Author Archives: Keith Garlington

Most Anticipated Fall/Winter Movies of 2015

by

48

 

movie-theater-1

With the sweltering heat of summer and the barrage of big budget popcorn flicks in full swing, what better time to look ahead to the cooler temperatures and hopefully great movies on the horizon. Fall and Winter will be here before you know it and it has grown into a much more diverse time of the year for movies than it once was. That is an exciting prospect especially considering how mediocre the 2015 movie year has been so far. But the second half of the year looks good. Here are just a handful of movies that I’m really excited for.

“Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens” (12/18/2015)

STAR WARS

No movie could possibly excite me more than a new Star Wars film. Disney takes the franchise’s reins which can be exciting considering their willingness to expand the franchise. It can also be troubling considering their potential willingness to milk it for every dollar it is worth. I choose to be optimistic and my love for Star Wars, from childhood to present day, drives my optimism and enthusiasm. This is a special series to me and it means everything that Disney and J.J. Abrams gets it right.

“Spectre” (11/6/2015)

007 purists will probably laugh me out of the room, but Daniel Craig’s run as James Bond has provided all I have ever wanted from the immensely popular franchise. Craig has brought a unique flavor to Bond and the subtle and not-so-subtle changes have won me over completely. Craig’s fourth Bond film “Spectre” lands in November and it looks insanely good. Considering the events of “Skyfall”, this installment should have a lot of story to tell and did I mention the casting of Christoph Waltz? I’m all in!

“The Martian” (10/7/2015)

MARTIAN

Some people’s enthusiasm for Ridley Scott has started to dry up. Personally speaking he remains one of my favorite working filmmakers which is the main reason I am excited for “The Martian”. In my opinion (for what it is worth) Scott has mastered big cinematic storytelling and he has also provided some of my favorite films of all time. Just as intriguing is the film’s cast including Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain, Kristin Wiig, Michael Pena, Sean Bean, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Sebastian Stan, and more.

“Midnight Special” (11/25/2015)

Midnight special

Speaking of filmmakers that automatically grab my attention, Jeff Nichols is one of my favorite directors which is impressive considering he has only three films to his credit. But all three have been superb especially “Take Shelter” and “Mud”. “Midnight Special” is Nichols’ new film about a father who takes his son on the run after realizing he is endowed with special powers. Watching Nichols play in a more science fiction sandbox is thrilling. He is a director who deserves an audience.

“The Revenant” (12/25/2015)

REVENANT

I have never fully bought into director Alejandro González Iñárritu the way many have. At the same time I always find myself interested in his style. “The Revenant” is a movie that may change my mixed feelings about Iñárritu and some are saying it is the film which could finally net Leonardo DiCaprio the long awaited Oscar. The western revenge tale also stars Tom Hardy which is just icing on the cake. The first trailer just hit the web and it looks absolutely fabulous.

 “Macbeth” (2015)

Macbeth

This may be a bit of a cheat for my American readers mainly because “Macbeth” doesn’t have a firm 2015 US release date (although one is speculated). But my friends in the UK only have to wait until October 2nd. The film premiered this year at Cannes and the buzz doesn’t surprise me. I mean we are talking about Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard starring in the William Shakespeare tragedy. Whether the film can fully deliver is a question, but all the pieces are in place for something special.

“Sicario” (9/18/2015)

SICARO

Another exciting film which premiered at Cannes is Denis Villeneuve’s “Sicario”. The first trailer is fantastic. It is tense, gritty, and violent. But what would you expect from a film about border violence and drug cartels. But what really excites me is seeing Emily Blunt getting a tough leading role. Readers know she is a favorite of mine who I believe deserves meatier material. It looks like she is getting that kind of role in “Sicario”. Josh Brolin, Benicio del Toro make the supporting cast equally exciting.

“Knight of Cups” (12/11/2015)

KNIGHT

While the film hasn’t been getting a ton of great reactions from early audiences, I still find myself excited for “Knight of Cups”, the latest film from ‘do-it-my-way’ filmmaker Terrence Malick. We got the first look at “Knight of Cups” several months back via a trailer that is as cryptic as the movie will probably be. Still I found myself utterly enthralled by what I saw and my appreciation for Malick’s visual and lyrical style of filmmaking makes this a must-see.

