Review CLIV - Triple Halloween Feature

Review 154
Triple Halloween Feature

Halloween 2016 has creeped up on us slowly but surely, and while I am sitting at home, feeling incredibly sick, I nonetheless have some reviews for you. Yes, I made an effort to watch some more Halloween movies before the time was up, so today, I present you with a triple Halloween Feature! Get ready to scream, cry, and laugh for this Halloween edition.

--

Grabbers (2012)

Lisa Nolan (Ruth Bradley), a high-achieving Garda employee, comes to a remote, Irish village off the coast to baby-sit drunk colleague Ciarán O'Shea (Richard Coyle) while his boss is away for two weeks. Tension is high until the local drunk (Lalor Roddy) discovers an alien which, according to British marine biologist, Dr. Adam Smith (Russell Tovey), survives on blood and water. Now the team must help save the town in a journey filled with blood, guts, and lots and lots of alcohol.

I fell on Grabbers from John Wright and Kevin Lehane completely accidentally when I thought the title suited my boyfriend perfectly well. And it actually turned out to be quite a ride! Released the same year as The Cabin in the Woods, the CGI is better and not over-used. It is also way better in plot and silly scariness. I also absolutely loved the characters and mourned those who were lost - how often can you say that about a horror movie? Although that might be more of a North American thing - we watch to see people killed. But anyway, let me tell you that, if you're looking for a pretty funny monster movie, check out Grabbers. I think maybe the love plot fell a bit short (I don't get how our main two love interests actually end up getting it on), but I was still happy with it in the end. Not fancy, but definitely a gem in its own right, check out Grabbers this Halloween season - or any season for that matter!

---

Doghouse (2009)

A group of friends, out to cheer up their recently-divorced friend (Stephen Graham), accidentally wind up in a remote village instead of a party centre. It turns out they get more than they expected when the town turns out to be zombie central, where only women are infected.

I watched Jake West and Dan Schaffer's Doghouse around the time it came back after a recommendation from my sister's boyfriend and remembered liking it, and somehow in this day-and-age of political correctness and SJWs, it seemed more appropriate than ever. Once again, this is a funny one, but it definitely exploits the blood-and-guts of typical zombie movies. If you haven't seen it and you're into zombie movies, check it out - you'll like it. Not to mention the underlying themes of oppressed men in this modern society is pretty accurate - though my boyfriend said it would probably convince more men of MGTOW than anything else. I definitely don't encourage it, but I think Doghouse is right in that you still need to be your own person and that a woman shouldn't mold you to what they want you to be. Regardless of its meaning, you should still check out this movie for its funny situations and awesome gorefest. Let's shake things up this Halloween, shan't we?

---

Theatre of Blood (1973)

A well-renowed Shakespearean actor, Edward Lionheart (Vincent Price), is neglected at an Actor's Choice Award for his lack of diversity, sending him to suicide. However, suddenly the critiques who denied him his award are being murdered in the fashion of Shakespeare, sending the suspicion that perhaps Lionheart is alive after all.

A la The Abominable Dr. Phibes, Vincent Price's takes revenge once again on those he feels have robbed him. And it continues to be as cheesy and funny. Honestly, Theatre of Blood starts off with murder, and, if you knew nothing of the plot, you'd be left in the dark. Explanations only rise as the film continues, which definitely differs from the usual way of story-telling, but the initial confusion wears off as Theatre of Blood continues. I'm pretty sure the movie wasn't taking itself too seriously, but man, it is still as funny, especially with the gang of killer hobos and the windshield-wiper fluid that makes an appearance toward the end (watch the movie, you'll understand). Nonetheless, while you'll get a chuckle out of the film, the deaths are pretty neat and horrific, even if it is kind of cheaply slapped together at times. But it is from 1973, so I won't raise hell on that. This one is kind of different given the different day-and-age of the other two films reviewed, but if you're into classics and don't mind a little Shakespearean acting, you should definitely give Theatre of Blood a watch. Vincent Price was known for his horror stunts, and this one was do not disappoint.

