I'm Gonna Write About Ted Lasso, Maybe

 Hey,

It's me, Ken. I used to write about movies on this site. Now, I... don't write movies at all. I have a 9-5 job where I do a lot of writing and it's pretty much zapped my energy when it comes to writing anything else, but enough about my personal "problems".

I'm thinking, maybe, if I have enough motivation, I might write about this final season of "Ted Lasso". Yes, I'm a "Ted Lasso" fan, or... was. Or... I'm not sure where I'm at anymore. First two seasons were fantastic. This season... has been a meandering mess, in my opinion. There've been high points and low points. There have been befuddling moments and moments that make me pump my fist. I want this show to be good. I root for this show like Richmond roots for its football club. But, man, why does it feel like things have gone flat this season?

I don't like to check my phone while watching a TV show or a movie. I'll do it more often during a TV show, though, and I did it during episode 10, season 3 of Ted Lasso. Midway through the episode, I had to check... is this really the final season? Like, there's only three episodes left and this is third-to-last one? There's only two episodes after this one?

If so, why doesn't it feel that way? All the plotlines in the episode do not give me the impression that this show is about to wrap everything up for good. The first thing that threw me off was AFC Richmond taking a break for international play. Fine. But, shouldn't that be like... an episode 3 thing? An early season thing? This team has started to master this triangle-style of play, which is one of the things I've found fascinating about this season, and yet episode 10 is an example of what's been frustrating me.

These episodes are too long. There are too many characters. We follow too many plot lines. We often lose characters along the way so we can spend an inordinate amount of time on the 10th or 11th lead of the show. We get it, you like your characters. You think you have a great cast on your hands. And you do! But this show is about to wrap up. There's two episodes left and we barely see Ted Lasso at all. We focus on Rebecca's relationship with her ex... why exactly? Nate quit coaching West Ham United, or got fired, or whatever... because he wouldn't fuck around on his girlfriend? So that storyline is just over? Or is Nate gonna magically get that job back in one of the last two episodes?

Seriously, what the fuck did these writers do to Nate? Much respect to all writers during these times as the WGA continue to strike, but Ted Lasso writers, I'm sorry... what the fuck? Season 2 ends with Nate with a full head of gray hair wearing a West Ham United uniform. Holy shit, Nate's joined the dark side! And he's become a real heel for the show! Except... no. Whatever rivalry between Nate and Ted dies a few episodes into season 3. What was that all for? Nate and Ted have a real heart-breaking conversation in the season 2 finale and now Nate is back to being a puppy dog again. We've focused more on this budding relationship he has with this Polish waitress, which... great. I'm glad he's found love. Isn't he supposed to be the villain of this season? Villains can find love, that's fine, but this whole storyline has completely gotten in the way of whatever was going in between him and Ted. They've barely interacted. There's no confrontation. When the two teams played each other, Nate wanted to apologize to Ted more than fight him. That felt too soon. We barely got to see hard-ass Nate in season 3. We barely got to see him at work. I'm stunned by how unsatisfying that storyline became. I'm not saying Nate has to become a one-dimensional asshole, but I thought the whole point of his dissolution with Ted was to show an alternative style of coaching. Nate's "wunderkind"/hard-ass style of coaching... maybe his players don't like him as much, but maybe it gets the job done too? Considering he actually knows the game? Ted's stumbled upon this triangle style of play for his team, which is great, but now Nate no longer coaches West Ham, so what now? He's gonna re-join AFC Richmond and he and Ted are gonna have a nice "diamond dogs" chat and cry together?

I loved the character of Ted in the first two seasons. He was a lovable, positive presence in season 1 that slowly won everyone over. In season 2, we got to see there's a darkness, a sadness behind that facade. In season 3, he's just... kinda here. He had that epiphany about triangles and he misses his son, but it feels like there's a third step missing. I feel like there's been an elephant in the room this entire season and now there's two episodes left and I feel like there's not gonna be a payoff. I'm not saying Ted needs to lose his cool, but it'd be nice to see him have a backbone and it feels like he's missing one in season 3. The way he handled Zava, the pressure Rebecca puts him under about really needing to win, his ex-wife dating somebody else, his estrangement from his son, that video of Nate ripping the "Believe" poster... at a certain point, it starts feel like... is he incapable of getting angry? I'm not saying he has to flip a table, but Nate's confrontation with him at the end of season 2 made me think that Ted's buttons might really get pushed this season. We come to find out that his style of coaching isn't for everyone, and that there are imperfections inherent in his philosophy. Nate felt left out and unimportant. Maybe Nate's big speech to Ted was unwarranted, maybe he was completely in the wrong. But Nate wearing that West Ham United uniform at the end of season 2 made me believe we were in for a big confrontation, a clash of styles. Ted really getting his philosophy put to the test. His buttons finally getting pushed too much. 

