Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

Before I get to the poll stuff, though, a quick PSA. Most of you probably follow me on Letterboxd and/or occasionally stop by my website; links to my A.V. Club work can be found in both of those locales, so I don't generally bother posting them here—you're getting enough emails from me as is. Just in case, though, let me note that The Killing of Two Lovers, which hits theaters and VOD tomorrow, is my favorite new film since First Cow, which is to say the best thing I've seen since (right) before the pandemic. My review goes into considerable depth, but if you're the trusting sort I'd encourage you not to read that until afterward, as the film benefits significantly from a lack of foreknowledge about what it's doing. Currently has an 89 on Metacritic, but I sense a backlash coming. Anyway, wanted to be sure that nobody who values my opinion misses this one.

As for this week's request poll: The Speed freaks will have to try again. 53% of you opted instead for They Came Together, which I believe may have been the oldest active request; while it had logged fewer weeks than reigning ignored champ For Those in Peril, that appears to be due to Wain buff Ross Kroeber having withdrawn/replaced it for a while (quite some time ago). It shows up slightly earlier than Peril in my mostly chronological list, anyway. Just goes to show, once again, that if you hang in there long enough, the patronage at large may eventually come through for you. Film's streaming on Cinemax and readily rentable everywhere; just now checked and confirmed that I did not W/O at the time, though I did watch the first 10 minutes (true of most notable films released since 2012) and didn't feel compelled to continue. Means very little.

Speaking of "oldest," May's random draws are both downright ancient, having been retired at least 18 months ago, possibly closer to two years. Tourneur's Canyon Passage was around for 10 weeks, while Mike's Murder was in and out for 30; the latter seems as if it may be tricky to get my hands on (I'm not gonna pay Vudu $10 to buy a standard-def copy), so any leads appreciated. (As for the former: arrrrr. But it may take a while.) 

Oh, and to whoever once briefly requested Cure: I'm gonna watch that soon regardless, as it was released here in 2001 and I want to make sure that it doesn't merit a spot on the list I'll submit to A.V. Club's annual "it was 20 years ago today" poll. 

As always, many thanks to each and every one of you for your support, especially over the course of this yearlong nightmare. I'm fully vaccinated now, and while the two activities I most long to resume—seeing movies at the theater and playing poker—still currently require a mask here in California, I anticipate that restriction being lifted at almost any moment, given that Newsom's facing a recall (however unlikely it may be to succeed). Following newly relaxed CDC guidelines clearly seems in his self-interest. Only problem is that there's nothing I "want" to see at a theater near me right now except for the Guy Ritchie thing (which I'm obligated to watch per my goofy review rules, mostly because Matt Zoller Seitz gave it four stars out of four). Might drive down to L.A. and see Zhang Yimou's Cliff Walkers instead, if it's still playing. 

Files

Comments

Anonymous

Do we know if that's the first film MZS saw on the big screen since the pandemic? I suspect some of the positive buzz comes from just that. (I kind of think you'll mildly enjoy the new Taylor Sheridan, which even if I'm wrong is at very least mercifully brisk.)

Anonymous

Ritchie's Wrath of Man is most certainly not a necessary viewing. Quick comment for Breakfast of Champions just so it is out there; when that inevitably gets picked (I refuse to let it go), I have a personally made DVD upscale file I can send since that film is not available online.

gemko

Not online, no, but Netflix carries the DVD. (Not true of this month’s random selections.)

Anonymous

Are you planning to write anything about WORLD’S FAIR?

gemko

No. I mean, from what I gather, the film had not even gotten to its actual subject by the 1/3 point where I bailed, having spent that time just repeatedly establishing the protagonist’s online existence. Which did not especially interest me, perhaps because this film (unlike, say, <i>Afterschool</i>) doesn’t juxtapose that with the rest of the world. Anyway, it did not in any way impress me, but we’ll see whether I feel obligated to go back à la <i>The Assistant</i>.

gemko

UPDATE: <i>Mike’s Murder</i> turned out to be available via the Russian site that seemingly has everything. (Hopefully that’s not a form of cyber warfare targeting naïve cinephiles.)

Anonymous

Have you ever written anything on your “review rules?” Or are you reluctant to do so for fear folks will game the methodology?

gemko

I mean professional critics aren’t likely to change their rating/grade/opinion in an effort to get me to see something. Basically I watch any film that gets at least two wildly enthusiastic reviews from among a group of critics/publications/sites that I pay attention to (the nature of which has shifted over time, e.g. I stopped caring about EW after Owen and Lisa both took buyouts). I don’t want to say which ones are active, lest I hurt someone’s feelings via omission. But it’s pretty much the ones you’d imagine.

Anonymous

Just make sure it's not dubbed in Russian, which a decent percentage are.