--

And so our triple feature comes to an end. I hope Halloween hasn't already passed where you are, but even if it has, how about some films for All Saints' Day, eh? Until then, happy Halloween and be sure to not overfill on candy! Cue creepy music!

Review CLIII - The Cabin in the Woods

Review 153
The Cabin in the Woods (2012)

Hey guys! It's been a while, hasn't it? The semester started and my attempts for staying on top of my game have been futile. I haven't even been watching a lot of movies, and when I did, I just didn't have time to write reviews. However, I can recommend The Warriors (with its obviously strong racial message) if you're looking for a funny film and Sicario if you're looking for something awesome. Anyway, I realised Halloween was approaching quickly, so I knew I had to try and get a horror movie in here while I still could. I have a few films lined up, and I'm hoping to write some reviews before Halloween passes, but we'll see given the intense school schedule. Regardless, I'm here today to talk about Drew Goddard's The Cabin in the Woods starring Kristen Connolly, Anna Hutchison, Jesse Williams, Chris Hemsworth, Fran Kranz, Richard Jenkins, and Bradley Whitford. Whew, that's quite a few names - you know we'll be seeing some people dying in this one. Let's review this (popular?) movie!

Five friends head off for the weekend to cabin in the woods (whoa, that was unexpected), hoping to get away from their daily routine. However, it seems that their trip will actually be a murderous rampage for a bigger cause.

Honestly, I'd be surprised if you hadn't heard of this movie - it seems like one of those films you would eventually watch if you watched horror movies. I'm usually not a fan of horror movies - my boyfriend even less - so I raised my eyebrow when he asked to watch this one. The reason? A scene with an elevator and a S.W.A.T. team. Yeah, if you watched the movie, you'll know what I'm talking about. If you haven't, let me actually review this.

The Cabin in the Woods pokes fun at other horror movies with its almost breaking-the-fourth-wall dynamic. You'll be sitting there thinking of a bunch of other horror movies while you watch this one, as early as when you see the cabin itself (The Evil Dead anyone?). For that, it breaks from the generic horror movie plot. However, that doesn't mean it's good and doesn't use stock horror jump scares to get your heart pumping. Honestly, I don't mind a clever jump scare - Insidious was not bad at all in this regard. It had some clever ones. But these typical ones where they're standing there, and it suddenly gets completely quiet, you're sitting there just waiting for the loud sound and sudden jump. It's such a cheap tactic and overly-used that it needs to change. I don't mind one every once in a while, but otherwise, I need an eeriness to the film that stays with me afterward.

I guess you could say the movie tries to do this, but... Okay, this will be a spoiler, so stop reading this paragraph if you actually care enough to want to watch this without spoiling it. All right, so, the movie is basically showing how these men are hired to kill people in a sacrificial way in order to give "blood to the blood god". They have a certain way these people have to die, and they set up the deaths as a horror movie set-up. It's trying to be self-aware, but let me tell you, this organisation is just bullshit. Not to sound like a conspiracy nut to the average Joe out there, but it's Baphomet all over the place. "Gods that used to rule us"? "Blood sacrifice in a gruesome manner"? One of the workers even comments at one point how it used to be easy when they could just throw people into a volcano. Now, all right, whatever, this is nothing new to me, but I was just sitting there wondering what the hell this dynamic of killing all the people in this particular order. I also don't understand why it had to be set up like this. Apparently it's to please the gods, but when they show Japan's failure (which is really hilarious - you'll get a good chuckle), they show a bunch of nine-year-old girls, not the dynamic set-up in the United States. So what the hell? Is it just based on horror movies from each country? Why would the gods care? And even then, why nine-year-old girls and not some guy after a hot chick? And what is with these shitty Gods? A bunch of people die horrifically in the process, but nope, it's not the designated people, so they fail. It's just bullshit. Not to mention the ending... The stoner (Fran Kanz) survives along with the "virgin" (Kristen Connolly), and the two decide they'd rather destroy all of humanity than sacrifice their lives. Which already means they buy into the bullshit story, but yeah, they don't care. They decide one last joint is all they need. And seriously, I would have preferred the stoner NOT giving us all these "premonitions" - why the hell would he guess that everyone is "watching them" and "alternating them". Sigh... The Cabin in the Woods is really just stupid even in its attempts to be above other horror movies. It fails. And the Baphomet/Illuminati bullshit is just bad writing. And let me say as well that the CGI was real cheap. Not good either.

