I have a purpose. You don't.

Marty Supreme — 2.5/5

For about an hour, I was into it, I think maybe because I just really like ping pong, but at just over the hour mark, as Marty does yet another terrible thing that he must get out of, it occurs to me — I think they want me to think this is a comedy? "Look at this trial of errors that this confident/ce man operating on pure self-belief gets in and out of, what a silly compelling life." It is at this point that I realize that Marty Supreme is a fucking dick, and I'm following an asshole. I think in this way, Josh Safdie is the heir apparent to Martin Scorsese, making movies about people which can be viewed by some as a warning, except they make their lives seem so appealing. "Being a bad man's bad, except for all that fun we had." And so, to cut to the end, I think that final scene is basically a Rorschach test for what you think of Marty. Do you like him, find him a fun funny character? Then that new child is salvation, a path towards forgiveness and turning your life around, around it. Do you aspire to be him (you fucking hustle-bro)? Then those tears are for the renewed motivation to keep on hustling, to hustle even harder because now you're not just doing it for yourself, you're doing it for an other. Do you dislike Marty? Then that baby is an excuse, and whatever path you choose next, you get to credit / blame that child for sending you on that path. Leave that life? "I have a baby at home." Continue on? "I'm a father, a father has to provide." I don't like Marty, so I think that baby is just a new way out of a jam. If you can't win, then find a way to escape cleanly.

Just walk with me a little longer.

The Long Walk — 2.5/5

Reading the wiki on 'The Running Man' >>> written by Richard Bachman née Stephen King >>> who also wrote this >>> sure, I'll bite. People tend to make good movies out of Stephen King's writing, if they choose to keep the premise and throw away everything else. I think the premise, unfortunately, doesn't quite feel updated enough to be relevant. I want to say it's unbelievable but, then again, it's everything Mr. Beast does, isn't it? And so could have used a bit more of that spectacle rather than just sort of the lonely sadness of doing the walk without the ostentatious television presenter to make it work. Richard Dawson that shit, my brothers. As is, it's a fun enough way to stick philosophically-hued conversation between bouts of violence, which I'm not mad at in theory, except I don't really think the conversation is forceful enough to have changed the character at the conclusion.

I cannot live without my life.

Wuthering Heights — 4/5

Well, well, well, look who's been shitting on Emerald Fennell for the past year, who now has to eat said shit. It's me! Man, this movie looks and sounds fucking great. Flesh-covered walls, blood red skies. "I think I'm going to die in this hoooouuuse." I thought this story was some 'Jane Eyre' shit, but man — Guillermo del Toro wishes he could capture this kind of gothic atmosphere. This movie feels dangerous. It feels like a distant world; I am compelled by the people in it. Jacob Elordi continues to embody the worst boyfriend you could ever have. At some point, I've told someone that he'd make a better Frankenstein than a Frankenstein's Monster, and here you have it, proof positive. And I think here Emerald Fennell is still doing that contrarian shit, except unfortunately I am also a contrarian, oops, and I happen to share a sentiment here — love is a destructive force. Love turns people into monsters. Love kills people. There has to be a force greater than that, because I don't think it's the answer everyone is thinking it is. 

This is America, goddammit.

The Running Man (2025) — 2.5/5

"Whatever Happened to Edgar Wright?" is a book I'd like to read one day. This movie has so many bad decisions in it. Ugly character designs, a character that feels important introduced 30 minutes before the ending, a host and producer who should be the same character for the sake of *taps wristwatch*, and a main character whose defining trait is as 'the angriest man in the world' who never gets to fulfill that rage in an act of pure catharsis. And yet, the premise of this movie is one I love so much that I still kind of enjoyed watching it. Fuck me. 

I don't care if I never get back.

Eephus — 3/5

An 'Eephus,' as the movie explains, is a ball thrown by the pitcher that goes so slow that the hitter loses all sense of time. And, of course, if you're going to name yourself after the smallest thrown pitch in baseball, you're probably searching for the same effect. It succeeds in that! But also, I'd say, it never quite reaches the meditative timeless state I'd have hoped for. I really wanted this to be some 'Perfect Days'-esque Zen account of baseball, only I think it lacked the beauty of a painting in its presentation. Good idea, heart's in the right place, but I think it never quite stops feeling small; it never really makes a case for baseball as the beautiful game.

I see no value in you.

Send Help — 2/5

I read a stray comment calling this 'mean-spirited' and that was stuck in my head as I watched this. I think it's a good read on the situation. This is a movie with a great premise. I hope they remake it someday! Make it into a romantic comedy. Make it a reluctant buddy adventure. Make it a 'Misery'-like thriller. I would watch and enjoy each of them. Just please, for the love of god, pick a fucking path. This movie's trying to be all of these things, and that's the tangible problem that can be touched, but I think it's that 'mean-spirited' that underlines it all: this movie doesn't like its characters. The boss is an irredeemable asshole. Rachel McAdams (who I really enjoy in the role!) is a loser. Both are the villain. Okay, so who do I root for? 

Sisu manifests itself when all hope is lost.

Sisu: Road to Revenge — 2/5

Motherfucker, I am tired of sequels not enumerating. This is the second time I'm on a plane watching the wrong fucking movie. Sigh. I did not like this movie very much and unfortunately it has killed any desire to watch the original. It feels like it means to be a comedy, except it's, like, got a serious sadness in the heart of it? I would not describe that as a great combination, my brothers. Imagine Jackie Chan in 'Drunken Master,' except his drinking is motivated by the fact that his family was chopped up into little pieces. I unfortunately need my comedies to not take themselves so seriously. I would have loved for this movie to be made by the guy who made 'Hundreds of Beavers.' 

Look for the blood and the smoke.

Warfare — 2/5

First of all — every five to ten years, every promising young male actor in Hollywood should be made to star in an ensemble war movie together, so that we may pinpoint a moment in time, and separate the wheat from the chaff. Secondly — with this, I think I have to give up on being excited for Alex Garland movies. 'Annihilation' and 'Ex Machina' and '28 Days Later' have engendered a great deal of appreciation for him at his best, and we can't always be at our best, can we. This movie feels like a counterweight to 'Civil War' — a movie I really enjoyed! That movie felt like 'there can be no objectivity in journalism,' we are choosing sides by what we choose to show. And this movie feels like 'this is what objectivity looks like' and boy howdy is objectivity pretty fucking boring. All there is is people in a place at a time, disconnected from larger history, separated from who they were and will be. I'm not against that fundamentally, it can have value. It's just I don't know that I disliked this movie so much as I didn't gain anything from it. I don't remember the characters' names. I don't have a larger takeaway. I don't think the characters have a larger takeaway, other than a loss of legs. It's never that exciting, never that tense, never that comedic, never that dramatic. 'This is a thing that happened.' Sure, but can you tell me your reason for choosing this thing that happened over the myriad of things that happen? Why is this one so important to you? The movie lacks authorial intent. It's objectivity as the height of mediocrity.