2023 FILMS - THE MASTER LIST

I saw 86 new releases this year, and here's how they broke down.

4. The Good, the Bad and the Meh (click HERE for brief comments) - a wide range of stuff I liked, stuff that was endearingly terrible and stuff I just didn't take to for whatever reason.

3. The Gold Mine (click HERE for commentary) - stuff I loved, period.

2. Platinum Level (click HERE for blathering) - stuff I loved that I also thought was the best this year had to offer.

1. The Diamonds (click HERE for profuse expressions of admiration) - my special favorites.

1. The Diamonds [2023 Films]

These are my absolute faves of the year, transcending silly things like rank. All of these were profoundly special to me.

I'm just so tired of watching myself and every single other woman tie herself into knots so that people will like us. And if all of that is also true for a doll just representing women, then I don't even know.

This movie has no right to be as good as it is – as complex, as emotional, and as deep (Deep! A Barbie movie!) as it frickin’ is. I think most people suspected that with Greta Gerwig directing it would be more than just product placement or even a fun spoof. But not this. Not this candy colored almost entirely practical set that makes you want to step through the screen and have the time of your life. Not this movie that feels like a technicolor musical, even before the epic “I’m Just Ken” number. Not this celebration of womanhood where Barbies can code feminine and be powerful at the same time. Not this treatise on feminism that somehow manages not to be preachy (unless you’re a butthurt dude who thinks anything they don’t want to hear is preachy). This movie surpassed every expectation I had and became one of those movies where every time I think about it I’m suddenly sad that I’m not watching it right now.

Is it perfectly logical? Does it do everything imaginable to criticize Mattel and Barbie’s legacy? LOL of course not! But play has its own logic. And the movie pokes at Mattel a whole lot more than anyone had any reason to expect it to. (Whatever Mattel’s qualms, I’m sure they’ve been crying all the way to the bank for the last six months as sales have gone through the roof.) This movie is about the impossible expectations of women, it’s about mothers and daughters, and it’s about how feminism benefits everyone, not just women. It also has a closing line that is Billy Wilder-level brilliant. (Streaming on Max and available to rent on other platforms.)

Can you find the wolves in this picture?

Of all the historical epic movies that make me furious at the state of history education in America, this one takes the cake. And of course, this is exactly the kind of history that some people don’t *want* taught because it makes white people feel bad. You know what? We should feel bad because white people are The Worst. I wasn’t even aware that there were indigenous Americans who became seriously wealthy when they discovered oil on the land they were forced onto. It was predictable that white people would swarm the land and try to take what advantage they could by selling goods and providing services. And it shouldn’t really have been that surprising that some people – like the figures portrayed in this movie – were capable of much worse. Martin Scorsese is no stranger to crime stories, but this is definitely a new milieu for him and you can tell that every effort has been made to get all the historical details right. (The list of indigenous consultants in the credits is vast.)

This is a beautifully made movie that takes its time and immerses you in its world. Leonardo Dicaprio has played villainous characters before but I don’t think I’ve ever seen him play someone so dim and weak; that you can still feel an inkling of pathos for this guy is kind of a miracle. Robert DeNiro is a much more clear villain and his character “King” is his own version of a mob boss – outwardly benign and helpful but capable of real evil. The heart of this movie, though, is Lily Gladstone, whose Molly goes through inconceivable amounts of grief and pain and still manages to convey the real love she had for her treacherous husband. The end of the movie has been much discussed, but I think it’s an essential lampshading of the nature of this movie – a retelling of a genuine tragedy that not only is being told chiefly by white men but is also packaged as a piece of entertainment. Having Scorsese himself utter the final words and accept responsibility for that is a fascinating note to end the film on. (Available to rent on AppleTV but will be streaming for free for AppleTV users starting Jan. 12.)

I liked you for who you are, and who you are is a person who leaves.

But for him, you’re the person who stays.

