Tag: english

Dub’s Take: Jeanne du Barry (2023)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

3.5 out of 5

Let us all admire for a second how far French actress/director Maïwenn has come, from Scream Queen in 2003’s “Haute Tension” to her filmmaking status in the 2010s. Her “Jeanne du Barry” may only stymie Western audiences for her casting of the French-speaking Johnny Depp as her film’s primary male lead: the King of France, no less. Allow me then to proudly declare that the two-hour-plus subtitled film was such a successful love story, that my pale-as-a-ghost wife – who will avoid foreign films – was in tears by its end.

In my screening’s post-film behind-the-scenes interview, Depp is as restrained as to his reasons behind the “challenge” of playing the character as his Louis XV is in the film itself, only really iterating that Maïwenn was able to convince him otherwise. Taking the last four years of Depp’s highly-publicized fall into account, it’s easy to dismiss his performance here as sleepwalking for a much-needed paycheque – personally, I think Maïwenn’s casting wants audiences to draw parallels between the eminent nature of her actor’s public & private lives with that of Louis XV’s, who also forwent the luxury of discretion based on his status and what was expected behaviour of royalty. As a man willing to forgo etiquette for love, Depp is great here, in a role he makes believable despite it leaving little room for his usual ostentatiousness.

Of course, the film’s real success isn’t just in its fortunate stunt casting: Maïwenn displays herself an equally-capable dramatic actress as she is director, allowing her Jeanne’s love for Louis to help her carry the silent burdens of her position. The production design is sumptuous (love those powdered wigs). While Jeanne’s poor upbringing made me want for more juxtaposition between her life in the palace and the one she left behind, I understand it was probably jettisoned to focus elsewhere (once you mention the Revolution, we want to see it). I also think the film could have ended at the perfect point about 10 minutes earlier than it did.

As a romance and not a biography, Jeanne du Barry is at its best. It’s when the viewer begins to look broader than the borders of its script that we realize the shortness of its plot: nothing much happens, other than the slow unfolding of life, which ends when it ends. I suppose you could say that about most lives.

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Are you a big Johnny Depp fan? (I’m really not.) Are you excited to see him in a “normal” performance for once, even if it is the first post-trial role he was able to get? Do you think Amber Heard will ever have a similar comeback? Did you all know that Kevin Spacey is starting to work again, too? Do you believe in second chances, or are these all just a bunch of spoiled libertines? Leave a comment below!

Posted on by wd 0

just say

A poem about how I don’t believe you.

i am glowering at some clothed chick’s
skin-tight pant
because it is there
and because i am a man,
conceiving a conversation in my head
about Kubrick & cannabis and sex positions
that the two of us will never have.
my father was right:
i’m just like my mother –
a broken fucking record;
still choking up at the sight
of metronomic hips in dark blue jeans
when they pass;


long hair tightly pulled in a farm girl’s braid
with a ribbon
for a rubber keeping it all together,

but it’s habit.
leftovers.
i’m more attracted now than i ever have been
to my own thoughts
and dreams
it seems
and by and large
the thrill is gone
because i know now that nothing.
any time you want to talk to me
it’s always under the guise of you wanting something
other than me,
so if you’re going to say anything at all,
just say no and
please leave me alone
because you shouldn’t start what you can’t stop.

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Killer’s Kiss (1955)

A spoiler-free movie review.

2 out of 5

It’s a mistake to confuse pity with love.

Stanley Kubrick’s second narrative feature “Killer’s Kiss” is a remarkable step-up in quality from his first film “Fear and Desire”, but it still ain’t no Georgia peach.

We’re talking about movies that are closer now to their centennial anniversaries than ever before, and unless you’re a Film Major in post-sec, or doing research, or you’re an old soul & actually enjoy watching older movies (the minority), or a senior (the majority), as we move further and further into the foreseeable future, it’s less likely that ensuing generations will seek out a black & white film from the 1950s, out of a largely-chauvinistic & misogynistic body of work, even if it IS a Kubrick film. Why watch this when you could watch “Full Metal Jacket” again, and possibly catch something you missed the first dozen times around? Is there even a reason to watch Killer’s Kiss in the 2020s other than what I mentioned, or possibly to farm content for a humble blog? Hmm? Read on to find out!

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Fear and Desire (1952)

A spoiler-free movie review.

1.5 out of 5

If only Stanley Kubrick knew how, decades later, his acolytes would give credence to his debut feature, when he thought the negative itself should be burned. “Fear and Desire” is a trade photographer’s exercise in the world of narrative film, and of not much value otherwise, were it not for the retrospective knowledge of what its creator would go on to do (and to a different degree its cast, including “Harry & Tonto” director Paul Mazursky in a key role).

Fear and Desire has come back to consciousness with the discovery of the Venice Film Festival cut, longer by a mythical 10 minutes.

OOO! I’d be lying if I said those 10 minutes didn’t make me more interested to see the film than I was initially. Kubrick (particularly “A Clockwork Orange”) was my childhood gateway to “cinema”, but I’d never seen Fear and Desire before. As a result, I watched what I got, which is the widely-available 60-minute version.

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Ghostbusters Frozen Empire (2024)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

I’m not a “Ghostbusters” fan. The first film was not in my childhood rotation, although it was a clever idea that could have only come from the renaissance of ’80s cinema. I did see “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” (2021), but I don’t agree with bringing dead actors back digitally, so I thought the ending was a cheap excuse to wring a wet rag of nostalgia over viewers’ heads. We saw the cast we wanted back (sans Rick Moranis) plus the Ectomobile & proton packs, and the script regurgitated all the flashy pseudo-science that made the first film’s screenwriters Dan Aykroyd & the late Harold Ramis giddy in ’84. And since it made money, now we have ANOTHER ONE.

For the first 75 minutes of “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire”, you’d be forgiven for thinking it’s a John Cassavetes picture: there’s minimal “busting”; a girl-crush with a ghost; quick flashes of what the old crew is up to; the tribulations of new, inexperienced management taking over an old, established operation; and, ultimately, the triumphant bureaucracy of William Atherton’s Walter Peck. After the small-scale atavism of the last instalment, the only thing producers had to do in this sequel was up the stakes. Yet, so little of consequence actually happens in the first hour-and-a-bit of “Ghostbusters 5” that it feels more like melodrama than the supernatural action-comedy team-up throwback it should be. It’s boring.

It all segues to a big finale that is heavily-spoiled in the trailers. All the new & old actors show up for the one camera shot audiences are all expecting (in uniform walking toward the camera in slow-motion), but the final fight takes place inside the cramped studio corridors of a firehouse when they should be outside in, you know, the world of ice (I thought it was cheaper to shoot against a green screen)? And when our heroes exit to their adoring public in the epilogue, the old actors mysteriously disappear. The final half-hour smells so foul of behind-the-scenes scheduling coordination, and contract negotiation, and cost-saving measures, that its equivalent would be watching a dramatization of the film’s accounting spreadsheet.

Maybe this is all you want out of another Ghostbusters sequel: to see everyone again, one last time. And if they make another one again, then maybe you’ll get to see them all one last time again, forgetting of course we’ve already been through this a few times already. But I’m done with busting. Not that busting ever made me feel good.

1 out of 5

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Am I being overly critical? Do I need to chill out more and appreciate that Paul Rudd can turn in a consistent, median-emotion performance whenever he wants? Would you be as awkward as Finn Wolfhard looks in the pre-show interview sitting next to a blond, long-haired Mckenna Grace? Leave a comment down below!

Posted on by wd 0