However, you will laugh a few times during the film. When Chris Hemsworth's character dies, my boyfriend had a good laugh. But honestly, I'd rather watch Dead Alive for a comedic horror movie than a mediocre film about everyone being a designated, stock role.

The Cabin in the Woods is not the worst, but its pathetic CGI, bad writing, and annoying ending just make it a meh ride. While there are humorous parts, I'd only check it out if you're not into actual scary movies and want to play something in the background.

Review CLII - Million Dollar Extreme Presents: World Peace

Review 152
Million Dollar Extreme Presents: World Peace (2016)

I don't know if I'm stretching this with the title of a review, but it nonetheless will get a piece of action here. I was not familiar with the original sketches from the trio at Million Dollar Extreme, and I have not checked them out either, but let me tell you, Million Dollar Extreme Presents: World Peace (short: World Peace) is something. I was going to wait until episode six was released, but unless they decide to throw everything down the drain in that episode, I have a feeling my views will not change.

World Peace is a comedy series of approximately eleven-minutes currently being shown on Adult Swim, a late-night program on Cartoon Network. I don't live in the United States - nor do I watch television - so I would have missed out on this series, but thankfully I managed to catch it on youtube (note: a quick search seems to produce negative results for the episodes at the current moment - I'm sure copyright issues are the culprit). For those of you wondering what it's about, it's a skit show. Given the length, there are usually about three major skits running through the show. As for the type of humour, it's definitely off-the-wall anti-comedy in general, with some sketches honestly not being all that funny, apart from a little joke in the middle of the sketch. C'est en style de The Eric Andre Show, for example, where you sit there awkwardly at times because stuff is just happening and it is just off. I'll admit, it isn't a style that's for everyone - I can't say I always enjoy it - but World Peace goes above and beyond with its political commentary.

Yes, I did say political commentary. I mean, it's damn obvious when you watch an episode, but I think it's important to remember that you should not be disregarding the commentary made in comedies. Monty Python's Flying Circus, while silly at times, still made some pretty strong political comments at times that can maybe be overlooked given the general context of the show. The Meaning of Life I can say for sure had a lot to say - only because I haven't watched the show in its entirety. A drama, when taking on political positions, is taken seriously and can cause a backlash, but comedy can have liberty as it can be taken more lightly. However, I can't say World Peace takes itself lightly at all. Check out the tap water sketch to see what I mean.

The title of the show already speaks volumes given the movements pushed by governments to accept and tolerate everyone, and to bring about world peace, which, given human nature, is a complete fallacy and should already provoke laughter. Check it, I do have a belief to treat people with respect regardless of their origins, but the general population does not. "But shouldn't we try?" Of course - but what the government pushes is not this - it only pushes agendas which are self-destruction to its own people. This is what the show presents. It presents the double-standards, political correctness which plagues Western society. It makes you laugh, but then you have sketches like this one which make you wonder what the hell is going on. Again, I believe in respect among people, but what exists today has taken on a whole new level. I was speaking to a fine arts graduate student the other day, and he complained that in one class, the teacher was analysing a piece of work and saying the author was just a "privileged white woman" with nothing to say. I can't say I didn't feel an anger from that comment - not because I am in that demographic, but because this was exactly the problem minorities had to face in the past. We are not progressing, instead we are just pointing at a different race. My field of study keeps me away from art and critiques from these pieces, so I can't say I face the consequences of it in general, but I'm sure my blood would boil in such a class. It's just a sad story all around when, by attempting to get other voices heard, we shut up others.

