directorial choices, without trying too hard or being too muted (which for me, is the case with a lot of indie films). It’s a wonderful film to watch.

"Road to fame" band films are a dime in a dozen, but TL;DR Frank, with the help of few amazing performances from its actors, brings a new twist worth seeing.

So. Excited.

Teaser for new season of Orphan Black, BBC America.

4.18.15

Save the date, #CloneClub.

Rant: Why Is There No Science-Fiction Culture In Indonesia?

The recent release of two Indonesian science-fictional movies made me think: what happened to Indonesian science-fiction (SF) culture, or the lack thereof? The movies in question are, of course, Supernova: Ksatria, Putri, dan Bintang Jatuh which was based on popular novel of the same title and Garuda Superhero, an original Indonesian Batman-esque superhero. I reviewed Supernova and intended to review Garuda Superhero (I ended up just writing a first impression of the trailer). For my failure to fulfill my promise regarding the latter, I'm sorry. I know it may look like I'm a hypocrite, but by the time I found the time to watch it, it had vanished from my chosen theater and before the end of its second week it disappeared completely from all theaters in Jakarta except for one single viewing. I read other people's reviews and the bottomline is that Garuda Superhero is more or less as atrocious as my first impression and apparently is almost as terribly received by moviegoers. Most of the reviews states that aside from being extremely derivative, Indonesia isn't ready to make this kind of film. The question is, why?

To answer, we have to understand what is SF and where did it come from? So in this article I'd discuss the history of SF as we know it (namely Western SF, the biggest SF culture in the world) and also in other parts of the world especially Asia and Indonesia.

Disclaimer: I did read some sources regarding the topic, but by and large this article is absolutely non-academic and might just be the ramblings of a misguided, naive, ignorant 24 year old girl, but I try to do this article justice. Discussions are more than welcome, of course. And brace yourselves, it will be a long post.

SF, with a "science" modifier to its "fiction", is defined by the existence of "novum" of the scientific kind in its stories. Novum literally means "new thing"; that twist that differs it from a tale about ordinary life. So a man in love with a woman is not SF, but a man from 2400 that time-traveled to 1958 and then fall in love with a woman is SF. That example is a crude classification, and there are always some works with arguable definition of novum or science (James Bond and his gadgets sit nicely in the fringe of SF), but that is the general idea.

Hearing the word "science fiction" most people would picture complicated technology and unintelligible conversations about quantum physics and buzzwords about melting positrons. Deriving from that alone, it's not hard to imagine why Indonesia seemingly have no SF culture. Indonesia isn't and never was the cradling bed of science and technology. Not to belittle the work of great Indonesian scientists and engineers (BJ Habibie, Sedijatmo, Warsito Taruno are the famous ones, among many others), but scientific attitude is never part of the building blocks of Indonesian living.

The thing is, in actuality SF (as far as it is from gods and demons) had its roots deep in mythology. You can still see it to this day as SF and Fantasy are frequently classified together (and sometimes collectively called as "genre", which I admit is weird. A genre called genre.). Many people are a fan of both and both are usually featured in the same ;cons, and writers sometimes jump from one genre into the other. Stephenie Meyer, for example, who wrote the notorious vampire love story Twilight series, went on to write The Host about alien invasion (or for more hardcore SF fan: Ursula K. Le Guin wrote both The Left Hand of Darkness and the Earthsea series). SF and Fantasy are both very similar because they both have nova, although one in scientific sense and one in the supernatural. So the question is: how can Indonesia, that is forehead-deep in mythological nova, is so poor of SF? Why hadn't it evolved into SF?

The origin of Western SF can be traced back to "voyage extraordinaires" stories in Ancient Greece. Those are stories about adventures to new and foreign lands, sometimes even to the sky or the moon and stars. Of course physically they were unreachable at the time but they saw the moon etc and thought, what if? What if we could go there? In Indonesia, an overwhelming amount of folk and ancient stories were about good vs. evil and cautionary tales, but there were extraordinary voyages too like the wayang story of meeting Dewa Ruci deep into the ocean. Not only that, there were also other fantastical, marginally SF stories like the folk tale of Timun Mas, which for all we know might actually involve genetically modified infant. We even have Gatot Kaca, who is basically the ultimate superhero before superheroes.

