#NoHashtag

Jul 29, 2020

"You may think you like someone, but...
...you could be wrong."

PINNED: this newsletter is supposed to be a friendly recapping of the movies in, and coming to, theaters. But those movies don't exist right now. Until that changes, I'll either be suggesting old favorites to revisit, pointing out recent flicks you may have missed or calling out notable new VOD / streaming options.

Well Tenet's indefinite delay definitely didn't last very long. Warner Bros. already announced that Christopher Nolan's secretive action flick will hit international theaters first in late August and then "some" US cities over Labor Day. How many is some you ask? Um, more than none? I honestly don't think even Warner Bros. knows, because it's all dependent on state and city guidance / restrictions.

AMC (the countries largest theater chain) for its part has said they're opening back up late next month. The first movie scheduled is Russell Crowes' road rage thriller Unhinged (cue headlines about people will be "unhinged" to go back to the theaters right now). Other notable movies saw their release dates shift too, with A Quiet Place II and Top Gun: Maverick shifting to next year entirely and Mulan now unset. 😢 The Bill & Ted threequel has shifted to a "day and date" release of September 1 - i.e. what theaters it can play in and VOD on the same day (think this is a smart move).

Other news that is very much a big deal. AMC made a deal with Universal (with whom they previously had a whole slap fight over Trolls' premium rental release - don't laugh, that shit's serious) about when Universal's movies can be released in homes for rental after their theatrical opening. Quick history lesson: normally movies aren't available for home rental until 90 days after their opening weekend. Why? A demand by theater owners so people don't just "wait it out." Now, Universal will be able to release their movies in homes just 17 days after its release. BUT! It has to be premium pricing ($20+) and AMC will get a cut. Expect other studios and theater chains to get in on this as well.

WAIT, HOW COULD I FORGET! James Cameron announced, with an intro in Na'vi no less, that the FOUR Avatar sequels release dates got shifted as well. Oh noez! From their original 2052-2055 release dates to 2075 - 2080. Or something like that. I don't know, I could be off a few decades. 🤷‍♂️

Cutoff? Go here, click "most recent edition."

This week I'm gonna do an overlooked / underrated / under-appreciated movies. And again, it's a set of movies I haven't seen.

Btw, I'm still here, still waiting for your emails. So feel free to email me your take(s)!

JENNIFER'S BODY
(2009)

Of all three movies, this one seems to have gotten the shortest of the shrifts upon its release. Reading up on the movie, its story is almost tragic. It recently had its 10 year anniversary, so there were multiple reassessments / deep dives, including with the the director (Karyn Kusama), star (Megan Fox) and writer (Diablo Cody) - all women. I highlight that fact because it plays a big part in the movie's history. Beyond being notable for a movie where the principle creative talent is female, it also figures into the purpose of the movie. Which, as told by the creators, was intended as a dark comedic feminist takedown of the patriarchy as well as a self reflective look at the toxic aspects of female relationships. Buuuut, if you remember the trailer, that... is not what comes across. What comes across is a sexualized late aughts trendfest (noteworthy: this was right after the second Transformers movie came out - Fox's last).

This all makes a lot more sense when you read that the Kusama and Cody wrote to the studio's marketing team, concerned about the direction they were taking, and received an email response of ‘Jennifer sexy, she steal your boyfriend.’ That was the whole email. (working in studio marketing and being in the meetings where this stuff is discussed, I can attest this sounds frustratingly familiar).

The movie has since become a cult classic as it gets seen by its intended audience, young women (vs the young men who marketing targeted - and also gave the feedback at test screenings of "moar bewbs" 🤦🏻‍♂️ ).

Fox in particular has a very interesting take on it all (she had not spoken about the movie publicly until last year) as well as how Hollywood has treated her in general. If you're curious about how Hollywood works (and doesn't - especially regarding gender), I strongly encourage you to read this interview with Fox and Kusama.

Personally, I'm quite excited to watch this one with this added layer of context.

Details: 45% on RT (200 reviews)
R, 1 hr 42 mins, 20th Century Fox

CLOUD ATLAS
(2012)

I could have done this entire set with movies made by the Wachowski sisters (who also did the Matrix trilogy). Lilly and Lana have a penchant for making ambitious movies that are initially critically panned, do poorly at the box office and then people reconsider with time - beyond Atlas, you can add Jupiter Ascending and Speed Racer to the list. Fun fact: I actually saw Speed Racer (alone) in the theater and thought it was wild, and wildly excellent. Do I dig into this position a little harder because it's generally considered bad? Probably. But isn't it kinda fun to like a movie other people hate? It's like you know a secret - except you generally don't wanna keep it (often to the dismay of those in ear shot).

Cloud Atlas has probably had the biggest resurgence of the non-Matrix Wachowski movies, and it is now more often referenced as a good movie that was "misunderstood." The misunderstanding might've been fair though, considering the scope. It is... a lot. It cast the same actors (Tom Hanks, Halle Berry and more) to play numerous characters across a multi-generational storyline, from past to present to future, where those actors keep interacting with each other over and over again, getting at themes of souls, destiny vs freedom of choice and more. It also has three directors (the Wachowskis plus Tom Tykwer who did Run Lola Run) and a nearly three hour run time. 😬

Yeah.

But watching a movie without the pressure and expectation is sometimes a boon and can create a different viewing experience. That's what I'm curious about here.

There is a noteworthy caveat with this one that, even at the time of release, it was heavily critiqued for using makeup / prosthetics to change the race of the actors - most notably white actors to look more eastern Asian (think adjustments to their eyes and hair). It seems more blind spot than ill-intention, but regardless, it doesn't come across great.

Details: 67% on RT (282 reviews)
R, 2 hrs 52 mins, Warner Bros.

INGRID GOES WEST
(2017)

Ingrid Goes West may not have been critically maligned, in fact, reviewers liked it quite a bit (see below). However, $3 million at the box office is... not great. In fact, it's bad. Which means it got overlooked by audiences. But why? Dunno. I know I wanted to watch it when it came out, but just never did. Movie (not) watching be like that.

At only three years old though, it's hard to say this one has "aged well" when it's barely aged at all. But at the pace the world is moving and themes present, this movie seems to only have become more pertinent. See, Ingrid (Aubrey Plaza) is obsessed with social media and mistakes her interactions on the platforms for genuine relationships. Her infatuation with these digital artifices drives her to do bonkers shit, including moving to LA to force a best friendship with an Instagram "influencer" ( 🤮) who seemingly has the perfect life (Elizabeth Olsen).

I use the socials like the next person, but I'm always game to see a bit of (necessary?) takedown on what ills can be born from our internet parents.

Details: 86% on RT (191 reviews)
R, 1 hr 37 mins, NEON

What's In Theaters +

Discussion about this post