I’ve never really been a fan of love triangles, despite some of my favorite romantic movies containing that element. I was wary of PAST LIVES from the trailers, as it looked like exactly the kind of triangle that rubs me the wrong way – there’s this great love trying to manifest and no matter how much the third person loves and respects one of the parties, they are In The Way of destiny. I’m sure that might resemble someone’s love story in real life, but that’s not my idea of how love works. So imagine my surprise when this turned out to be incredibly, heartbreakingly real and mature, with no one as the bad guy and no one with an ulterior motive. We meet Na Young and Hae Sung as children and the two clearly have feelings for each other. They’re parted when Na Young’s family moves to Toronto, but 12 years later, after Na Young (now Nora) has moved to New York, they reconnect online. Wanting to focus on her life in New York and her career, she suggests that they not have contact for a while. She soon meets Arthur at a writer’s retreat and they fall in love. Another 12 years later, Hae Sung comes to see Nora in New York.

This is yet another incredible feature directorial debut – assured and confident and not desperate to impress you. There are some really cool editing choices that take us briefly to another time period to underscore something happening now. And the photography is incredible; I don’t think I’ve ever seen New York City look so warm and romantic. The performances from the three leads are all impeccable, and I want to especially heap praise on John Magaro, who plays Nora’s husband. He has such complicated feelings to convey and it would be so easy to make this character a villain. But he really is the hero in many ways, not only because he loves Nora and trusts her enough to not try and keep her from seeing Hae Sung, but also because he is there for her in a way that Hae Sung doesn’t have to be, which says so much about the nature of a long-term love versus the idealism of romantic possibility. This is one of the best romantic movies I’ve ever seen. (Available to rent on various streaming platforms.)

We must experience everything. Not just the good, but degradation, horror, sadness.

Then we can know the world. And when we know the world, the world is ours.

I’ve loved everything I’ve seen from Yorgos Lanthimos, but this is by far my favorite thing he’s done. Teaming up once again with Emma Stone (who gives one of the best performances of the year), he tells the tale of Bella Baxter, which is essentially a feminist version of Frankenstein. It also would make a fascinating conversation with BARBIE, both films being about women on a journey of self-discovery. There are some elements that some will probably strongly object to, among them being the way in which Bella is “born.” There is also a very frank sexuality in the film and in Bella’s character arc, and I found myself rather astonished at seeing a woman in a film talk about “needing” sex – a thing I’m almost positive I have never heard a woman say in a movie or on television EVER because women traditionally are not allowed to have those feelings (and for sure never to admit to them).

Bella’s growth as a person is rather brilliantly written and acted – from the way she moves to her manner of speaking and syntax. The look of the film is also quite distinctive. It’s not clear what time period this is supposed to be, but there’s a sort of pastel steampunk look to everything. The costumes are extraordinary and all of Bella’s outfits *look* very period while clearly not being period (lots of elaborate high collars and puffy sleeves paired with silk pajama-like shorts). Pretty much any shot in the film that’s not a close-up is skewed in some way (including a whole lot of fisheye shots), reflecting the unique way that Bella sees the world. It’s all incredibly specific and unique and stunningly beautiful to look at. The screenplay was written by Tony McNamara, who also wrote the screenplay for Lanthimos’s THE FAVOURITE (and created the TV series “The Great”) but while you can see a similar sense of humor at play in the writing, it’s much less biting and more humanistic (I mean, I love THE FAVOURITE, but damn it’s mean). I love everything about this movie. (In theaters.)

I knew we should have gone to Nacho Mama.

(There is not a whole lot to choose from yet when it comes to stills and quotes for this movie. Thank goodness one of the child actors reminded me of the quote above.)

This was by far my favorite thing I saw at Fantastic Fest. I have a strange relationship with movie kids and movies *about* kids. I didn’t get to see a lot of movies when I was an actual child and I ended up seeing a lot of movies that were formative for people my age when I was an adult and therefore had a much different perspective on them. And it’s incredibly rare that I see a movie that evokes what I remember about actually being a child. Which is one reason this movie is so special to me. A lot of people will compare this to THE GOONIES, and there’s definitely a sense of “kids on an adventure that’s a bit too big for them” here. The director Weston Razooli says his biggest inspiration for this was “The Little Rascals” and I definitely see that as well. But it’s also got a lot of eldritch vibes and mystical journey tropes (kind of like a redneck Lord of the Rings).