I'm not saying Ted has to yell. He doesn't have to shout. A simple "Hey, that's not cool" would be nice. He did have that kind of conversation with his ex-wife about her new relationship, and that was good. But that hasn't been built upon. We haven't seen him confront his players, his coaches, his former assistants, rival coaches, rival owners... no one. We have two episodes left and I'm worried that there isn't enough time to put a nice enough bow on this thing. Loose ends can't get tied up because there's too many of them now. Sure, they can all get tied up in one big montage or whatever, but I'm worried that's not gonna feel satisfying either. I'm just straight up worried about this show and what it's turned into. There's no reason for 60+ minute episodes. It's always been a comedy-drama, but this season seldom has been funny and it really isn't that dramatic. There's a lot of pleasant conversations with people who are nice to each other. There are some unpleasant conversations... which are still wrapped up rather nicely. Everything is... nice. Ted Lasso season 1... only Ted was nice! And Keeley. Sure, Keeley was nice too, but her storyline... look, I'm glad she's become a successful businesswoman but we spend A LOT of time on her this season and on her new relationship and then that storyline just goes nowhere too. 

Here's how I feel, plainly... the time we spend away from the football club is time wasted. It's like the writers don't give shit about soccer/football at all. But it's not even that, a lot of the drama has nothing to do with the team, either on the field or behind the scenes. Instead we're spending time with Nate and his girlfriend, Keeley and her girlfriend/business, Sam and his restaurant... these storylines can exist, but my god, we spend way too much time with each of them and it does the show a disservice. We've gone way off course. We've lost focus. If this was the penultimate season or season 3 of 5, I wouldn't mind any of this as much. But this is the FINAL season. Can start to act like it? We gotta get back to business here. This football team, their progress, Ted's progress as a coach, Ted's home life, his rivalry with Nate (though that seems like it's over), Jamie and Roy's training turning into Jamie becoming an elite player on the field (isn't that what that excess training is supposed to be about? Why are we not seeing any of the results of that? Are we really waiting for the finale for Jamie to do something really cool and then we're supposed to say "wow, the training... finally... paid off... now. I'm glad we waited 'til now to see if Roy's training actually helped Jamie in a meaningful way!"

Ok, I gotta stop there. It's getting late. I have two more episodes left to watch. The finale is this Wednesday. I think I'll watch it when it gets released and then I'll give my final thoughts. But... yeah... I'm worried. Like I said, I do like some stuff about this season, but there's a part of me that wonders if this show just kinda sucks now. Cause if so, we only had 3 seasons and for the show to wrap up this way, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Please put my fears to rest and nail the finale, Ted Lasso writers.

Subtext in "Space Jam" (This Is Really Stupid and More of a Sports Take, Just Go With Me On This)

 

In "Space Jam", aliens want to enslave the Looney Tunes or whatever. I don't remember the plot of "Space Jam" and don't feel like looking it up. I've seen the movie twice in the last 20 years and the point of this blog post isn't to re-hash the Looney Tunes-specific plot. Aliens want to enslave Bugs Bunny and his friends, right? But the Looney Tunes come up with a plan: they challenge the aliens to a game of basketball. These aliens have no fucking idea what basketball even is, but as soon as they do, they're smart enough to know that they should go to North America on planet Earth, specifically the United States of America and visit NBA arenas. They scouted the league's top players and decided to steal the talents of Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing, Muggsy Bogues, Shawn Bradley, and Larry Johnson. 

When I re-visited "Space Jam" a few years ago, as a man who has much more knowledge on basketball, I remarked out loud to my child (who wasn't paying attention nor cared) that a line-up of Bradley, Ewing, Barkley, Larry Johnson, and Muggsy Bogues doesn't really work on the basketball court. That's two centers, two power forwards, and a point guard. None of those players can guard Michael Jordan. 

But therein lines the rub, right? Michael Jordan was in retirement when the aliens scouted the NBA. If we're to believe this movie took place circa 1994/1995, who were the best 2-guards back then? Particularly in the absence of Michael Jordan? Clyde Drexler was nearing the end of his career, though he did end up winning a championship with the Houston Rockets. Mitch Richmond, Reggie Miller,  Latrell Sprewell, and John Starks were all really good players at the time too. None of them could hold a candle to MJ. 

The Looney Tunes made the deal with the aliens during the luckiest time in NBA history. If they had coerced the aliens into a game of basketball (a game in which, if the Looney Tunes lose, would have grave consequences for them all) in the years prior to 1994-1995 OR the years immediately after that (1996-1998), the aliens surely would've found out about Michael Jordan and he'd have been the first NBA player they'd steal talent from. With Michael Jordan retired in the mid-90s, that wasn't an option the aliens were aware of. Bugs Bunny must've been following the league at this time. He must've known Michael Jordan was retired or he wouldn't have made this deal. Because the Looney Tunes immediately "recruited" Michael Jordan to join his team (they forced him into their world via a hole in a golf course). All the Looney Tunes needed was Michael Jordan and that was enough to defeat whatever talent the aliens were able to steal.

Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls dominated the league in the early '90s. They won championships three consecutive years from 1991 to 1993. He stopped Ewing's Knicks from the making the finals during that run. In the '93 finals, he was a thorn in Barkley's side, preventing him from winning a ring with his Phoenix Suns team. Meanwhile, Shawn Bradley, Larry Johnson, and Muggsy Bogues had no hope of any real playoff success with their respective teams. But, it wouldn't have mattered who the aliens stole talents from. No one could get past Michael Jordan and the Bulls during that time. 

"Space Jam" represents where the league was at that time. There was a giant void when Michael Jordan retired. The Houston Rockets were able to win two consecutive championships in Jordan's absence (he played toward the end of the '95 season, but wasn't in game shape until the year after). Playing against Michael Jordan during those days was like getting robbed of your talents. It didn't matter how hard Barkley and Ewing worked. MJ worked that much harder and always came out on top. So, the aliens could summon their talents and the talents of other notable players at that time, but still wouldn't matter. None of them could get past Michael Jordan. None of them could beat Jordan, especially in a world where basic physics or laws of gravity don't apply. Jordan could play on a team of literal Looney Tunes and still beat an awkwardly-crafted all-star team consisting of the NBA's best players during a short era when Jordan was missing. 

At the end of "Space Jam", the talents of Bradley, Johnson, Bogues, Barkley, and Ewing are all restored and they're back to being the players they used to be. Great news! Except, Michael Jordan was coming back to the league too, ready to win three more consecutive titles before retiring a second time. Barkley and Ewing ended up having Hall of Fame-caliber careers, but people will always point to the fact that they were never able to win a ring when they played. And that's all thanks to Michael Jordan.

Although Ewing's Knicks DID make the finals twice, and in both years, Jordan wasn't in the league. The Knicks still blew it anyway. And Ewing was hurt during his second finals trip. So, whatever. Anyway, I don't know if any of this will end up making sense or if I made a coherent point. Goodnight.

A Rare Movie Review: The Hatchet Wielding Hitchhiker

 

February 2nd, 2013 - a local news station from Fresno, California interviews a young man who refers to himself as Kai. He claims he was picked up by a heavyset man who claimed to be Jesus Christ and, later, crashed into a pedestrian - pinning them against the rear of a parked truck. Kai promptly pulled a hatchet out of his backpack and whacked the driver across the head with it several times. In Kai's words, he went "Smash, smash, Suh-MASH" on the driver's head. Before recounting this story, Kai addressed the camera directly telling whoever's watching that they "deserve respect" and are "worthwhile, nobody can ever take that away from you." This interview went viral and made Kai an internet celebrity. He even managed to become a guest on the Jimmy Kimmel show, a little over a week after the video went viral. Kai's interview with the local Fresno reporter was watched by millions, who saw him as a lovable, free-wheeling, kind, carefree surfer/skater, who's completely unfiltered but contains a heart of gold. Hollywood caught wind of this man and immediately wanted to make him famous. The world was Kai's oyster. Three months later, Kai becomes the primary suspect of a murder and gets sentenced to jail. What the hell happened?

That's what the Netflix documentary "The Hatchet Wielding Hitchhiker" attempts to unpack. Interviewing the reporter from Fresno, a man who works on the Jimmy Kimmel show, a woman who wanted to give Kai his own reality show, Kai's mother, his cousin, and a few other people who knew Kai----the documentary attempts to piece together the type of person Kai was,  the events that occurred directly after that interview went viral, what really went down between him and the murdered attorney, and how this all could've happened in the first place. 

But while watching this doc, one can't help but wonder about some of the people that were interviewed. This video goes viral and suddenly there's a number of people in the television industry that want to do business with Kai without attempting to do any sort of background check or research on the person. Other than the local reporter who genuinely seemed concerned for Kai's well-being, it was hard to take the people who wanted to make Kai famous seriously. 

Let's get something crystal clear - after that video went viral in February 2013, this is what we knew about Kai: he hitchhikes, he doesn't have a home, he likes to skate/surf, and he carries around a hatchet which he used in a very violent, and possibly excessive, way. It's understandable why his interview went viral  - it's the same reason why the "Hide yo kids, hide yo wife" guy went viral a few years before that. Off-the-cuff, unfiltered, unpredictable interviews with the local news can often lead to funny soundbites. It's five minutes of entertainment, which ends up becoming a meme and leads to parody videos and re-enactments before everyone gets sick of it and moves on. Did people in Hollywood really think this man was going to become a national celebrity? A reality TV star? Especially without knowing anything about him?

The guy from Jimmy Kimmel tells the story of how Kai pissed on a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, and the guy got Kai a room at a fancy Hollywood hotel, a hotel "Marilyn Monroe used to live in", Kai walks in, grabs liquor bottle from a minibar and immediately chugs it. How baffling! How odd! Yes, this person whom you've never met just might have some mental health issues! Think about what this person's life was like before that viral video. Is it possible for a homeless hitchhiker to be mentally stable? Yes, 100%. But there's a reason why people generally don't like to pick-up hitchhikers --- because the opposite can be true. Either way, when you meet a hitchhiker, you can't really be surprised about anything the person ends up doing. If you decide to pick them up, or in this case, invite him onto the Jimmy Kimmel show, you will have to deal with whatever consequences that might arise.