But then Copernicus "emerged" in Europe. The history of western SF was a bit incredible to me because of how specific its development was, sometimes even (roughly) traceable down to a single person. In the 16th century it was Copernicus, with the outrageous (and accurate) Heliocentric theory. The church held the believe that the earth is the center and the only significant body in the universe, but with Copernicus's new theory came the realization that we are just a fraction of whole universe, and an insignificant one at that. Voyage extraordinaires stories still existed, but changed. Before Copernicus, the sky and the moon were usually portrayed in the divine or spiritual sense (as the extension of heaven or the heaven itself). But after, they became material—in the sense that they became an actual place protagonists could visit and meet wacky new creatures. That paradigm change was important in igniting true SF.

There were similarly important figures throughout the years who paved the road for today's SF: Mary Shelley ("Frankenstein" unified contemporary scientific advancement, fantastical elements, and realism to create the first real SF work), H.G. Wells (of The War Of The Worlds fame, whose primary influence is grounding/connecting SF to "the mundane and the present"), Hugo Gernsback (who popularized SF with the rise of pulp magazines), and..... George Lucas (whose Star Wars had HUGE impact in cinematic SF—or cinema, period.). And here is my reminder for readers that those are oversimplication in the most absolute sense. There were TONS of other influential people that I didn't mention like Jules Verne, Isaac Asimov, John W. Campbell, George Orwell, Philip K. Dick, Ursula K. Le Guin, William Gibson, Douglas Adams, the list could go on and on.

I am absolutely tempted to say that the reason Indonesia developed no SF is because we have no Copernicus, but that is cheating. Plenty of other regions developed SF from a separate branch than the west. Voyage extraordinares also existed in the middle east, and the Arab world had identifiable proto-SF work as early as the 12th century. Now middle eastern SF is still not as popular as the western, but genre work in Arabic language is said to be on the rise, although back in 2009 there was an op-ed lamenting the lack of Arabic SF (much like what I do now).

There were several notable SF-esque Japanese old tales like The Tale Of The Bamboo Cutter, but 1900s saw one of the first true SF work in Japan. After the world wars, Japanese SF were more influenced by American fiction but they were distinctively Japanese. Gojira (or Godzilla), for example, were conceived as physical portrayal of nuclear attack--an unfortunate but uniquely Japanese experience. Today, SF theme is very big in Japan and there are countless and countless Japanese SF work in the form of live-action, manga, anime, or even game. Many of them reached high recognition in the SF world, like Akira (the poster child of SF anime), Ghost In The Shell (definite inspiration for The Matrix movie), Paprika, Gundam/Macross/Evangelion franchises (oh yeah I had just lumped those into one!), 20th Century Boys, 1Q84, Battle Royale, Casshern, The Girl Who Leapt Through Time, etc.

Basically, SF emerged all over the place like a natural evolution, and that made the lack of it in Indonesia is all the more stark. "Everything not forbidden is compulsory" is a "rule" in quantum physics, and I believe it applies to literature too. People throughout history had always incorporated fantastical elements in their stories, some of them by rule must be of the scientific nature. There is a space or even need of SF in Indonesia, and somewhere, someday that niche will be filled. And, for reasons I'll explain, I'm actually optimist that it will be soon.

I must elaborate that when I say there's no SF culture in Indonesia, I don't mean there is absolutely no SF. There are recorded works, but they are patchy or hard to find (sometimes even with questionable quality). Djokolelono's Jatuh Ke Matahari (Falling Into The Sun), published in 1976, is regarded as the first Indonesian SF novel (which I observed is 100 years too late than others). If there was ever SF before and not long after 1976, it completely fell into the cracks of cultural history and I'd argue is therefore insignificant to its development. SF only regained its life again in 2000s, when novels like Supernova (Dee, 2000), Area X: Hymne Angkasa Raya (Eliza Handayani, 2003), Anomali (Santopay, 2004), etc. were published. To this day, Djokolelono also wrote several SF and Fantasy books for children, young adult, and adult. There were actually quite a lot of SF works in 2000s if we try to list them all, but few of them reached significant popularity or longevity and I'd argue the SF culture is still practically non-existent. Case in point; there is no SF section in the bookstore that makes browsing the bookstore painstaking, confusing, and likely result in no SF bought. I can't remember the last time we had local SF movie and it felt forever until we eventually have Garuda Superhero (and some still say that "we're not ready for it"). Also, aside from few enthusiasts like me, basically no one's talking about SF. Maybe I just hang out with the wrong set of friends, I don't know.

