Web Shoutout: Actors On Actors

Mini-Review and Rant: Monsters University, Anti-femininity, and Some Other Stuff

So, this time I am going to have a little rant. I always think that feminism is important, but I usually try not to hit my readers over the head about it. But not today. Because oh boy, I have a lot to say about Monsters University.

I am not sure why Monsters University particularly irritated me. Probably because it’s Pixar, and I do expect better from them. Pixar is famous for producing high-quality, critically acclaimed children’s animation movies, some of which are my absolute favorites. They are also usually excellent at handling femininity and masculinity, and the majority of their movies are non-gendered (neither a girl’s film or a boy’s film). The second reason is probably because I just finished Pop Culture Detective’s thoughtful video essay about “The Complicity of Geek Masculinity on the Big Bang Theory”, so the topic about masculinity and femininity is fresh in my mind.

Anyway, let’s review Monsters University! (Includes spoilers for Monsters University and Monsters Inc.)

Monsters University (or MU for simplicity in this review/rant) is a prequel to Pixar’s Monsters Inc. (or simply Inc). MU tells the story about how Mike Wazowski and James P. “Sulley” Sullivan met in university, way before they worked for Monsters Inc. In MU, Mike is not a scary monster, but he is determined to be a Scarer and works hard for it. Sulley, on the other hand, is a preternaturally gifted Scarer and serves as Mike’s rival for most part of the film.

MU, on its own, is a good film. It has good set up, a definite arc, and satisfying conclusion. It has characters we care about, and it’s pretty funny too. But it’s when we think beyond the scope of the film that things start to get… shakey. First of all, the story arc of MU is immediately undermined by Inc. MU is about how Mike works to achieve his dream to be a Scarer in the company, but we know in Inc that Mike does not even get to be a Scarer. In Inc, Mike serves as Sulley’s partner, which is basically an assistant. So during MU’s runtime, we already know that all of Mike’s hard work in MU eventually will never pay off and he will forever live in Sulley’s shadow.

Also, Inc’s whole premise is about how Mike and Sulley revolutionize their industry by retiring Scream Energy and switching to Laugh Energy instead, because they met Boo. But instead, all of MU is about glorifying the act of scaring. I know, the events in Inc happens after MU, so Laugh Energy is not a thing yet, but there are ways to incorporate a more cohesive theme throughout the two movies. Probably one of their friends from Oozma Kappa could make an off-hand remark about how they wish there’s another energy source other than children’s scream–just something to foreshadow what will happen in Inc. But there’s no such thing in MU, instead MU is laser-focused at idolizing the scaring industry. Which, again, is fitting when we think about Mike’s arc in just MU, but completely falls apart once we consider the broader theme from Inc. 

And that’s all I can say about MU, from the filmmaking standpoint. From here on out, I want to discuss about the representation of social themes in MU. Let the rant begin!

Our protagonist is Mike. Kind, small, with big round eyes, and is underappreciated for his whole life. While the antagonists, the fraternity brothers of Roar Omega Roar or ROR (pictured above)--and also Sulley to a certain degree--are big and muscular, cocky, aggressive, and intimidating. I think it’s safe to assume that ROR is meant to represent the ultimate form of masculinity (they’re fraternity bros, for starters), and, as a consequence Mike and the Oozma Kappas (pictured below) represent a more feminine form of masculinity. You might accuse me of “reading too much into it”, which I think is fair assessment if every other little thing does not reinforce my point.

I also know what you’re thinking: Isn’t it a good thing for feminism, that our protagonists (Mike and the Oozma Kappas) are the more feminine of the bunch? Not in MU, because their whole arc is that they really, really want to be like Sulley and ROR. Also, the movie is relentless at making fun of characters for their femininity. In fact, baking and hospitality, which is usually viewed as a part of femininity, was literally spelled out loud as “L-A-M-E” by the movie. When the movie wants to make fun of a character, they used glitter, flowers, stuffed animals, heart signs, and dream journals with unicorn and golden stars.

The message of Monsters University is clear: masculinity is coveted, while femininity is viewed as lesser and deserves to be made fun of.

I think it’s no coincidence that there’s no notable female character in MU, aside from Dean Hardscrabble. Hardscrabble is one of the good things in MU–she’s legitimately scary, firm, but kind. Other smaller female roles are Squishy’s mother (who is mostly used as comic relief), and sorority groups HSS (the goth one, pronounced “hiss”, who I don’t even think has any speaking role) and PNK (pronounced “pink”, because they’re girls. GET IT??). PNK consists of six non-descript, identical cheerleader-type girls, because…. GURRLS, am I right?