I guess I don't really have much else to say about World Peace except expressing how flabbergasted I am that this show was even produced. It's damn raw, pretty funny at times, and has a lot to say about the political climate now. Regardless if you agree or not, sometimes you need to listen to stuff outside of your bubble to keep your views in check, and one hundred percent, World Peace does this. So thank you, Sam Hyde, Nick Rochefort, and Charls Carroll for your sketches, as well as Andrew Ruse who directed and also helped write this.

I would link a promo or something, but I linked you a bunch of sketches, so check those out! Youtube should also have some episodes uploaded somewhere, so be free my minions!

Review CLI - けんかえれじい

Review 151
Fighting Elegy (1966)

Seijun Suzuki (鈴木清順) entered my life and well, he never left. Having started his filmography with Tokyo Drifter (東京流れ者) and followed with Branded to Kill (殺しの烙印), it was bound to continue. This time, I checked out the forever-violent Fighting Elegy (けんかえれじい) starring Hideki Takahashi (高橋英樹), Junko Asano (浅野順子), and Yûsuke Kawazu (川津祐介).

Kiroku Nanbu (高橋英樹) has fallen madly in love with Michiko (浅野順子), without any release for his love. He fears destroying her innocence, and his Catholic prospects stop him from expressing any sexual desire. Consequently, thanatos takes over as his way to alleviate the pressure. With Turtle (川津祐介) taking him under his wing, Kiroku Nanbu claws his way to the top of the machismo social ladder.

If you're familiar with Seijun Suzuki's work, you already know what to expect in terms of violence. However, Fighting Elegy is in black and white, escaping from the beautiful colours presented in Tokyo Drifter (among others), which is unfortunate, I must say. However, if you're new to Seijun Suzuki, let me say that this is one Japanese filmmaker who stands apart. Now, Akira Kurosawa (黒澤明) and Yasujirō Ozu (小津安二郎) are phenomenal directors whose work continues to inspire, but you know when you sit down and watch À bout de souffle (Breathless) for the first time? You remember that feeling of uneasiness and shock that you aren't in normal French cinema? Well, that's Seijun Suzuki's work. He is, in a way, the New Wave of Japanese cinema, taking risks, going nuts. So much so that he basically got fired after Tokyo Drifter came out and the sequel to Fighting Elegy was put into limbo and never completed. Even if you can't really enjoy the weirdness of his films, you can nonetheless appreciate his cinematography and palette choice from his films if nothing else. Plus you got Mr. Cheeks (Jō Shishido (宍戸錠)) from some of his films, which never ceases to make me laugh. No offense, Mr. Shishido - you're still great.

Fighting Elegy does not disappoint in his style, though I would say it is tamer than the two other films I watched from him. The violence is still there - oh yes, is it there - but I find the plot didn't delve into crazy spots like in Branded to Kill. So if you're looking to be introduced to Seijun Suzuki's work, Fighting Elegy is not a bad start. However, I can't say it was my favourite. I got a great laugh from the opening scenes with Kiroku Nanbu's adolescent lust for Michiko, all while fanning over the love birds and missing the innocence of teenagehood, but I kept yelling at Kiroku Nanbu to just pay attention to Michiko as she obviously crushed on him. And the thanatos part really went far. I dunno, with the mace and changing prefecture (is it correct to put it that way?) insanity, I can't really say I dug the whole view on machismo. Our protagonist could have gone to anything else, but instead went to hardcore violence and believed he could still get Michiko from it. Since the source material was from a book, I can't really blame Seijun Suzuki (although apparently he took many liberties with the script), but it still made the plot kind of eh for me. I think Seijun Suzuki's work in hitman/yakuza stories works well, especially when he's given liberty. Fighting Elegy definitely wasn't bad in its plot, but the more it went on, the more I just sat there wondering what the hell was going on - and not because Seijun Suzuki was going topsy-turvy with the plot.

Otherwise, what about cinematography? It had some typical Seijun Suzuki moments, like in the bar, but I must say that his work with colours has really been my absolute favourite, so my bias means I missed out in Fighting Elegy. As well, since I feel like our beloved director was trying to make more of a quote unquote normal film, it didn't have the same level of craziness that I remember from Branded to Kill. But it has also been a while, so I'd have to get back to you on that.