That said, Indonesia is not special in its stagnation. Several other SF culture in other countries struggled too. India's SF, despite its popularity, is regarded as "mediocre and derivative". Chinese radio, TV, and film authority issued guidelines to discourage, among them, time travel stories. And don't forget the aforementioned arabian essay.

But the 100 year gap of SF in Indonesia (only first emerged in 1976) compared to other regions is curious, to say the least. Provided that were true and there were no significant SF work of that period that fell into obscurity, SF in Indonesia have no direct line to the rest of Indonesian literature history (Jatuh Ke Matahari's author Djokolelono is actually a working book translator too, and it seems reasonable to say he was rather influenced by western literature). Lacking real sources about this matter, I resorted to wild guesses. In 18th and 19th century—a significant time of SF history in which it branched out to a notably distinctive genre—Indonesia was under the colonism of Netherlands (actually, Indonesia was colonized way before that by the Portuguese and Spain, since early 16th century). I know it's fashionable to blame things on the colonials (we do like to blame things on them colonials, don't we?), but I figured something must have happened around that time that made situations inconducive for the birth of SF. Proper education for native people were limited only to the elite and therefore, science were too. The development of science and technology is crucial to the emergence of SF, for obvious reasons. Science and technology eventually came to us, but they came fully formed from the west. We never had that anxiety of invention, which is important for the heart of SF. I'm just armchair-philosophing here, but that reasoning seemed probable enough for layman me. Although one might think that the influx of western literature especially during the time of VOC, combined with insurgent situation at the time should be a fertile ground for SF, but hey, apparently not.

Now that we've understood the history of SF here and in the rest of the world, it's time to ask: what should we do next? Quite a few of Indonesian SF lifted elements from Indonesian mythology, which is a great effort to make them "ours" and I hope people would keep tapping on that endless resource. But selfishly I'd like to see something that are more contemporary and speak more loudly (in a true SF fashion) about our condition now, because for me SF are best when they speak with social resonance (if you have a recommendation for Indonesian work, let me know). Poverty, gap of the rich and the poor, corruption, religious anxiety—mixed in with a little alien or dystopia—might be a recipe for truly compelling SF. I kept thinking something akin to Lord Of The Flies, which is weird because it's not SF but it could have been (it certainly is speculative fiction), would be awesome for us. In the realms of movies, I'd like to see more script-based SF (instead of pure visual spectacle), from independent and commercial filmmakers alike. There's no reason we can't produce lowkey projects like Pi, Safety Not Guaranteed, Seeking A Friend For The End Of The World, Timecrimes, 28 Days Later, etc (yes, I'm basically spitting out every title that comes into my head).

But the truth is, we may not realize it but SF in Indonesia is slowly and surely rising. Even now, there are two superhero movies slated for release in the next couple of years (Volt and Gundala Putra Petir remake, if fate permitting), and superheroes Bima Satria Garuda and Nusantaranger are gaining good grounds. Hopefully, other subgenres will follow. I hope the next time I write about the state of Indonesian SF, it will be in a completely different circumstance (possibly raving about The Golden Age that Indonesian SF were having).

Sources: The bulk of western SF's history is from Adam Roberts' book The History of Science Fiction. Other sources can be found through the link.

Edited to add (6/02/2015): So I had a trip to the bookstore today and gave myself time for a thorough browse. I found 5 seemingly-SF books (if not, then certainly speculative fiction): Zombie Aides (Satria Satire), Bumi (Tere Liye), Spora (Alkadri), Gerbang Trinil (Riawani Elyta), and Time[s] (Aya Swords). So SF lives, but some genre savviness (knowing the kinds of title and cover SF usually comes in) definitely help to pick them up from the rest. I bought 2 of them, Bumi and Gerbang Trinil, and maybe I'll give them a shoutout if they're good.

Review: Black Panther (2018)

Rating: 9.0 of 10

At first, I wasn't that impressed with Black Panther. Now, I am happy to tell you that I was wrong.

I think the reason I was initially underwhelmed by Black Panther is because I struggled to grasp both the big picture and all the nuances that Black Panther has to offer. I thought it was a mere origin story*, but in truth it is deeper than that.

While the production is excellent through-and-through, I thought the movie was a bit aimless at the start and only begin to find its direction after Erik Killmonger (Michael B. Jordan) is revealed. But in retrospect, it actually all work with the theme. At first, T'Challa (the titular Black Panther, played by Chadwick Boseman) really is aimless. He just lost his father in a violent and traumatic event, and he struggled to find out the kind of King he wants to be.