In a comedy movie, it’s important to ask ourselves, “Who do we laugh at and, and who do we laugh with?” Answer: We laugh at the Oozma Kappas. Always. So eventhough Oozma Kappa eventually wins the Scare Games, the takeaway is that they won despite their more feminine form of masculinity, not because of it.

Which is a shame, because none of that animosity towards femininity exist in Inc. No character in Inc is outright masculine or feminine, except the ultra-feminine and flirty Celia (Mike’s girlfriend) but she’s never shown in a particularly negative light. Sulley in Inc is not even particularly masculine. In fact, his defining characteristics in Inc are his kindness and his paternal relationship with Boo.

And I want to emphasize that even though I am here to talk about the portrayal of femininity in MU, it is not about the women. It is about the men. With MU as example, it is clear that feminism is not just a woman’s fight–it’s everybody’s fight. Look at how miserable Mike’s life is in MU. Even though he is kind, smart, and works hard, he is belittled because he does not fit the standard definition of masculinity. Mike is only miserable because of the arbitrary societal rule of “how men should be like". So it is clear that misogyny not only affects women, it affects men too. As Emma Watson once wisely said (paraphrased) about feminism, we can only be truly free if women are allowed to be strong and men are allowed to be sensitive. But even in the end of MU, Mike and the Oozma Kappas still end up conforming to the idea of toxic masculinity.

There’s another thing that I want to discuss about MU. I did point out that the entire plot of MU is about glorifying the scaring industry, which is fine in itself because it fits Mike’s arc (a Scarer is not a real career choice anyway). But the movie also goes out of its way to depict other geekier career choices like scream-can architect, or more creative ones like dancer, as–for lack of better word–lame. So MU basically teaches children who watches the movie that a career in STEM and in Arts is neither an important nor fulfilling career choice (Direct quote from the Dean, “Scariness is a true measure of a monster. If you’re not scary, what kind of a monster are you?”). That’s totally not cool, Monsters University, not cool. (I could add a paragraph’s worth of rant about how MU depicted Scarer as an ultimate “masculine” career choice, but I digress. The article is as long as it is.)

So… yeah. This rant/review is all over the place because I have a lot of things to say, but I hope this will give you a new perspective. Pixar, you could do better.

Review: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2017)

Rating: 9.8 of 10

We all know how it ends. Princess Leia got ahold of the plans to the Death Star, a moon-sized weapon capable of destroying an entire planet, which she then give to R2-D2 at the beginning of Star Wars: A New Hope. This is a story of that first victory of the Rebels.

While the Star Wars trilogies focus on the Force-wielding people, Rogue One is the story of the struggle of the ordinary people. The closest thing to a “Chosen One” character is Jyn Erso (Felicity Jones), daughter to Galen Erso (Mads Mikkelsen), a high-ranking officer of the Empire. But while his father had sympathy for the Rebel’s cause, Jyn has grown apathetic since she was left abandoned at 16 years old. She has connections, but it was her choice to help the Rebels that determines her character.

Other characters include Captain Cassian Andor (Diego Luna), a true believer of the Rebel’s cause with willingness to do anything for it; K2SO (Alan Tudyk), an unlikely friend in the form of reprogrammed Imperial droid; Chirrut Imwe (Donnie Yen) and Baze Malbus (Jiang Wen), a couple of warrior monks and sworn protector of the Kyber Crystals; and Bodhi Rook (Riz Ahmed), a defecting Imperial cargo pilot.

This is Star Wars, like you can live and breathe in it. Rogue One is definitely grittier than the trilogies, more grounded–less quip from the likes of Han Solo, no flashy lightsaber fights, or even the cuteness of a BB-8. It’s street-level Star Wars, but Rogue One does have lighter moments too (’I’M BLIND!’ is definitely the best line the movie IMO), and it is most definitely not without hope.

Hope, after all, is the stuff that Star Wars is made of. These people do not need to have the Force, or be the best of anything, they are just willing to do what it takes to make a difference and change the galaxy for the better. Nothing is going to be easy, and maybe not everyone is going to make it until the end, and yet, somehow it’s all going to be worth it. Devoid of Jedis or a Chosen One, Rogue One only has characters distinguished by their believes and their choices, and that’s okay. That’s kinda the point.