The basic story is that three children, on the last weekend of summer vacation, “acquire” a new video game system and hope to spend their last free weekend playing it to their hearts’ content. But they hit a snag when they realize the boys’ mother has put a password on the television and to get it from her they have to complete a task that grows increasingly complicated and potentially dangerous as the movie goes on. This is maybe my favorite kids adventure movie that I’ve ever seen and genuinely took me back to my own childhood, when the most mundane things could feel like an actual adventure. The children in this are all spectacular, and the plot heavily depends on the classic laissez-faire parenting that we know and love from all our favorite stories from childhood (and many of our own actual childhoods, let’s be real). And it has the most unexpected use of the “Cannibal Holocaust” theme you could imagine. (Coming to theaters in April the last I heard.)

Happiness is continuing to desire what we already have. But you, have I ever had you?

This snuck up on me at the end of the year, and I confess that a huge part of my curiosity about the film was due to its two leads, Juliette Binoche and Benoit Magimel, who were partners in the late 90s and early 2000s and have a child together but split about 20 years ago. I try not to “ship” real people, but seeing these two play a love story was too much to resist. And their real-life history definitely adds to the passion between their characters. Dodin and Eugenie have worked together in the same kitchen for 20 years and a romance has blossomed between them, though Eugenie continually says no to Dodin’s marriage proposals because she prefers her freedom. At the same time, the two of them are mentoring a young girl who shows all the signs of being a cooking prodigy.

The first roughly half-hour of the film is a mostly dialogue-free scene of the characters cooking an elaborate meal. We get to know them by how they wordlessly communicate with each other, how they move around the kitchen and how they handle the food. I always love watching competent people doing things competently, but to show emotion and passion through the act of cooking took my breath away. There’s another cooking scene later in the movie, where Dodin is cooking just for Eugenie, and it’s like his version of a proposal and his best way of expressing his love for and devotion to her. This is so beautifully filmed and wonderfully acted, and there’s something so incredible and tender about being able to convey deep emotion through an act of service. (Coming to theaters in February.)

2. Platinum Level [2023 Films]

 These are the movies I loved that I also thought were the best of the year.

A shoe is just a shoe until someone steps into it.

Of all of the product placement movies that came out this year, this one charmed me the most. I used to work a few blocks from the Nike store in midtown Manhattan, and when I would pass it there was always a line (which I always wondered about, but thanks to TED LASSO I know this is de rigueur for an athletic shoe store). Of course, like so many “true stories,” we know how this one ends. But I’m always a sucker for a “yeah, but did you know how close it was to NOT happening???” story, and this one is really well done, to the point that I *almost* forgot that Air Jordans not only exist, but they have been a cultural icon for decades. This movie largely rides on a stellar cast, led by Matt Damon and co-starring lifelong BFF (and the film’s director) Ben Affleck. The obvious standout is Viola Davis as Michael’s mother, and every scene she’s in is the best part of the movie. The “80s vibes” might seem pretty on-the-nose and the music cues might seem a bit “now that’s what I call an 80s movie,” but it all really worked for me. Even the production design is amazing – everything looks extremely 80s but it still looks “new,” if that makes sense. I genuinely thought this was great storytelling, culminating in one of the best “pitch” scenes I’ve ever seen. (Streaming on Amazon Prime.)

Do I scare you?

There’s a lot in this movie I can’t relate to, as a straight American woman. But when it attacked me, it

ATTACKED me. There were some very particular ways in which I identified hard with this movie. I don’t

want to say too much about the story because it’s tricky, spoiler wise. But it’s a tough movie to nail down,

in terms of what’s actually happening (if you’re someone who needs that to be etched in stone, that is). Is

this a fantasy? A ghost story? Time travel? All of the above? However you come down on any of those

questions, it’s nonetheless emotionally devastating. Andrew Scott is in top form here and his chemistry

with the equally great Paul Mescal, who plays his neighbor and romantic interest, is palpable. Claire Foy

and Jamie Bell (my goodness, has it been THAT long since Billy Elliott?!) are also excellent as Andrew

Scott’s parents and the only other characters in the movie. There’s a profound sense of loneliness in the

movie, though I also identified with the main character’s seeming contentment with not being around

people most of the time. And I will never hear “You Were Always On My Mind” again without crying.

(In theaters.)

Not being able to relate to people isn’t a badge of honor.