That said, obviously nobody could've predicted that this would be the same man that would end up committing a murder three months later. It's chilling and unsettling, learning about the details of the murder. Yet, all the reality TV show producer can think is "I can't believe I let him spend the night at my house once!" 

Is this an effective documentary? If you want to learn about the story behind Kai's interview, his appearance on Kimmel, and the gruesome murder of the New Jersey attorney---you will get that from this movie. But, this movie is called "The Hatchet Wielding Hitchhiker" and hearing the baffled bemusement of some of these interview subjects will really make you scratch your head... hey guys, what do you expect from a guy who's nickname is "the hatchet wielding hitchhiker"? This is a guy with no home and a history of violent behavior and instead of attempting to find the person help, you throw him back on the streets when he ends up being too unstable to become a star. I'm just saying, if I brought this guy to my home and he exhibited the behavior they were describing, my FIRST reaction would be "This guy needs help." How do none of these people come to that conclusion? Is this me on a high horse? Me saying that? Am I out of line here? I don't know too many people who piss on public property the first chance they get, or chug a bottle of alcohol as soon as they enter a hotel room. This guy clearly had problems and he was chewed up and spit out by the Hollywood machine and committed a murder months later. 

It's like the documentary has all this information. It's all there for you to see, but it seems unaware that there's a surface-level story (the story of Kai) and an underlying second story beneath the surface (sketchy Hollywood people trying to take advantage of Kai for personal/financial gain, discover he has mental health problems, and promptly cast him aside). It's just weird. Roger Ebert once said, "It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it." I feel like that applies here. Kai's story? The murder? Very interesting and unsettling. For that reason, the documentary is worth a watch. But the way this documentary decides to tell Kai's story? It left a bad taste in my mouth.

Maybe it's not easy to tell a guy like Kai, "Hey you need help". All I'm saying is that, I'm surprised NONE of the Hollywood people interviewed in this movie came to that conclusion. They all just seemed baffled and disgusted by him when it all just seems so obvious. Hope y'all understand where I'm coming from.

And how about that? My first movie review in, like, 6-7 years (letterboxd doesn't count). How'd I do? I know, I know. I'm kinda rusty. I might do more write-ups like this in the near future. We'll see.

Will Smith smacked Chris Rock in the face during the Oscars

 Hi.

So, Will Smith smacked Chris Rock at the Oscars yesterday. Did you guys hear about this? It's all over the news and social media. You must've heard. Chris Rock made a rude joke about Jada Pinkett-Smith's hair and Will Smith slapped him seconds later. It was pretty wild. I'm surprised you haven't heard about it yet. Also, why are you here? Who are you? Nobody reads my blog. Nobody! What brought you to this blog? Did you google "Will Smith Chris Rock Oscars" and google brought you here? If so, that's awesome. I have a post many years ago about how much I hate The Big Bang Theory and it's got like 10,000 hits, which is a big deal for me. Maybe this blogpost can get 11,000 hits. That'd be 10,999 more hits than Chris Rock received from Will Smith. Right in the face!

I don't know if I like pop culture anymore. The perception of "pop culture" as it stands now. I think that's just me being in my mid-30s. A straight white male in his mid-30s. Yeah. You should stop reading at this point if you haven't already. Can you believe what I'm saying? 

No, what I'm talking about is how we process pop culture now. How we chew things up and spit them out. How we consume it. It's all so fucking weird and fractured and there's always "sides" to take, right? It's not just crazy off-the-cuff live moments, either. It's literally everything. 

When I started this blog in January 2010, I wanted to write about movies. I wanted to review new releases and occasionally write about things that were happening in the world of movies. Things looked a lot different back then. We had Twitter, but the discourse surrounding movies and pop culture didn't seem so dizzying and maddening then. Obviously, a lot has happened then. A lot of terrible shit has happened since then. And by the way, I'm not talking "outrage" or "cancel culture" or any of that. I'm strictly talking about how we consume the shit that happens in the world. 

Whether you saw it live or heard about it then looked it up, you looked up reactions to the Will Smith/Chris Rock incident. That's why you're here, after all. Now you're reading some random-ass blogger's opinion on the matter and you're disappointed cause I haven't really said anything yet. You probably stopped reading at this point and I don't blame you. My point is, when you looked up reactions to the incident, what did you notice? Did you notice how immediately there were sides to take, just like with everything else? And not only were the sides to take, but if you took the other side, you were a dumb piece of shit. Right? It's fucking crazy how we consume pop culture! What the hell are we doing? And why are we doing like this?