One undisputable good thing about this movie is the characters and the actors who play them. Chadwick Boseman is as captivating as T'Challa/Black Panther when he was first introduced to us in Captain America: Civil War. Letitia Wright is the clear breakout star of this movie, as she displays equal level of intelligence and playfulness as T'Challa's little sister, Shuri. Lupita Nyong'o, Danai Gurira, and Angela Bassett all excellently play strong, confident women. And don't forget Michael B. Jordan, Winston Duke, Forest Whitaker, Martin Freeman, and Daniel Kaluuya who each believably play characters of their own convictions and believes.

It all get very interesting once we realize how the characters mirror or parallel each other. Most obviously, Killmonger is the opposite of T'Challa, but perhaps purely by circumstances. T'Challa grows up in the safe haven of Wakanda, while Erik Killmonger grows up in Oakland (one of the most dangerous US cities) knowing that his father's home country abandoned them. T'Challa has supportive family and community that includes strong, intelligent women, while Erik grows up without any role model to speak of. As good as Nakia's (Lupita Nyong'o) character is, she still disagrees with T'Challa and Okoye (Danai Gurira) on some level, and also has similarities with Killmonger's worldview. Shuri's youth scares M'Baku (Winston Duke) whose tribe fear that their technology could destroy them some day. I would not discuss the intricacies of the characters and their relationships at length (because there are already a lot of articles written about them by people more informed on the matter than me), but there are a lot of nuances and subtleties that speak not only of the fictional universe but also of our world, now. Story-wise--like I said before--Black Panther is not that impressive if we break it down beat-by-beat, but becomes infinitely more interesting once we consider the interactions between all of the characters.

The other best thing about Black Panther is its worldbuilding. Ryan Coogler (director) and his team had to create a new culture from the ground up--free of our inherent perception of what an African culture and nation should look like. In Marvel universe, Wakanda is the most technologically advanced nation in the world, hidden and untouched by the outside world including by collonialism. Visibly supported by a lot of research and care, Black Panther movie succeeded in showing us how that world would look like in the visuals that are fresh, believable and empowering.

TL;DR Worth to see Wakanda realized on-screen alone, Black Panther is a movie proud of its black heritage and filled with interesting, well-rounded characters.

-

*Yes, the character Black Panther first appeared in Captain America: Civil War, but for all intents and purposes the Black Panther movie is his origin story. In Black Panther, his entire worldview changes and his experiences in it shape who he is as a superhero and as a person for the rest of his life.

Web Shoutout: Youtube Edition

Today, I’m starting a new series: Web Shoutout. It’s a place where I Shoutout random stuff from all corners of the Internet that I find interesting, most especially regarding movies. Hope you like it!

This time I feature standout channels from Youtube that help me, as an amateur movie reviewer and movie enthusiast, understand layers of movies and moviemaking that I might never paid attention before. This list is by no means all encompassing, it’s just a bunch of channels that I enjoy watching at the moment.

1. Every Frame A Painting ( @everyframeapainting on tumblr )

I guess it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that my first pick is Every Frame A Painting, because in my mind, anybody who’s plugged into the Internet’s movie newsreel for a while must have stumbled into an Every Frame A Painting video at least once. 

The channel is created by filmmaker and editor Tony Zhou, to host a video essay series dedicated to the “analysis of film form”. Like the name suggest, the channel mostly--but not limited to--dissects movies you love on cinematographical level and makes you realize things you’ve never thought of before. But most importantly, he encourages “ordinary” people like me to appreciate a movie beyond the skin-deep, like with The Silence of the Lambs essay above. 

To this day, Every Frame A Painting features a wide range of analysis from the works of Martin Scorsese, Jackie Chan, Edgar Wright, etc., to an entire video dedicated to texting on screen, and another one exclusively on chairs. Heck, even his video on Michael Bay makes you appreciate the director more (Bayhem is still crap, but a masterful kind of crap). To my knowledge, Every Frame A Painting is the first of its kind to gain real media recognition, and for good reason. His videos are engaging, crazy good, and always of excellent quality.

Subscribe to Every Frame A Painting. Support the channel through Patreon.

