Reaction Shots

Earlier this year, I had a list of movies to be released. A quick tally led to a surprising result that almost half of those releases were sequels or movies based on previously existing IP. After a second or two, I caught myself and figured I didn't really need to be surprised. There are a few reasons why. One is that it's the market attuning itself to what the consumers want based on sales trends in merchandising connected to those properties. One way to check to see what character might be in an upcoming Marvel or DC film is to check a toy store; tie-in materials sometimes make it to the shelves well in advance of a movie dropping, but the point is that those tie-ins reflect the commercial bonds that drive mass movie-going attendance and consumption. Another reason is that, of course, what proved profitable at one time is likely to be so at another, though this is a riskier proposition for investors. Any shortfall in theatrical performance is likely to be assumed to be offset

One of the great things about a blog is that I'm not beholden to deadlines. I can tell the boss I don't feel like writing anything and he doesn' t care; in fact, he often agrees with me and even enables my slacking. The downside is that I actually get to missing the act of writing, applying my meager critical skills, and sharing this with whomever. March flew by and I thought I'd actually written more than I had. I have a spreadsheet I use of movies seen and a column marked "for RS?" that receives a "Y" if I feel like I should write up a movie. The "Y" is in red font, to remind me to follow through and once published, I switch the font to black. That way, I have a record of what I've written.  What's wacky about this is that while I have a spate of films I saw in March, and the "Y"s are all in red, there is a bunch of films in February that have black "Y"s by their titles that I haven't written up and some

The Little Gold Guy is back... Honestly, I don't care. I've had a general antipathy toward the Academy Awards for decades, ever since Raging Bull was passed over for Best Picture for Ordinary People (which is, of course, a very good film; no flies on it, but Scorsese's masterwork was a leap forward in depth of narrative, use of film grammar, and is simply a towering masterpiece of cinema).  I also have a dim view of most of the nominees in any given year. Last year was brilliant, with Everything Everywhere All at Once raising the bar for what can be honored by AMPAS. This year, I'm more intrigued; it's been a good while since every entry is a remarkable work and in half the cases, An Important Film. I think I'd be good with just about any of them winning. I've already covered Past Lives , Poor Things ,  The Zone of Interest , The Holdovers , Killers of the Flower Moon , Barbie , and Oppenheimer ; I'm remiss that I haven't given the rest their due,

What to say about Anh Hung Tran's The Taste of Things ? It is idyllic, to be sure. Also, lyrical, and literary in a way that calls to mind films like A Day in the Country . It feels so sensorial, not to say sensual and there is a foundation of genuine emotional depth - an adult emotional depth in a cinematic landscape often littered with infantilization or histrionics masquerading as emotion. Dodin and Eugenie talk to each other, are demonstrably loving toward each other when silent, and all of this is communicated and shared with friends and family via their beautiful meals. Cuisine here is more than mere food cooked for consumption; it's more than merely some dining "experience", however exquisite. Each meal Eugenie and Dodin conceive and execute is a sumulacrum of existence. We neglect to our peril our place in the chain of how our embodied existence is born of nature and to nature will return.  In the meantime, if we live well and attentively, life becomes infused