In the end, the film has some Seijun Suzuki flavour, but it lacks his superb yakuza story telling, it isn't super colourful (which he handles so well), and it isn't his most New Wave-y film. Again, if you're looking to slowly dip into the pool of Japanese New Wave, Fighting Elegy is the way to go. If you're a sommelier of Seijun Suzuki, I would say it isn't his best. It's still worth a watch for his take of a school tale ("Chasing girls is a sign of weakness! Break all the rules!"), a good laugh (at least initially), and a freakin' crazy mace, but he's definitely released better. Honestly, though, that mace haunts my nightmares *shudders*

Review CL - Le samouraï

Review 150
Le samouraï (1967)

I have reviewed Alain Delon films before, and I've mentioned some of the classics, but I figured it would be fair to review the first film I ever watched him in, Jean-Pierre Melville's Le samouraï (The Samurai for the anglophones in the audience, although the English-known title is the same as the French one, but with a capital on the "s". I'm done). I think my boyfriend was trying to impress me with this film before we started dating, and he definitely did. This is one of three partnerships between Delon and Melville, and trust me when I say that I enjoyed each of those films. I've also checked out other films from Melville, including Bob le Flambeur, and Melville really has it going down. But putting the two together just gives me some of my favourite films ever. Pure eye-candy all around with frigid awesomeness. Le samouraï also stars François Périer, Nathalie Delon, and Cathy Rosier. Let us begin!

Jef Costello (Alain Delon) is a professional hitman, normally known to be superb in his work. However, after killing a night-club owner, a group of witnesses and a persistent head investigator (François Périer) may be enough to overthrow his fake alibis and send him away to prison.

If any of you love French cinema, or super clean, beautiful cinematography, or love Alain Delon/Melville, you've seen this film and don't need any convincing to give it a second watch. For those of you who aren't familiar with any of this, well, you need to have an appreciation for cinematography and crime films in order to enjoy this one. It's truly a film from the sixties, taking its time and showing us the beauty of an image as opposed to focusing on dialogue. Definitely very French as well, which I am biased to, of course. Consequently, this film might not be as accessible to modern viewers as an American film, we'll say, but if you want an initial look into some real class cinema, Le samouraï is the way to go.

Honestly, I guess my review could be longer, but the film is great. I especially love the chiaroscuro feel you get in this film - Melville is not afraid of showing us darkness. The opening shot is just Alain Delon's character lying in bed, smoking, with our focus on his slender, large windows. I mean, that enough to me was a sigh of happiness. Melville's concentration on the film's palette being muted (at least in the beginning) is obvious and soft on the eyes. Otherwise, placements of characters and angles are great. I would expect nothing less. It's not crazy and did anything that particularly had me jumping in my seat, but it was still very pleasurable.

Acting was great. Alain Delon is very quiet and serious in this one, which was great, and François Périer was great, but I really liked the female characters. Nathalie Delon is not very present in the film, but her way of keeping cool and innocence in loving Jef Costello was great. I also liked Cathy Rosier's portrayal as Valérie, the pianist. Again, subtle. Like the palette, no one is screaming and yelling and being outrageous, but I liked her coolness.

What else now but the plot? It's a typical crime plot - nothing really hidden happening here. I remember the first time I watched the film, I was skeptical of the title, but it holds its meaning in the end. But yeah, Le samouraï is not trying anything crazy here. It's a fun movie, but is taken to a new level with the aesthetics of it.

That's all I really have to say about Le samouraï. It's a film that isn't daring to go crazy, but it definitely has a lot of beauty to it. If you like old crime films, check it out. If you like beautiful shots, check it out. If you like a super chill Alain Delon, check it out. And if you're familiar with Melville and never checked this one out, that's a crime itself. Happy viewing!

Psst... Sorry about the roman numeral screw-up. Everything should be in order now.