“Everest” (9/18/2015)

EVEREST

I have a real soft spot for disaster films so it’s no surprise that an upcoming disaster film has caught my attention. I’m talking about “Everest” based on the true events of the 1996 Mount Everest disaster. The story is perfect for the cinematic treatment and judging by the trailer this looks like a film that could actually make thrilling use of 3D. And listen to this cast: Jason Clarke, Josh Brolin, Kiera Knightley, John Hawkes, Jake Gyllenhaal, Emily Watson, Robin Wright, Michael Kelly, and Sam Worthington.

“Bridge of Spies” (10/16/2015)

BRIDGE

“Bridge of Spies” caught my attention the moment I first read about it. First, it is a Cold War period thriller from director Steven Spielberg. When Spielberg is on his game he is hard to beat as a filmmaker. It also stars the always reliable Tom Hanks in a role that looks custom made for him. But the most intriguing thing about the film is that Joel and Ethan Coen were writers which automatically makes me think this could be a special movie. Put them all together and that is one heck of a combination.

 

REVIEW: “Ant-Man”

by

23

ANT poster

Marvel’s cinematic universe has become a powerful presense at the box office. This has allowed Marvel Studios (and owner Disney) to branch out into what could be more obscure territories for moviegoers other than comic book fans. We saw it first in the insanely successful “Guardians of the Galaxy” – a film about a fringe group of characters within Marvel’s comic book mythology. “Guardians” was a decent film that struck a major chord with audiences grossing over $750 million. “Ant-Man” falls into a similar category – a Marvel character lesser known to the masses brought to the big screen on the backs of the other films and their successes.

One of my big questions going in was whether or not this character and story was worthy of the big screen solo treatment or is this simply Marvel showing off their powerful box office muscles? That is a tough question to answer especially considering Marvel took an insane amount of liberties with the source material. The story we end up with only features snippets of content and characters from the comics. Taking liberties and telling a unique story isn’t a bad thing. But with “Ant-Man” I left the theater thinking that the better story was the one left behind in the comics – the one Marvel chose not to tell.

ANT1

“Ant-Man” had its share of development problems mainly in the form of writer and director Edgar Wright’s departure. A number of other directors turned down offers to helm the film until Peyton Reed eventually took the reins. Perhaps this contributes to the film’s shaky foundation and overall lack of identity. There are times when “Ant-Man” feels fresh and a bit experimental within its genre, but it never sees these things through. Instead it embraces some of the same cliches and story contraptions that we have seen numerous times.

Funny man Paul Rudd plays Scott Lang, a smart man with a good heart who sometimes makes dumb decisions. We first meet him as he is being released from prison after serving a sentence for a non-violent burglary. His incarceration has driven a deeper wedge between him and his ex-wife Maggie (Judy Greer). She refuses to allow him to see their daughter Cassie until he gets his life together. This is tough pill for Scott to swallow especially considering how Cassie idolizes her father.

Now enter Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) who the movie has as a physicist who lost control of his company to an ambitious former protégé Darren Cross (Corey Stoll). Since gaining control of Pym Industries, Cross has been trying to replicate Pym’s shrinking technology. But knowing the dangers of the formula in the wrong hands, Pym refuses to give it up causing all sorts of animosity between him and Cross. After Cross’ nefarious intent is revealed, Pym and his estranged daughter Hope van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly) recruit Scott to help them stop Cross before he can unleash his evil plans.

ANT2

“Ant-Man” is definitely a mixed bag but its strong points are obvious. First, the story plays out on a much smaller scale which is something I appreciated. Yes, there are serious worldwide implications, but this is a superhero story which fits nicely within its smaller group of characters. There is no impending global doom or ominous cataclysmic event. In fact portions of the film play out like a corporate thriller while other portions play out like a heist film. I liked these elements and I was surprised by them. I was also surprised by how well Rudd fit into the character. The writing doesn’t always help him out, but overall he is good. I particularly liked Corey Stoll who managed to make a pretty one-dimensional character entertaining.

I also enjoyed the special effects which bounce back and forth between action-packed and playfully silly. In fact, some of the film’s best humor can be found in some of the visual effects sequences. It’s also worth noting that while the film is loaded with CGI, it’s not your standard big explosions and massive devastation. We get some of that but overall the effects serve different purposes which was refreshing. There is also a cool cameo and several other neat references which ground the film in Marvel’s greater cinematic universe.