Rogue One did excellently to introduce us to all these new characters, and we fall in love with each of them effortlessly, each for different reasons. Most importantly, Rogue One succeeded in accomplishing what prequels and spin-offs should always do: make the universe feel bigger, more fleshed out. In it, we get to see the different corners of the galaxy and the people who inhabit it–the people who built and lived by it. I found Saw Gerrera (Forest Whitaker), an almost Vader-like rebel extremist leader, to be a very interesting part of Star Wars history (We'll get to see more of him in Star Wars: Rebels series!).

Rogue One had to do so many things for it to succeed. It had to live up to the legacy of the original and prequel trilogies, not to mention The Force Awakens; fit the timeline and canon; and tell a compelling story with entirely new characters. It succeeded in all accounts. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story maybe is not a perfect movie (because nothing is), but to me it is a perfect Star Wars story.

Review: 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)

Rating: 9.5 of 10

10 Cloverfield Lane is about 3 people, Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), Howard (John Goodman), and Emmett (John Gallagher Jr.), who are trapped in a bunker because of some mysterious attacks that poison the air above ground.

If the title sounds a bit familiar, it’s because 10 Cloverfield Lane is named after 2008 film, Cloverfield. But wait! It’s not a sequel or prequel, instead 10 Cloverfield is a “spiritual successor” or “blood relative” of Cloverfield, according to producer JJ Abrams. Honestly, that sounds incredibly confusing and pretentious–usually jargons like those are red flags–but trust me when I say 10 Cloverfield Lane is good. In fact, it’s a great movie and it’s one of the best thrillers I’ve seen in recent years.

I was skeptical when I heard this “Cloverfield 2″ project was happening because while I loved Cloverfield, it had too many gimmicks (the found-footage format, viral marketing, always-on-the-corner-of-your-eye monsters) for it to work the second time. I’m happy to tell you that 10 Cloverfield is nothing like the original Cloverfield. It’s a whole new story and setting, with a set of new characters. So if you wanted a Cloverfield sequel then you need to adjust your expectations, but that also mean those of you who hated 2008′s Cloverfield with a passion (or have never seen that movie and couldn’t care less) can see 10 Cloverfield without reservation.

I WON’T tell you anything about the story in 10 Cloverfield Lane. The best thing you can do is to go in blind, and experience the ride you’re going to have without any spoilers. Don’t read any spoiler-filled review, don’t look up any interview, don’t watch the trailers on Youtube. Just go off the internet and watch this movie as soon as you can. In fact, just in case you need a small taste of the movie to convince you that you need to see this movie (it’s also worth noting that this movie currently sits at 90% in Rotten Tomatoes), I’ll share you this teaser trailer–and only this. Don’t look up any other trailers, because  the other trailers still reveal too much.

10 Cloverfield Lane sets up an unsettling vibe from the very beginning, that you could never quite shake off even when the movie gives you a warm, cuddly scene. In a movie that is set in claustrophobic bunker, the movie never goes to places you expect. There are so many twists and turns, and then there’s the ending. The ending has a MAJOR twist, that frankly, some people might think is too jarring. I, for one, loved the twist. In fact, that’s why I love this movie so much. It gives an excellent dramatic payoff that lines itself quite nicely with the franchise, and it brings an added perspective into an already layered story.

Was the threat chemical? Nuclear? Was it human? Monsters? Aliens? Throughout the movie you’d keep guessing, and the best thing about 10 Cloverfield Lane is that whatever answer you have in your head, you’d still be surprised. 10 Cloverfield Lane also tend to give you hints and not straight answers, and that is one of the reason the movie has so much depth than you’d expect.

TL;DR Crafted with masterful writing, acting, and direction, 10 Cloverfield Lane is an intense thriller that you don’t want to miss.

Review: Oldboy (2003)

Rating: 9.0 of 10

Oh Dae-Su (Choi Min-sik), a drunken and crass office-worker, was locked up in a mysterious hotel room for 15 years for no apparent reason. He was confused and desperate at first, and ended up just plain angry. When he eventually got out, with the help of one sushi-bar worker, he was determined to find out why he was held and the identity of his captor to take revenge.