This movie was not what I expected from the trailer, which has quite a different energy than what it’s

advertising. Our main character is a Black writer whose books don’t sell. After seeing a colleague get some s

uccess with a book exploiting Black stereotypes, he decides to write his own exploitative “masterpiece”

under a pseudonym as a joke. Except no one gets the joke. That’s what you get from the trailer, but there’s

so much more going on here. There are a whole lot of family dynamics and even a romance in the offing,

but all of that gets swallowed by the main character’s accidental success. Which is the entire point. Jeffrey

Wright gives a career-best performance and he’s in excellent company, with Tracee Ellis Ross, Sterling K.

Brown, Issa Rae, John Ortiz, and Leslie Uggams filling out the ranks. Not to mention Keith David and

Hamilton’s Okieriete Onaodowan in an incredible meta scene. Speaking of incredible scenes, the film’s

ending has sparked a lot of discussion, with many of the opinion that it kind of ruins the movie. I agree

that it “ruins” it but that’s actually why I love it and why I think it works. This is an astounding movie

to be its director's feature debut and I’m excited to see what he picks to do next. (In theaters.)

Sometimes a couple is kind of a chaos and everybody is lost. Sometimes we fight together and

sometimes we fight alone, and sometimes we fight against each other, that happens.

German actress Sandra Hüller gave at least two incredible performances this year and I feel like this is the

better one, if only because you can actually see it. Here she plays a woman whose husband dies from a fall

out a high window, and she finds herself on trial as the chief suspect of his alleged murder. Like last year’s

SAINT OMER, this movie gives us a glimpse at how French court trials work, which is very different to

how I think most English-speaking people think of how courts work. Here, it’s not just about presenting the

facts and proving the case; defendants have an opportunity to tell their story – and opposing counsel to

challenge that story – which is exactly what we see happen for more than half of this movie. It’s fascinating

and compelling, because it drives home the fact that you cannot fully know and understand another person’s

marriage. Things get said and are done that sound very different without their full context. You can see the

main character’s frustration at being misinterpreted. And it’s quite possible that she could have acted

without malice and still be responsible for her husband’s death. None of this is knowable and the film

makes no attempt to come down on one side or another, which some viewers might find frustrating but

I think is brilliant. It doesn’t matter if you think she did it or not. The uncertainty is the point.

(Available to rent on various platforms.)

I've been looking for you, God. I looked for you in Temple. I looked for you in Church. I didn't feel you at all.

Why? Why, God? Why do I only feel you when I'm alone?

Like many people my age and a little older, the Judy Blume novel on which this is based was a beloved text

in my home during my childhood. I considered it a “how to” book for how to get through puberty, especially

the obligatory female troubles. This is a joyously faithful adaptation and reinforces that this isn’t just about

a girl getting her first period; it’s about a girl learning her place in the world and figuring out who she is.

The cast is outstanding, perhaps especially Rachel McAdams and Benny Safdie, who play Margaret’s

parents. Kathy Bates is great as always, as Margaret’s grandmother. And Margaret herself, as played by

Abby Ryder Fortson, is fantastic, as is just about all of the tween cast. They all feel real and not like

cloying, cutesy “movie” kids. I never really thought of the book as taking place in a specific time, but it

was published in 1970 and the movie is very much a 70s movie, with all the delicious period detail that

suggests. I’m bummed this movie hasn’t gotten more critical or awards love because I think it’s genuinely

great and feels as daring as the novel did when it first came out.

(Streaming on Starz and available to rent on other platforms.)

Can you die from this?

Oh, Ari Aster, you beautiful weirdo. There’s been a looooot of overthinking this movie, which you can hardly

blame people for. It’s kind of built to make you desperate to make sense of it. I think it’s a mistake to read

all of the glorious nonsense that happens to this character as somehow not really happening or “it’s all in

his head,” but at the same time a lot of it is clearly symbolic rather than literal. Aster’s Kafkaesuqe nightmare

comedy is undoubtedly influenced by stories like Scorsese’s AFTER HOURS or the Coen Brothers’ A SIMPLE

MAN, in which a character has misadventures heaped upon them past the point where a single human could

conceivably endure it. This is that narrative filtered through Ari Aster’s absurdity palette, and I think it can be

enjoyed and appreciated on that level without even needing to get into the figurative – save that for a

subsequent viewing. This movie also boasts an all-star cast, many of them stage veterans, which lends the

movie a theatrical quality. Chief among them is Patti Lupone, whose character looms over the whole movie

like a massive bug swarm until we finally meet her in the final act. Of all of the domineering and manipulative

mother figures in fiction who have ever made their child’s life a living hell, Lupone’s monstrous Mona is

right up there with Mrs. Bates, Margaret White and Eleanor Iselin.