Review CXLIX - The Brave Little Toaster

Review 149
The Brave Little Toaster (1987)

I remember being super young - maybe something like four or five years old - and my parents somehow accidentally cracked a ceramic plate. After seeing the plate, I made a comment that I felt bad for the plate because it cracked. While my sister would use this as a way to completely embarrass me shortly thereafter and as I got slightly older, it didn't stop me from shedding a tear for the lamp in that Ikea commercial. While I have since moved my feelings of sympathy to actual living persons and animals, I'd like to blame my little childhood sadness on Jerry Rees' The Brave Little Toaster. Starring (err, voice acting) Deanna Oliver, Timothy Stack, Thurl Ravenscroft, Timothy E. Day, and Jon Lovitz, this film is pretty well known. I'm always surprised when I speak to someone my age about it and they seem to know it. However, while I remembered seeing it as a kid, I watched it when I was really young, so my memory was limited to the cottage home. So, why not check it out and see how it stood the test of time?

Toaster (Deanna Oliver), Kirby the vacuum (Thurl Ravenscroft), Lampy (Timothy Stack), and Radio (Jon Lovitz) all try to console Blanky (Timothy E. Day) after it seems like "Master" Rob (Wayne Kaatz), their owner, is abandoning them. Taking a proactive step, they decide to find him in a modern world.

What can I say about The Brave Little Toaster? Well, it definitely is a kid's film, and the animation definitely is kind of slow, but it still has a great message that I approve of. And I won't even hate on them for the animation because it wasn't horrible - it's just interesting to see what low-budget animation looked like in the late eighties as opposed to what can be done now. Pretty awesome. But I digress. The Brave Little Toaster is definitely an experience, let me say. The writers and director and crew really went ahead and made interesting characters. As the director already mentioned in an interview, he did differ from the novella the story was based on and decided to play with character aspects that related to their functionality as appliances. I mean, I thought this was pretty cool because it's obviously visible in the movie as you watch it. It gives you a view that not all is what is seems necessarily.

Since the director is open in his views of the characters, I'll just skip to discussing the overall theme of fighting a throw-away culture. When our heroes finally make it to Rob's home, new modern equipment tell (sing to) them that they are more modern and thus better than they are. However, we know that one, Rob actually wants them as they are "his", and two, Rob doesn't believe in throwing them away just because they're old as they still work well. His girlfriend continuously tells him to buy new equipment and take the modern goods at his parents' house, but he is insistent on using the old. And given our "always need the new equipment" kind of mentality that exists, it's a nice change. Of course I'm not saying to keep your toaster if it's broken, or to never indulge in new appliances, but the fact is, getting rid of stuff just because it's "old" seems like a wasteful mentality to me. I get critiqued on my old cellphone all the time, and while I complain about its battery life, it nonetheless holds up in my requirements. Why would I buy a new one when this one suits my needs just fine? I think the film has an important message on that, even though it isn't necessarily strict on it.

Otherwise, yeah, I don't think I have much else to say. The film can be pretty dark, and the final scene would have gotten a cry out of me had it been extended. The film doesn't have perfect characters, but they (most of them) nonetheless grow as they continue on their adventure. I thought it was endearing. The singing was not my thing, but this seems to be common in films from this age. It's not awful, just eh. Nonetheless, I would totally recommend this for a child, though make sure they don't take it too far like I did growing up. Happy viewing!

Review CXLVIII - Playtime

Review 148
Playtime (1967)

Playtime is not my first Jacques Tati film. I watched Mon Oncle probably about two years ago, and I can't say I was a fan. Some parts were funny (like the guy cleaning the streets talking to different people constantly) and the colours going on beautiful, but I thought it was slow and lost on me. Well, in the end, it was lost on me because the message really went over my head. Consequently, while hearing Jacques Tati's name reminded me of silence and little quirky jokes - not a very powerful duo - I agreed to watch Playtime with my boyfriend when he was searching for a comedy. Starring our beloved funnyman and Barbara Dennek, let us examine Tativille.

A group of American, female tourists visit the new, modern Paris in search for the newest craze. Monsieur Hulot (Jacques Tati) befriends one (Barbara Dennek) while attempting to reduce his confusion in this strict, monochromatic city.