There are reasoned takes out there, surely. They, unfortunately, get drowned out by the craziest takes. I lost my passion for writing about movies - mostly because life got in the way, but also, when I stepped outside of "internet movie world", when I stopped outside the world of Twitter, I found the world to be a much more enjoyable place. Does that mean bad shit isn't happening in the world? Of course it is. I see that too. But that's the thing. Bad shit IS happening in the world. Around you. Literally around you. And around me. I don't need to get into specifics, although I can tell you that it feels like people are fucking crazy right now. You go outside and it's not hard to find them. They are usually loud. You go to the grocery store or a restaurant or you're driving - you're gonna find crazy assholes. They're everywhere. That's kinda my problem. I don't need to see those people, then come onto the internet and rub elbows with MORE of those people. I really don't! Life is exhausting enough as it is, isn't it? Like, enough.

This brings me back to Chris Rock/Will Smith. First, there was the initial shock of the moment, which I feel we don't appreciate enough! That was absolutely insane. Chris Rock was right, one of the craziest moments in live television. Of course it was! We're talking about one of the biggest movie stars of all-time slapping one of the biggest comedians of all-time right in the face during the middle of the Oscars! An award show that, yes, has lost a lot of it's luster and is harder and harder to get excited about every year, but it's still a big, live event and all of Hollywood (more like Hollyweird, amirite? lololol j/k j/k guys) attends. It's Hollywood's biggest night! And guess what? Two of Hollywoods biggest stars ended up in a crazy-ass, live altercation. It was absolutely insane and the moment it happened, it was clear this was going to be talked about everywhere by everyone - thus showing what kinda power the Oscars have if they do something people actually give a shit about.

The moment itself was insane. That's what we should focus on and enjoy! You know what? Nobody died. Chris Rock will be fine. Will Smith apologized, rightfully so. It was a shitty thing he did to Chris Rock and he should not have done it. The fact that it happened though? I mean, it happened. It really, really happened. What a batshit crazy moment. Why can't we just soak it in? Minutes after it happened there were immediately takes and think pieces about the incident. This, right here, what I'm writing - it's an anti-thinkpiece. I think. Cause I don't want to really get into the ramifications of any of it. What about the children? I talked to my son about the incident afterward and it was a solid conversation. I'd give it a B+. He seemed to realize and acknowledge right away that... no, you shouldn't slap somebody in the face even if they insult you or someone you love. Some out there might disagree with that and uh... no, I'm not getting into that. Don't make me! You're trying to pull me into an argument I don't wanna have. If that's how you feel, how can I convince you otherwise? You were raised different than me? Ok, so you were. Let's just leave it at that. I'll just remember that and try not to insult you or any of your family members anytime soon.

(Although, I mean c'mon, people don't just go around hitting people in public, do they? And there can be consequences. If you hit someone who insulted you, they can press charges against you! Why would you want that? There's really nothing good that can come out of hitting someone unless you're Will Smith at the Oscars. Now, if you're forced to hit someone out of self-defense, that's a completely different story, but that's not what this was.)

Please don't read what's inside the parenthesis. I want to just get all of this off my chest and the best place for me to do that is on this blog that nobody reads. If you read this, just know that I love you no matter what crazy opinion you have about this. I mean, at the end of the day, it's all pretty trivial - what we think. What's going on between Will Smith and Jada? That's a whole other thing and that's something they have to sort out - not us. We just get to enjoy a crazy batshit moment that happened. A crazy batshit moment that I don't condone by the way! And by the way, Will Smith won the Best Actor Oscar right after! Is this real life??

I guess at the end of the day, what I'm trying to say is - can't we just enjoy things? Is it impossible? I feel like it is. I just watched CODA not too long ago. Like an hour ago. I enjoyed it. It was good. Great? The best ever? Worthy of its Oscar? Does any of that really matter? Unless somebody gets slapped, I don't really care what happens on the Oscars. Happy for everyone that won though, good for them.

Just adding a post.

 Hi.

I'm just adding this so Google doesn't decide to just remove my blog like they did with my "sister" blogs (which I hadn't updated in 5+ years). 

This blog, kenoncinema, hadn't been updated for two years and I kinda forgot it existed for a little while. It's easy to get caught up in your shit as you get older. I really miss the days where I could go see movies and review them. 

This blog actually did a lot for me despite it never blowing up. I don't think I'd be where I am right now without it.  Also have I written about this before? If I did, that's embarrassing, but here I go again.

...

...

Ok, I looked at my previous posts and I'm safe to talk about what I'm about to talk... about. Wow, so eloquent.

Deciding to make this blog over 10 years ago has lead me to where I am right now. This is despite my blog having essentially no followers whatsoever. Nobody reads this. Nobody will read this post! Well guess what? I still succeeded because of the blog, so suck it! (sorry, it does kinda feel good to say that).

Most of my blogging on kenoncinema took place between 2010-2015. Toward the end of 2013, I felt that my film reviews were actually getting up there in quality. So, I emailed the people behind The Playlist (theplaylist.net) about a job. I sent them links to my writing from this blog, then they asked me for a writing sample, and hours later I got the job. Now, I wasn't getting paid, but I was having my work published on a website a lot of people read. Down the road, The Playlist would pay me to do gigs here and there, but the biggest thing they did was help me get into Chapman University.