(Streaming on Showtime and available to rent on other platforms.)

I really value when people use violence for me, it's actually one of my love languages.

The teen movie has had a tried and true blueprint for decades, with John Hughes as one of its preeminent

architects. That has been changing in the last few years and BOTTOMS feels like it has completely rewritten

the playbook. This feels like a new HEATHERS – very different story, but the tone and heightened reality

are quite similar. The plot centers on two unpopular high school lesbians who start a self-defense club to get

closer to the girls they have crushes on, and it’s not really like anything else (other than HEATHERS and

probably BOOKSMART) that I’ve ever seen. Most of the familiar beats are *kind of* there, but never in

the way you expect. And the humor is so balls to the wall, it’s really something (there is one gag about a kid

who’s planning to kill the whole school that had me ROLLING). I enjoyed Emma Seligman’s previous film,

SHIVA BABY (also starring absolute treasure Rachel Sennott), but this was a huge step up for me. As fond

as I am of the classic 80s teen movies, it’s great to see a new one of these that feels very much of its time

and not such an homage. (Streaming on MGM+ and available to rent on other platforms.)

Why make a masterpiece? Do what you’re good at.

This is the Korean COBWEB, not to be confused with the horror film of the same name that also came out

this year. This was one of my favorites from Fantastic Fest, and it’s the latest from Kim Jee-woon, who also

made THE GOOD THE BAD THE WEIRD, A TALE OF TWO SISTERS and (a movie everyone loves a lot

more than I do, apparently) I SAW THE DEVIL. Song Kang-ho (PARASITE, SYMPATHY FOR MR.

VENGEANCE) stars as a director who has just wrapped his latest film and suddenly changes his mind about

how it should end. Most of the film is the chaotic couple of days spent reshooting and telling various lies and

hatching various schemes to hold everything together. This reminded me a lot of ONE CUT OF THE DEAD,

but this is more cynical!funny and satirical than endearing!funny (not a criticism). It’s also a period movie,

set in the early 1970s, with loads of great period detail. There are loads of hilarious characters rounding out

the fictional cast and crew and you find yourself really invested in the movie getting finished, even as the

director’s behavior teeters over into abuse. There’s an interesting reveal about a previous shoot that ended in

catastrophe. And the last fifteen or twenty minutes are an incredible playout of the final product – the perfect

ending everyone’s been killing themselves to bring about, which happens in a jawdropping oner.

(Not yet released.)

To have never gone to war is something to be proud of.

Saying this is the greatest Godzilla movie ever may seem like hyperbole, but I think it might be true. Yes,

perhaps even better than the original 1954 film. This movie goes back to the feel of the original, actually

dealing with the serious subject matter, and creates an astoundingly emotional narrative. It’s set right at the

end of WW2, when Japan is at its lowest point, and sends in a kaiju to kick them while they’re down (which

I think is the meaning of the title). Our eventual hero is not initially heroic at all – being a kamikaze pilot

who abandoned his mission out of fear. And it’s incredibly satisfying to see him find something to fight for

and become willing to do what is necessary, even if it costs him his life. The monster effects are first-rate

and the spectacle of destruction is breathtaking. And I always love the sciency scenes, where all the smart

people get together to figure out if and how the beast can be destroyed. If you’ve never seen a Godzilla

movie … well, go back and watch the first one first, but definitely watch this one. It is movie magic in

every sense. (In theaters.)

It's my own arrogance to think I could survive on what he could give.

There is ONE moment that very nearly throws this whole movie off a cliff, it’s so bad. Why that needle drop?