ANT3

Unfortunately the movie’s strong points can’t overcome its problems. With all of the things the story does differently early on, ultimately it devolves into your standard, cliché-ridden fare. The redemption angle and typical origin story felt way too familiar and predictable. I also wasn’t blown away by its hit-or-miss humor. There were times when the movie is funny (Michael Pena is cast for no other purpose but to be a constant joke). Other times the humor fell flat and didn’t feel the slightest bit original. And perhaps my biggest issue was with the villain. On several occasions Marvel has struggled to give us an intense, engaging villain. Just look at “Guardians” for a glaring example. Darren Cross is pretty terrible. Now matter how good Corey Stoll is, his character’s actions simply don’t match his motivations. He is so poorly developed and we are basically given a few small lines of dialogue that are supposed to explain his reasoning. It just doesn’t work.

“Ant-Man” is an easy movie to digest. It dabbles in promising areas and has its share of fun scenes and cool visual effects. But it also squanders a lot of its potential by traveling down well-worn and overused paths. In the end this isn’t a Marvel film that I’ll find myself visiting again and it makes me skeptical of how they will use these characters in the future. I guess this is a case where I simply can’t shake the comic book fanboy within me. I still feel an Ant-Man film focused on a young Hank Pym and his wife Janet would be much better and more interesting than what we get here. But I guess we will never know.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

3 Stars

REVIEW: “San Andreas”

by

19

ANDREAS POSTER

It looks like this is the big one – earthquake that is. You know, the massive ‘mother of all earthquakes’ that leaves epic-scaled devastation which is prime fodder for a summer popcorn audiences. And trust me, “San Andreas” has the summer popcorn movie cred. It is loud, often silly, filled to the rim with corny lines and CGI destruction, and it stars The Rock. Yet at the same time it also manages to entertain – an accomplishment that many summer blockbusters can’t claim.

Disaster movies have always managed to find an audience and if you look at the catalog of film history you’ll see that almost every disaster imaginable is represented. Earthquakes are no different. Quake disaster picks have been around for a while as evident by the great Clark Gable film “San Francisco” from 1936 and Charlton Heston’s “Earthquake” from 1974. “San Andreas” certainly doesn’t fall into the same category of those films in terms of quality, but I would be lying if I didn’t say I had fun with it.

 

ANDREAS1

The movie starts in typical fashion – with an introduction to the players. Dwayne Johnson plays Ray, A helicopter rescue pilot for the Los Angeles Fire Department. He is in the middle of a divorce with Emma (Carla Gugino) who has moved in with her wealthy real estate broker boyfriend (Ioan Gruffud). Their daughter Blake (Alexandria Daddario) is seemingly caught in middle and maintains a strong relationship with her father. Meanwhile seismologist Lawrence Hayes (Paul Giamatti) and his team are studying small tremors in hopes of perfecting their earthquake prediction theories. And we are also introduced to a young engineer named Ben (Hugo Johnston-Burt) who has eyes for Blake and his younger brother Ollie (Art Parkinson).

I don’t need to tell you but an earthquake hits and the epicenter is near the Hoover Dam. But little does everyone know that it is simply a precursor to a bigger quake – one unlike any we’ve seen before (how’s that for dramatic effect). It just so happens that when ‘the big one’ hits the central family is separated and Ray sets out to save his estranged wife and daughter. The story bounces back and forth between each group of characters as they navigate an assortment of perils and close calls.

The city of San Francisco is the computer generated ground zero of “San Andreas” and the special effects crew leaves no street undamaged and no landmark unscathed. This reveals some of the film’s strengths and its weaknesses. Visually the film shines. Watching this there is no question that modern special effects are capable of capturing almost anything. Even the film’s more ridiculous and absurd sequences were impressive due to the spectacular visuals. On the other hand the barrage of CGI destruction is relentless to the point of becoming almost numbing. And there are times when you question whether the filmmakers are even considering the catastrophic death toll resulting from their visual artistry.

ANDEAS2

But my biggest mixed reaction centers around the characters. Unquestionably the movie features several throwaway characters and some prototypical cookie-cutter characters that you’ve seen in a hundred other movies. I won’t spoil who is who, but the sheer lack of imagination in some of the character development is ridiculous. On the more surprising side, I actually found myself liking the family dynamic as cliché as it was. Even amid the sometimes lame dialogue and laughably cheesy lines I liked the three main characters. And the performances were generally good. They are nothing that you will  remember but they’re able to weather the occasional hackneyed writing that can sometimes leave you shaking your head. It’s a pretty solid cast some of whom feel a bit wasted.