Oldboy (actually based on a Japanese manga of the same name) is one of the most popular and acclaimed example of South Korean cinema in international stage, frequently listed as one of the best movies of all time and is firmly ingrained in the minds of modern cinephile. After earning cult status with Oldboy, Director Park Chan-wook eventually directed his first English-speaking movie, Stoker, in 2013 with Nicole Kidman and Mia Wasikowska, and Oldboy itself was remade by Hollywood with Spike Lee directing and Josh Brolin as lead (with less critical acclaim). I can’t tell you the merits of those two films, but I can tell you that Oldboy is very deserving of its cult favorite status.

Lacking normal social skills due to more than a decade being confused and alone, it was clear that Dae-su was a changed man, forever scarred by the absurd circumstance of his life. Dae-su was volatile and dangerous, a far cry from his previous buffoon self, and Choi Min-sik was equally believable as both. With range not unlike Robert de Niro in his best years, Choi Min-sik frequently changes from incredibly cold and menacing, to incredibly sad and pitiful without a blink of an eye.

With the absurdity of its premise, Oldboy had a perfect tone. Definitely not a typical grim-revenge story, it managed to keep a degree of surrealness—palpable from the moment we see Dae-su nagging in the police station but cemented the moment the octopus-eating scene arrived—only grounded by the sight of violence and blood. Inventive and highly stylish in its violence, the film is definitely not for the squeamish, but the actual horrors was largely visceral and psychological instead of purely gross visual. Oldboy is also partly a detective tale and partly a coming-of-age story (whatever age that is), providing much more layers to a simple vengeance story.

TL;DR With memorable images and moments throughout, Oldboy is a fascinating, heartbreaking, and stylish work about revenge.

Music Shoutout: Bernhoft

Bernhoft or Bern/hoft, sometimes also known by his full name Jarle Bernhoft, is a singer and musician from Norway. He's pretty well-known in his home country and part of Europe, but trust me when I say he really should be worldwide famous. With unique musical sensibilities that is drenched in soul and funk, he's the grooviest white man you'll ever meet and you know it.

If you listen to his recorded songs and albums and think, "Eeeeeh, this guy is pretty good, I guess," wait until you see his live performances. With the help of loop machine, he plays all the instruments himself and magically always sound like he has a full band with him. (Basically, for the Orphan Black crowd, he's virtually the Tatiana Maslany of music ;) ) Honestly, it'd be a gimmick if he weren't so good at it, but he somehow makes it all seem so naturally easy.

He already had 3 irresistible solo albums: Ceramik City Chronicles, Solidarity Breaks (buy), and most recently Islander (buy). Each of them had somewhat different vibes, but equally good. Being a well-rounded musician that he is, of course, the "gimmick" isn't all that he is. If you're interested, he also published live performances that he did with orchestral companion (with album Walk With Me (buy)), and also with actual band (in the double CD, 1:Man 2:Band). All of that showed that yes, there is nothing that he could not do. Oh, and he was also nominated for the Grammy Awards for his album Islander, so there’s that.

So, check him out already!

Disclaimer: All videos embed and linked above are for promotional purposes only. Please support the artist legally!

Review: Attack The Block (2011)

Rating: 9.5 of 10

Once you've reeled yourself from Star Wars: The Force Awakens fever, let's take a moment to look at a previous starring role by one of its star, John Boyega (or Finn in The Force Awakens), in 2011′s Attack The Block.

Alternatively, you could also check out the incredible movie in which General Hux (Domhnall Gleeson) and Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac) got to hang around with their very own droid (pun very much intended) in Ex Machina, reviewed previously here at 9.0 rating (I tell ya, these are all awesome films).

(John Boyega in Attack The Block, and Domhnall Gleeson and Oscar Isaac in Ex Machina, respectively)

But now here’s the review for Attack The Block. Can I say enough good things about Attack the Block? No I can't, because it's absolutely brilliant.

Attack the Block, brought to you by the guys behind Hot Fuzz, tells the story about a gang of kids in South London who suddenly find that their neighbourhood was being attacked by aliens from outer space. Then they do the only thing that they know: fight for their 'hood.

Attack The Block is awesome, there’s no need to downplay that. It’s definitely a popcorn movie, but it’s a really, really good one. Tense and breathless, Attack The Block has everything you want from an action/thriller film. Littered with bikes, baseball bats, and fireworks, it’s definitely not a conventional one--but those facts by no means reflect its adrenaline level. It has some quick bloody scenes, so viewer discretion is advised. The lead character Moses (John Boyega) was especially brilliantly acted, but the movie somehow managed to make all the characters relatable even though they were basically criminals. Almost atmospheric in their choice of neighbourhood, Attack the Block also has great soundtrack (by Basement Jaxx) and visuals, and I especially loved the simple yet effective design of the aliens.