When i was applying to grad school in the Fall of 2014, I was several years removed from undergrad. I graduated Penn State in the summer of '09 and did not do a good job keeping in touch with my professors. The heads at The Playlist, Rodrigo Perez and Kevin Jagernauth, wrote letters of recommendation for me. I don't know what their letters said. And funny thing is, I barely even knew them beyond the work I did for them. I don't know what they pulled out of their ass, but I do know I got into Chapman.

Months after I graduated Chapman in the Spring of 2017, I applied for a job as a closed captioner. My current boss saw that I had a Masters in Screenwriting and thought I'd be better suited for audio description - the other department. I took the job in audio description and I've been in that world ever since. 

And it all stems from this blog! If I had no blog, would I have gotten a job with The Playlist? Would my writing be good enough if I wasn't working on my craft all those years beforehand?

Food for thought, I guess. But, the main takeaway: I don't want Google to remove this blog! It's of high importance to me. That said, it's up to me to make something of it. I don't know if people even read blogs anymore. I don't even get to watch as many movies as I'd like to anymore. It'd be hard to update this regularly because my current job takes up so much of my time. Even now, it's almost midnight. I have two kids. If I don't go to sleep any minute now, I'm going to regret it. Life really gets in the way. But, I need to write. Just free writing feels nice. I write in such a specific style these days, for work, it can feel a little stifling (despite it also being rewarding). So, yeah, to the one person who reads this blog: you are looking at a big piece of my personal history. Enjoy.

and now, the 2015 list

Here are my top 10 films from 2015

1. Carol, director: Todd Haynes
2. Mad Max Fury Road, director: George Miller
3. Hateful Eight, director: Quentin Tarantino
4. Son of Saul, director: László Nemes
5. Sicario, director: Denis Villeneuve
6. Room, director: Lenny Abrahamson
7. Anomalisa, director: Charlie Kaufman, Duke Johnson
8. Bridge of Spies, director: Steve Spielberg
9. Ex Machina, director: Alex Garland
10. Heaven Knows What, director: Safdie Bros

Honorable mentions: Queen of Earth, The End of the Tour, Inside Out, Spotlight, Creed, It Follows, The Martian, Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation, Tangerine, Eden, Mississippi Grind, The Diary of a Teenage Girl, Straight Outta Compton, Crimson Peak, The Big Short

Good lord this year was stacked! Super, super stacked! Every movie mentioned in my honorable mentions could've had an outside shot of making a top 10 any other year. And there's movies like "Crimson Peak" and "The Big Short" which kinda left me cold when I saw it, but now I regard them much more fondly and they deserve a re-watch.

"Carol" and "Mad Max Fury Road" is essentially a tie. If I was lame and actually made it a tie between those two movies, "Queen of Earth" would be at the 11th spot, but I've always ultimately sided with "Carol" at #1. Why not give the #1 spot to the greatest blockbuster-sized action film of the 21st century (yeah, I'm going there)? Honestly, I don't know, maybe I should. "Carol" could not be a more different film than "Fury Road" and I love that they're my #1 and #2 because they represent two wildly different types of movies that I enjoy. And yet, if one were to find similarities? It'd be the way both movies give care, and attention to detail, to their characters. The films largely let the visuals do that talking and are sumptuous visually. "Fury Road" with the desert scapes and dark blue skies. "Carol" with the obsessive attention-to-detail to 1950s New York. I'm a huge fan of "Far From Heaven", Todd Haynes's 2002 melodrama, a movie that is more upfront about its Sirkian influences. What I love about "Carol" is that, while the influences are there, the movie's style feels more assured. I'm not thinking as much about the influences, the style, look, mood, and feel of "Carol" just seduces me all on its own. Does all that make sense? I hope so. These are two of my favorite movies of the decade - no question.

"Hateful Eight" was originally in the 5 spot, but the way people responded to "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" - as if "Hateful Eight" wasn't as good - made me bristle a little. Sure, "Hollywood" is more accessible, sweeter, and nostalgic. It's more of a feel-good movie. I love it. It's my #2 of 2019. Would've been an easy #1 if "Parasite" didn't rock my world. But I also love me some nihilistic, mean-spirited Question and "Hateful Eight" is all that and more. I first saw the roadshow version which had an intermission, and my god, that blew my mind. Having seen it a second time since then, I still marvel at the film. Featuring a cast of mostly QT regulars like Sam Jackson, Kurt Russell, Michael Madsen, Tim Roth, Bruce Dern and Walton Goggings. Then a newcomer to the QT-verse, Jennifer Jason-Leigh, who fits like a glove. It's three hours of people sizing each other up, then killing each other. Shot in 70mm inside a haberdashery. Honestly, just typing this out, I can't believe this movie exists and I'm thankful for it. I'm sad it wasn't as big of a hit as QT's last couple of movies, but it just makes me wanna embrace it more. One day, hopefully, others will come around.