When watching movies like “San Andreas” I feel you sometimes need to have a discernment switch you can flip off in order to enjoy the movie. It’s that critical switch that when flipped on keeps us from seeing past a film’s negatives so that we enjoy the positives. Many summer blockbusters stink regardless of whether the switch is flipped on or off. But I found “San Andreas” to be entertaining in its own cheesy, summer blockbustery way. The predictability is undeniable. The corny lines are too many to count. The CGI devastation and last second rescues are aplenty. But at the same time “San Andreas” kept me engaged thanks to its visuals, its cast, and even the occasional unintended humor which I count as part of its charm. I can see where some may pile on or dismiss “San Andreas”, but for me it was good throw-away summer fun.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

3.5 stars

Random Thoughts on the “Batman vs Superman” Comic-Con Trailer

by

18

BATMAN poster

San Diego Comic-Con has evolved over the years. That can be good or bad depending on how you look at it. What started as a comic book convention has evolved into a full-blown entertainment extravaganza. Movie fans have grown accustomed to a host of new reveals from an assortment of superhero, horror, or sci-fi films. This year one of the big ones was from Warner Brothers and DC Comics. It was a new trailer for “Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice”.

The sheer scope of this project was enough to excite me beyond measure while also concerning me that WB had bitten off more than it could chew. The first teaser certainly scratched my comic book superhero itch, but it also left tons of questions and worries. Well at Comic-Con we got a bigger, bolder, and more revealing trailer that shot my excitement levels through the atmosphere. So many nuggets of information was shared. It is impossible to process it all with one viewing. Here are a few random thoughts and observations about the new footage we were given:

BATMAN SUPER

  • Finally context is given to the whole Batman vs Superman concept. The trailer unfolds the entire reasons for the impending superhero scuffle and it is pretty compelling. We still need to see how it plays out but it looks promising.
  • I love how this film will address one of the major gripes most people had with the last Superman movie – the seemingly careless disregard for Metropolis or human life in the finale. According to the trailer that subject plays a huge part in the BvS story. We see it early in the trailer through the people’s and government’s anger. We also see it later as a force behind Bruce Wayne’s drive to stop Superman.
  • WONDER WOMAN!!! I have to say Gal Gadot look fabulous and she could truly be a force in this film. The trailer shows her in the middle of an undisclosed fight unleashing a really cool move with her bracers. But we also see her in an evening gown which shows that her role is probably multidimensional. Gadot has me excited and I think Wonder Woman may prove to be a pivotal character among the warring alpha-males.

BATMAN WW

  • Lex Luther appears in the trailer and he definitely has some devious plans at work. The trailer shows three key Luther images. First we see him with what appears to be Kryptonite. Second we see that he is in possession of Zod’s dead body. Third we see him talking to Superman from a rather dominant position and Superman doesn’t look too happy. Lex is clearly getting his hands dirty while the two heavyweights are duking it out.
  • Speaking of Lex Luther. We get our first look at Jesse Eisenberg as one of DC’s great villains. I have to say at first I wasn’t convinced with Eisenburg’s casting. Unfortunately his spots in the trailer did nothing to ease my concerns. I’m not sure what Eisenburg is channeling but it doesn’t resemble Lex Luther. From his terrible wig to his weird almost Joker-inspired line delivery. Hopefully better things lie ahead. The Luther character deserves greatness.
  • Jeremy Irons as Alfred. In the first Batman series Alfred was almost strictly a butler. In Nolan’s Batman Alfred was a butler, a sage, and occasionally a little more. In the trailer Irons’ Alfred is still dishing out wise advise but he looks as if he is ready to jump into the action. Not sure how I feel about that. But Irons is a great actor and I’m anxious to see what he brings to the character.
  • DC’s movies have generally been a bit darker than Marvel’s and we definitely see that in the trailer. It is something that may not work for some, but I love how it distinguishes the universe. And this is definitely a story that would call for a darker tone. Hopefully the movie sees it all the way through.