The blurb for Playtime is short because there isn't a very strict plot. It's literally following this woman along as she looks around modern Paris, and Monsieur Hulot being confused as hell because everything has been modernised. Everything else that happens just happens as a subsequent way to show what happens in this modern way.

While supposed to be a comedy, the movie instead made me feel very sad. I mean, I recognise the funny parts in it, but the theme was so depressing and always in your face. Starting off we see that the airport is also an office building and a hospital. A pharmacy is a drug store and a bar as well. To be as efficient as possible, single buildings are combined. It takes out the specialisation of a place and makes it general because who wants one thing when they can settle for more? Next the absence of colour makes your eyes hop at any chance to see green or red. You see that all the buildings are the same, all grey and white and black. When Barbara sees a woman selling flowers, she wishes to take a picture, claiming this is "really Paris". She herself is ridiculed when she goes to a party in a green dress. Seeing this droning colour palette makes you feel uncomfortable, or at least, I did. The design of the building is all square and linear with no chance at escaping on a different route.

When it comes to our characters, we see that Monsieur Hulot and Barbara stand out because, again, they move in an organic and flow-y way. Barbara, for example, is constantly straying out of the group, always being called back in. Monsieur Hulot enters a building and loses the man he should be following given the linearity of his movement. He moves around in any which way, throwing off others.

But perhaps the most depressing aspect was the globalisation and hidden French culture. In the beginning of the movie, the group is in a tour bus and get out to look at the Eiffel Tower. However, their guide tells them it is forbidden and moves them to look at the new Paris, slated with rectangular, grey buildings. We catch glimpses of posters beckoning residents to other cities, like London, all with the same grey, rectangular buildings that have plagued Paris. Obviously Tati is showing us that modern aesthetics take away originality from the country only to replace it with something clean that, well, makes you lose sense of where you are. You would never guess Playtime takes place in Paris because it has no distinct features, no distinct buildings. Barbara catches a look at the Eiffel Tower in a reflecting door, and we catch the Eiffel Tower in the distance in a shot with Monsieur Hulot. But the Eiffel Tower is far away - not where Paris is moving. Paris is moving away from beauty, from its routes. Instead, it is moving to a globalist viewpoint.

The globalist warning from Playtime, apart from the posters showing every city, every country looking the same, is the lack of coherent language in the movie. German, English, Japanese, Spanish, and French are mixed in. People expect to be catered to their language preference, without any attempt at speaking French. The European Union was pushing for presence when the film was made, but only formally introduced in 1993. It's eerie how the film communicates this union so well, with Frenchmen claiming throughout the film that they don't understand why the product isn't explained in French. Of course this is language, but given the reduction in prominent French culture, we see this as losing France as a whole. At one point, Monsieur Hulot is with his friend, and his friend searches in his pocket for a franc, implying he has currency from all over the world. Sad, isn't it, knowing that monetary union would take over about thirty-five years later in the country. When Playtime was made, it was warning the audience about the loss of French culture through globalisation and modernisation - now it reminds you that this is the present-day struggle.

While Playtime is sad, it nonetheless offers hope at the end. Modernisation is shown to fall apart at a restaurant, and a carnival is celebrated in the streets when people break away from a linear path. Given recent accomplishments in the United Kingdom, there is hope that nationalistic views can once again take over from international ones; traditionalism is what makes us stand apart. Attempting to mish-mash cultures to get a grey, straight, boring lifestyle does not lead to happiness - it only attempts to put us all in a box.

While the message in the movie is strong, I found it too strong and in my face. I like a bit more subtly in my film, and I feel like this one can be lost of a viewer as the theme is constant. Consequently, while I think Playtime is a great movie, I can see it being completely lost on the average Joe. It's artsy in its approach, so you get nice shots, but if you aren't seeing the message, you won't enjoy this one. But if you read my review, you're a little bit above and might appreciate the movie. Oh, and check out Why Beauty Matters while we're on the subject. It'll make you think. Happy viewing!