"Son of Saul" and "Room" are two very difficult watches that I've been too much of a wuss to try and re-watch. Maybe that's why they've gotten knocked down a peg (they were originally #3 and #4 when I unveiled my 2015 in a podcast 4 years ago). They're both fantastic films and I'm sure they hold up well, but man they're also emotionally draining. It was alright in 2015 when the world and this country wasn't going through quite as much bullshit. Like, don't get me wrong, things were not peachy in 2015 either, but I think I was a lot more willing to re-watch a haunting Holocaust drama four years ago then I am now. Anyway, I'm rambling and getting off track. "Son of Saul" is a very powerful movie that's what makes it hard to revisit. The camerawork, which largely fixates on the protagonist's face, forces the viewer to imagine the horror that surrounds the man as opposed to seeing it on screen and possibly getting de-sensitized to it. Having seen quite a few movies set during the Holocaust, I was really struck by the unique approach "Son of Saul" took and the way it made me feel having to listen - but really being able to see - a concentration camp. And the story, how it's about a man's quest to bury his dead son - it's just a brutal movie to watch. But important and excellent and masterful too. The difficulty of watching "Room" has more to do with being trapped in this shack with Brie Larson and Jacob Tremblay and this awful life they've had to endure together. Then, when they're finally free, watching the mother suffer from PTSD, while the son is able to finally be a kid for the first time. Yeah, I cried 20 times when I saw this movie. Goddamn.

With "Sicario", Denis Villeneuve showed he was a director we all had to pay serious attention to, and we have ever since. I think of all the movies he's made during this amazing 2010s run, "Sicario" might be my favorite still. I love the way this movie unfolds. I love its cynicism. And my goodness, it's a gorgeous movie to look at, thanks to Roger Deakins. I love the way it slowly transitions from being Emily Blunt's movie to becoming the Benicio Del Toro show. It's so seamless. And yet, the fact that the movie kinda sorta leaves Blunt's character in the dust - that's exactly the point! She's in over her head because the war she's stepping into is complex and there is no clean way out, no matter what.

What I love about 2015 is how disparate all these movies are. The last four on my list "Anomalisa", "Bridge of Spies", "Ex Machina", and "Heaven Knows What" couldn't be more different than each other. Charlie Kaufman only made one movie in the 2010s and it's kinda been forgotten a little. Undeservedly so! "Anomalisa" is such a beautiful, unique, introspective film about a man grappling with the mundanity and boredom of his life. Everyone around him looks and talks exactly the same except for this one woman, Lisa. Could she be the one for him? Are they made for each other. The way the movie unfolds and where it leaves us is so profound and says a lot about our modern society and how we interact with each other. A truly remarkable film, made from stop-motion animation (in case someone reading this didn't know - and yes, I know, nobody reads this!)

"Bridge of Spies" is the closest thing to what I would call a mainstream, awardsy film on this list. Obviously, "Room" had a lot of awards attention, but "Bridge of Spies" is more the classic definition of that kind of movie. And you know what, I loved this movie. Steven Spielberg simply knows how to make these dramas. In fact, I prefer Spielberg dramas over his blockbusters these days. "The Post" panders a tad too much, "War Horse" is way too cloying and saccharine. But "Lincoln" and "Bridge of Spies" are just brilliant. The acting, the production design, the cinematography are all top notch. But "Bridge of Spies" is particularly special in the way it marries the Coen Brothers' writing with Spielberg's technical wizardry. Is it the most groundbreaking film in the world" No. But I wish more movies like this existed these days. I wish more movies were made this well.

"Ex Machina" is the assured, confident directorial debut from Alex Garland lead by three fantastic actors. Alicia Vikander became a star with this movie. We already knew Oscar Isaac was great by the time this movie came out. He kinda got sucked in to the Star Wars machine after "Ex Machina" - as did Domhnall Gleeson, but man I love the way they play off each other in this movie. Yes, Oscar Isaac overpowers Gleeson. Vikander overpowers Gleeson too! That's the point! He's in way over his head! Ok, I'm starting to repeat myself (see Sicario blurb up above). It's funny because, when talking about these movies, it's almost impossible not to talk about the conversations that surrounded those movies. It's almost as if those types of conversations where what made writing about movies less fun. Huh. Anyway, I'm getting tired. I started this at 11pm and it's 11:45pm and I'm fucking tired. "Ex Machina" is awesome and I haven't seen it in 5 years. I still love it very much and I think back on it fondly. I love the way it unfolds, I love the performances, I love the sleek production design. I just love it, alright?

I saw "Heaven Knows What" at the Arclight Hollywood in the summer of 2015. It was my rude introduction to the Safdie brothers and they now rule my life. I love their movies. They made some films before "Heaven Knows What", but for me, this is the movie where it all starts. The movie that made me fall in love with them. And while I'll probably return to "Good Time" and "Uncut Gems" more often than "Heaven Knows What" because HKW is a hard, hard watch about a woman battling a heroin addiction, it's also a great representation - stylistically of what was to come with these filmmakers. The brilliant use of no-name actors. The way a somewhat famous actor, Caleb Landry Jones, completely and utterly throws himself into his role. The way the music brings the whole film to a different level. It's such an immersive experience, which is exactly what makes HKW so difficult. This is not a world I wanna be immersed in! And yet HKW does it to me anyway and when it's all over, I feel like I need to take a shower. I love that about this movie.