BATMAN robin

  • Could we have gotten teasers of a possible Joker appearance? We see Bruce Wayne looking at a newspaper with a message written in red. We also see a suit of armor with another written message along with the familiar “HA HA HA”. Is this the Joker? We know he is set for “Suicide Squad”. How does he fit into this equation?
  • Speaking of that suit of armor, it doesn’t appear to be Batman’s. In fact, after a closer look it just may be Robin’s????
  • Batman in a trenchcoat? There is a brief shot of Batman in his batsuit but also sporting a trenchcoat. It is a very cool look but my bigger question is where is he? The next scene shows him fighting in this dusty ravaged almost otherworldly location. I’m curious.

BATMAN DUSTY VIDEO

  • Speaking of that fight, the soldiers appear in several scenes. They are decked out in all black armor including face shields and helmets. Most intriguing are the Superman crests found on their shoulders. Who are these guys? Where are they from? Better yet, are they human? Why do I ask? In the scene with Batman we see him snapping one of their necks. We know Batman doesn’t kill, right? RIGHT???
  • That final shot! Superman rips off the top of a destroyed batmobile probably expecting to see a hurt and defeated Batman. Instead Batman slowly rises from the wreckage and we get a heart-pumping face-to-face. The absolute perfect way to end the trailer!

Those are just a few random thoughts about this exciting trailer. There are so many other potential nuggets of revelation. Have you seen it? Did you think it was as thrilling as I did? Whether you did or whether you didn’t, I would love to hear your thoughts on it.

REVIEW: “Jurassic World”

by

25

JURASSIC POSTER

When will they ever learn? Sure, the idea of mixing living, breathing dinosaurs with a theme park sounds like a lucrative can’t-miss idea. But three movies have proven that it leads to nothing but disaster (and a boatload of box office cash). The Jurassic Park franchise has laid dormant for 14 years so it shouldn’t be a big surprise that this sequel and reboot driven movie era would usher in a new installment. What made it an easier decision was the fact that all three of the previous movies did extremely well at the box office. So Universal Studios greenlights a $150 million budget and the result is “Jurassic World” – a poster child for safe, crowd pleasing, summer popcorn flicks.

“Jurassic World” recycles several things from the first film except this time things are a little cheesier, motivations are a little goofier, and many of the people are a little dumber. But that doesn’t mean the film is short on big cool dinosaur moments. There were times when I literally laughed and shook my head at the corny dialogue or stereotypical character. At the same time there were several scenes where I found myself absolutely thrilled at the action or the spectacle on the screen. It’s a conflicting mixture of good and bad which makes my final thoughts on the film hard to nail down.

Jurassic1

Chris Pratt is everywhere these days and in “Jurassic World” he stays within his ‘likable, everyday guy’ comfort zone. He plays a velociraptor trainer named Owen working in the Jurassic World theme park. He’s joined by a plump cast featuring Bryce Dallas Howard as Claire, the park’s director of operations, her two nephews (and obligatory kids) Zach and Grey, B.D. Wong as the park’s chief scientist responsible for creating the dinos, Irrfan Lhan as Simon, the owner and bankroller of the park, Vincent D’Onofrio as the sleazy, shady Hoskins, Omar Sy as Owen’s buddy and fellow trainer Barry, and a host of others.

Basically the story places all if these characters on the island park each with their own little threads of story. For example Claire has agreed to keep her nephews for the week even though she is too busy at the park to entertain them. The boys have the baggage of a possible divorce between their parents back home. Claire had a brief ‘thing’ with Owen in the past but that’s long gone. Now he is butting heads with Hoskins who wants to use Owen’s velociraptors for nefarious purposes. Simon has noble intentions but his demands for bigger attractions open the door for his aggressive science team to do some pretty questionable experiments. And on and on and on. Rarely do any of these subplots leave an impression, but they set the table for the movie’s main attractions – big dinosaurs.

One thing “Jurassic World” does well is presentation. Visually the world we see is vast and filled with impressive creatures and cool landscapes. The dinosaurs themselves look great. Their movements and the way they blend into the world almost allows the audience to completely forget the heavy CGI behind it. I was also impressed by the design and feel of the park. The rides, exhibits, and attractions were well thought out and genuinely believable taking elements from everything from Sea World to Disneyland. Overall the film is just as visually strong as you would expect, and those going for the wild dino-carnage will not be disappointed.