TL;DR Intense, unpredictable and unique, this movie is a hidden gem and goes to show that big budget is not necessary to make good sci-fi action.

*a version of this review was previously posted in 2011.

Web Shoutout: Academy Originals

Welcome to Web Shoutout, a series highlighting interesting places in the interwebs about movies and filmmaking! (Check out the previous Web Shoutout here)

This episode, I’m going to talk about Academy Originals, a Youtube channel of video series produced by The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, of the Academy Awards (or might be best known as The Oscars) fame. For all the problems existing inside The Academy Awards, almost surprisingly, Academy Originals consistently puts out extremely sincere and inspiring videos about people working in the industry. They usually feature dedicated, extremely talented people of professions closely linked to filmmaking--sometimes even professions you might have never heard about or thought about. They talk about why they do what they do, and how they do it, and they always leave me inspired (and makes me wish I can be that person). For anyone who loves to find love in filmmaking processes, this channel would certainly feed your soul every Monday.

Just check out these videos, hand-picked from the channel!

1. “Credited As: Creature Performer” -  Tom Woodruff (Aliens, Jumanji, Zookeeper)

2. “ Academy Close-Up: Conservators” - Conservation team of Academy's Margaret Herrick Library

3. “Creative Spark: Theodore Shapiro” -  Theodore Shapiro, Composer (The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, Tropic Thunder, The Devil Wears Prada)

4. Questions: What Was The First Movie That Scared You?

Subscribe to Academy Originals.

More cast photos should be like this

Review: Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

Rating: 8.0 of 10

In terms of Marvel’s universe, Avengers: Age of Ultron is pretty decent. Because Marvel has been pulling things off left and right throughout these years, any small dip downward will always be felt like a dip. For me unfortunately, Age of Ultron could not reach the heights that was Iron Man, The Avengers, or Captain America: The Winter Soldier, although thankfully it did not rise low like Thor or Iron Man 2.

In Avengers: Age of Ultron, after the fall of SHIELD, Avengers Initiative was continued by Maria Hill under the wings of Tony Stark. They were looking high and low for Loki's Sceptre that was left on earth, and found it in a HYDRA base in Sokovia. They attempted to retrieve it, but they also faced something more: two "enhanced" people, Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch (although no one's calling them that). But wait, they're not the villain! The villain was an Artifical Intelligence called Ultron, almost unknowingly built by Tony Stark, who was hellbent on destroying the world like how ultrasmart AI sometimes do.

The movie was fun and exciting, for sure. There were plenty of action to be found in this film, as you would guess from a movie that has Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Hulk, Black Widow, and Hawkeye together. After all, you can't really accuse a movie that had Hulk vs Iron Man's Hulkbuster Armor to be lacking action. The sequences were big and beautiful as always, and one thing I particularly liked was how determined the heroes were to keep civilians as far as possible. I even liked how they protrayed Scarlet Witch's mind-altering powers visually, she never looked out of place at all.

Despite all that, the movie's strong suit was always when the action stopped. The personal moments were incredibly the best in this film. Hawkeye, who was mostly mind-controlled in the first Avengers, had a lot of screentime dedicated to him and his (surprise) family, and it was sweet. We got to see a whole new side of Natasha and Bruce Banner as they found solace in each other. And Tony Stark? We found out that he was still an arrogant and a genius, as expected. It was always fun to see them hangout over nothing too, like how they did in the party with Thor's hammer (not a euphemism).

Unfortunately, I found the villain kinda meh. Ultron was a very powerful villain, and his very existence was supposed to change the world or something, but he was too strong, too fast, and too vague that it was hard to feel any particular emotion towards him. Mostly I was like, "What's with this guy?" wondering why he got so crazy and ended up with no satisfying answer other than a single Tony Stark's off-handed remark. Ultron was an underdeveloped villain, but the movie itself was already clocking at 2,5 hours that it was an understandable decision. The Vision was pretty cool, though!

And I am excited for the new generation of Avengers!

TL;DR With serviceable villain, Age of Ultron could not be an instant Marvel classic, but it was a spectacle like none other with excellent dramatic moments.

So. Excited.

Teaser for new season of Orphan Black, BBC America.

4.18.15

Save the date, #CloneClub.