2. Nerdwriter1 ( @thenerdwriter on tumblr )

Due to no fault of its own, I immediately compared Nerdwriter1 to Every Frame A Painting when I first discovered it. In retrospect it was a bit funny to ever think that, because it turned out that Nerdwriter1 (by Evan Puschak) existed almost 3 years before Every Frame A Painting. But it was obvious why I did--they both produce high quality video essays (very often) on movies--but fortunately, I eventually understood that Nerdwriter1 is a different beast.

It took me a while to realize why I love his videos so much: it was because he treated movies not as a separate entity, born in a vacuum, but as part of humanity. Once I understood that, it’s actually very apparent on his channel. That’s why he makes video essays about Donald Trump, Youtube as a medium, and Black Friday--but the same holds true whenever he talks about movies (as evidenced by Children of Men essay above) and entertainment, like when he used Louis CK’s jokes to illuminate the nebulous nature of humor and morality.

His “Understanding Art” series, especially, is most excellent, in which he talks about movies a lot, but also about paintings, poetry, etc. His video on David Cronenberg’s Eastern Promises might be my favorite yet (which you can watch on his channel, it’s too bloodily graphic to embed here. SERIOUS WARNING, guys), and others include Pan’s Labyrinth, Ghost In The Shell, A Serious Man, Batman, etc.

Subscribe to Nerdwriter1. Support the channel through Patreon.

3. RocketJump Film School ( RocketJump is @rocketjumptv on tumblr )

If you want to get a bit technical about what happens behind the scenes, RocketJump Film School is an excellent place for you to be. RocketJump itself is a digital movie studio that specializes in original web video content, including hit webseries Video Game High School (it ran for 3 seasons, BTW), and a collaboration with Youtube/TV breakout stars Key & Peele (can be seen through their main channel, RocketJump). They also recently had a deal with Hulu and their 8-episode documentary about their production will premiere this December. RocketJump Film School channel, however (they also have a forum), is their place to share their knowledge with budding film-related workers.

There are lots of themes discussed in their videos, ranging from editing, cinematography, lighting, screenwriting, sound, effects and CGI--to more random stuff like how to create fake blood, how to fold a green screen (it's surprisingly hard and easy at the same time), even as simple as how to hold a boom.

Aside from that, RocketJump Film School also have 101 classes as well as master classes, field trips, and podcasts (talkshow-type follow-up video to their previous content)--which, for lack of better word, are all kinds of awesome and full of information. If you don’t go to film school, it's the second-best place to learn and appreciate all the little things behind the art of film. And if you can believe Youtube comments, even people who actually went to film school frequently say that they learned something the were never taught at school. More than anything, I think that speaks a lot about the quality and dedication of the RocketJump FIlm School crew. Basically, it’s a channel that is chock full of information, if you are at the slightest bit interested in learning what happens behind the scenes, RocketJump Film School is a treasure.

Subscribe to RocketJump Film School.

Review: Whiplash (2014)

Rating: 9.8 of 10

A story about how one young ambitious jazz drummer Andrew Neyman (Miles Teller), captured the attention, and then some, of a talented but ruthless teacher Terence Fletcher (JK Simmons), Whiplash is one of the most electric and intense film about music.

Partly inspired by its writer and director's, Damien Chazelle, own experiences as a jazz drummer at school, the movie defies every stereotype one might expect from such film. Pursuit of greatness is such a prevalent theme in movies about music/dance/sports/whatever to the extent that the trope becomes boring, but Whiplash managed to find a fresh new angle to the trope with refreshing complexity. As we see Fletcher barking orders to his scared students, and as we see him encouraging a little girl to keep playing music; as we see Andrew practicing his beats over and over again through the night, and as we see him having dinner with his loving but unappreciative father, we understand them better as we see different sides of them, and we appreciate them as morally grey characters that they are. JK Simmons stole the show as Fletcher--but with every smirk, every twinkle, and every glance, Miles Teller successfully conveyed Andrew's drive, his humiliation, and his ambition through silence. He also played a convincing drum on screen (for non-drummer like me) too, which always help elevate a movie.

Whiplash is also an extremely intense movie, like you wouldn't believe. With tight shots, sweat, blood, pure determination, strive for perfection and no tolerance for anything less, watching Whiplash is like an endurance sport for your heart. TL;DR Filled with more thrill than any of recent action movies combined (okay, maybe not Mad Max: Fury Road), Whiplash is an experience like no other--and with good jazz music, too? You can't lose.

More cast photos should be like this