Jurassic2

But I can’t say the same if you’re going into “Jurassic World” hoping for an engaging story. At its very base level the story gets by, but there are plenty of other things that simply don’t work. Again, the characters are pretty one-dimensional, stereotypical, and forgettable. We aren’t given anyone to latch onto. Some are just flat-out bad. D’Onofrio’s Hoskins may be the prime example. The performance isn’t great but the way he is written is even worse. Then there are turns in the story that are too stupid to let slide. I won’t spoil anything but certain evil plans we see are beyond preposterous. Then throw in some incredibly cheesy dialogue and scenes which actually had me laughing and shaking my head in the theater.

So storytelling isn’t the strong point of “Jurassic World”. In fact, the writing keeps it from being the intelligent, engaging film that it could be. But at the same time I actually found myself entertained in the way that big budget summer popcorn flicks sometimes manage to pull off. The visual spectacle, the dinosaur fights, the theme park environment all work to immerse you in a really cool setting. It’s too bad the underwhelming story, narrative hiccups, and bland characters drag it down to passable but forgettable levels.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

3 Stars

2015 Blind Spot Series: “My Life to Live”

by

9

BLIND SPOT

“My Life to Live”

“Vivre sa vie” or “My Life to Live” is a French New Wave film that also feels distinctly different from some of the more prominent movies of the highly influential movement. Director Jean-Luc Godard released the film in 1962, two years after his groundbreaking debut “Breathless”. Viewers will undoubtedly see similarities between the two films, but “My Life to Live” differentiates itself both in structure, subject, aesthetic, and style. “My Life to Live” undoubtedly attempts to buck common, overused movie trends – something French New Wave films sought to do. At the same time Godard makes “My Life to Live” distinctly its own.

The captivating Anna Karina plays the lead character Nana and she was Godard’s wife at the time. Interstingly, Godard first noticed Karina in a series of Palmolive ads. Godard was preparing for “Breathless”, his feature film debut, and offered Karina a small role in the picture. She turned him down but his persistence led her to be in his next three films and his wife for four years. Their relationship is evident in the movie. Godard’s camera seems enamored by Karina’s face, by her expressions, by her countenance. His concentration on her eyes, the features of her face, the language of her body. Unquestionably much of Godard’s story is told through the lens of his star.

LIFE1

The film is broken down into twelve chapters each with basic synoptic captions. The first introduces us to Nana who is at a cafe with her husband Paul. We learn that she has just left him and their infant daughter to pursue acting. The revealing scene paints a complex picture of Nana. Adding to that complexity is the intriguing camera work by Godard and long-time cinematographer Raul Coutard. The focus is mostly on the back of the two character’s heads. The camera shifts back and forth while strategically giving us glimpses of their faces often through a mirror’s reflection. It leaves us curious about Nana and unsure how we are to feel about her.

Nana’s acting dream seems unrealistic. We see her working in record shop but apparently she can’t make ends meet. She asks different people to borrow money and one particular scene shows her being forcibly removed from her apartment. Out of a sense of desperation she turns to prostitution. But is it desperation or simple necessity? Nana is never easy to read. She approaches life with an open book mentality yet I always found a cloud of mystery around her. At times she seems impervious to possible consequences of her actions. Other times there is a playful life-loving personality that bubbles out. At other times she feels overwhelmed by her circumstances. Mainly she wants to be able to define her life and she wants to be the one to live it.

Life 2

The film’s look into prostitution of the day adds another level of intrigue. We see Nana grow more and more comfortable and content, but at the same time we the audience begin noticing cracks and concerns within her environment. Godard goes to great lengths to educate us on the mentalities, practices, and laws that made up the Paris prostitution scene of early 1960s. It gives us a better perspective even if it sometimes feels a bit dry and procedural. The coolest thing is how the approach to this element draws from the cinéma vérité documentarian style.

“My Life to Life” is a captivating film slowed down only by the occasional lulls – moments when Godard’s experimentation feels like experimentation instead of storytelling or progression. Still, it’s hard not to be drawn in by the portrait Godard paints. And his cinematic model Anna Karina is a mesmerizing expression of energy, wonder, and reality. Surround her with intoxicating style, layers of cultural references, and a grounded story and you have “My Life to Live” – a film that is uniquely its own nestled within the French New Wave.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

4 Stars

THE END