Anyway, sorry for the rambling. I hope I made my cases clear. I'm rusty, guys. It's been years since I've written about movies in this manner. I should write a review of a recent movie just to see if I still got it (or maybe I never had it to begin with, we'll see).

Here's the movies from 2015 I never got around to seeing.

Green Room

The Invitation

Bone Tomahawk

Dope

Mustang

Sunset Song

Beasts of No Nation

Youth

Knight of Cups

A Bigger Splash

45 Years

Krisha

The Fits

Our Little Sister

Cemetery of Splendour

Right Now Wrong Then

Chi-Raq

Dheepan

So yes, I still have my work cut out for me, but good lord, I don't know how I'll be able to move the movies already on my list. Guess we'll see how it shakes out.

my 2016 list, a bit more locked in.

so here's my 2016 top 10:

1. Moonlight (director: Barry Jenkins)
2. Silence (director: Martin Scorsese)
3. 20th Century Women (director: Mike Mills)
4. Manchester-by-the-Sea (director: Kenneth Lonergan)
5. The Lobster (director: Yorgos Lanthimos)
6. The Neon Demon (director: Nicolas Winding Refn)
7. Arrival (director: Denis Villenueve)
8. Don't Think Twice (director: Mike Birbiglia)
9. Jackie (director: Pablo Larrain)
10. Hell or High Water (director: David Mackenzie)

This is a good batch of movies here. I feel like 2013-2016 was a loaded period for film. Some movies that came close to making the list are Jeff Nichols's "Loving" - a beautiful, understated drama, "Hunt for the Wilderpeople" - Taika Waititi's New Zealand adventure dramedy, and "La La Land" from Damien Chazelle. Yes, I liked "La La Land" just fine and that's ok! Or at least that's what I tell myself.

None of those movies are a match for the ones on my list though. "Moonlight" is one of my favorites of the decade and the last half hour is cinematic perfection to me. I mentioned it when talking about "If Beale Street Could Talk" but Barry Jenkins just has such a knack for blending mood, tone, cinematography, performances, and music in such a way where it's all working in perfect harmony. Truly transcendent stuff.

"Silence" is really an astounding work. Is it a great hang? Maybe not. Of his last three movies, "Silence" is the Scorsese movie you know that's best for you, but you're gonna return to "Irishman" and "Wolf of Wall Street" more often. But man, what a run of epics this man has churned out these last 7 years. "Silence" is a beautifully rendered work, rich with meaning.... I haven't seen it in three years, I'm sorry for speaking in broad terms. It's a movie that's begging to be re-watched by me because when I think back on it, I hold it with such high regard. The only thing I hold against it is that there's an alternate universe where Daniel Day-Lewis, Benicio Del Toro, and Javier Bardem played the leads. Neeson/Adam Driver/Andrew Garfield is a wonderful consolation prize... but it is a consolation prize.

Rounding out my top five are two beautifully made dramas, one a bit lighter than the other. "20th Century Women" is a deeply personal film laced with emotion and nostalgia. Mike Mills just pouring his heart and soul into that thing. By that token, Kenneth Lonergan was no slouch with "Manchester-by-the-Sea". It definitely deals with some heavy stuff,  but it's so neatly-layered and textured and features fantastic performances all around. "The Lobster" comes from the demented mind of Yorgos Lanthimos. Very funny, very bizarre, but also thematically rich and the story unfolds in such a skillful manner.

The last five films on my list features the very divisive, not-for-the-faint-of-heart "Neon Demon", one of my favorite sci-fi films of the decade in "Arrival", the very underrated "Don't Think Twice" which makes me thirst for more Mike Birbiglia movies. I love your stand-up but you got some screenwriting skills and we need more down-to-earth, grounded comedies like this. One that's actually funny, like "Don't Think Twice" is. "Jackie" is a nearly claustrophobic day-in-the-life biopic from Pablo Larrain and Natalie Portman fits like a glove as the title character. Lastly, "Hell or High Water" is a wonderfully made neo-western that moves at its own pace but delivers the goods and is tense throughout its runtime. It also has Jeff Bridges sporting a thick Texas accent. The thicker the accent Jeff Bridges throws out there, the more I like it - that's my general rule for any movie with Jeff Bridges.

So yeah, while I haven't seen most of these more than once, this feels like a much more solid list than 2017's. Here's a list of movies from 2016 that I never got around to...

Handmaiden

Paterson

Personal Shopper

Fences

Elle

Free Fire

Toni Erdmann

Love Witch

The Salesman

The Light Between Oceans

Christine

Julieta

Birth of a Nation

A Quiet Passion

Graduation

The Wailing

Kate Plays Christine

I definitely slacked on foreign films from this year. I gotta fix that. Anyway it's late. Time for bed.