WHY??! Thankfully, it happens very near the end of an extraordinary film and I can ignore it. I’ve heard

complaints that this is a by-the-numbers biopic, that this needs to be the death knell for biopics, etc. I feel

differently. The biopic tends to be the least interesting genre because a person’s life is not a story. Not one

story, anyway. And chronicling the events of a person’s life like ticking off boxes on a checklist doesn’t

really tell you anything about them. But I don’t think that’s what this movie is. This movie is not really

*about* Leonard Bernstein; it’s about his wife and their unconventional love story. This is Carey Mulligan’s

movie and it’s not an accident that she, not Bradley Cooper, has top billing. This isn’t a perfect movie, but

I think it’s an interesting one, with lots of interesting filmmaking decisions. For example, I like that each of

the eras of Lenny’s and Felicia’s life are filmed like the movies of that particular time in cinema history (e.g.,

when they meet in the 1940s, the movie is shot and performed like a 1940s movie, with rapid-fire dialogue

and dynamic black-and-white photography). This is also, for me at least, an emotional movie. As a lover

of music, it’s hard not to be moved by a lot of this – especially the glorious Mahler performance. Also, and

this is only a personal thing for me, there’s a moment in the movie where Carey Mulligan looks almost

precisely like my late mother, which was a whole other layer of overwhelming.

(Streaming on Netflix and still in some theaters.)

What’s the future like?

A few years ago, I saw this team’s previous film BEYOND THE INFINITE TWO MINUTES at Anomaly

Film Festival in Rochester. That was a devilishly clever film that had a simple time travel premise that the

filmmakers took to unbelievable lengths. When I read the description for RIVER and saw that it was another

plot revolving around a “two minute” time anomaly, I was dubious and wondered how this would be sufficiently

different from the previous film to merit another story. I should not have doubted these geniuses. Instead of

seeing two minutes into the future, all of these characters are experiencing the same two minutes over and

over again. Well, not the same exactly. The same in time – bowls of food refill themselves, characters who

move during the two minutes end up back in the same spot – but the characters all retain their memory of

each loop, so they can learn and figure out solutions. As much as I loved BTITM, this movie steps up the

storytelling significantly, with lots of incredible character moments and a setting that allows for all sorts

of interesting development. There’s one chunk of the movie that actually manages to slow the movie down

enough for two characters to have an extended and meaningful conversation. Like the previous movie, there’s

a bit of Extraordinary Sci-Fi that miraculously saves the day, which in another movie might be annoying, but

here it’s literally the only way to resolve the situation. (Available to rent on AppleTV.)

So apparently there are two types of people in this world. The ones who wave at boats,

and the ones who hate joy.

The romcom genre feels almost as much in need of a dramatic overhaul as the biopic, but what I think this

movie does so well is prove that it’s not the tropes that drag these movies down; as long as you’ve got

interesting characters and an interesting setting, you can still make it feel fresh, especially if you’re a gifted

filmmaker with style and energy. This movie has style seeping out of its fingertips – so much color and

deliberate detail, even in the background of shots – and it’s a joy to look at, on top of an engaging story. There’s

a walk-and-talk scene where one character is constantly moving around the other that I swear evoked

Michael Jackson’s “Thriller” and how Michael keeps dancing and singing around Ola Ray. There’s an

incredible confidence in the filmmaking here, and it’s even more noteworthy as this is the director’s first

feature. And it’s all shepherded along by an amazing cast of characters, including the supporting players.

Our two main would-be lovers are mysteries that unfold for us over the course of the film, just as they do

to each other through all the ridiculous situations and mishaps they get into, and it’s such a good time

watching it all happen. (Streaming on Hulu.)

Can we watch something happy now?

This one was very divisive, and I definitely understand why. “Experimental” is a word to keep in mind if

you’re going to check this out. It’s a movie of childhood terrors and is exclusively from the point of view

of two small children (ages 4 and 6). There may be a collective total of 60 seconds in which you can see

an identifiable person on screen (i.e., a face or even the back of a head). The view of any figures, including

the protagonist children is almost exclusively legs and feet. The camera angles are all askew and mainly

looking up from a low height (the point of view of the children) and the only noise other than thumps and

bumps and the occasional creepy voice are cartoons playing in the background. Plenty of scary things

happen – the doors and windows disappear, objects appear to move on their own, and voices say creepy

things and instruct the children to harm themselves. But none of it happens in the way you expect if you’ve

watched any “normal” horror movies. And that’s why I think it’s brilliant. Lots of people hated this, and I

have no judgment on that at all, but if you can tune in to this movie’s strange frequency, you’ll be rewarded

with one of the scariest movie experiences you’ve had in quite a while (if you want to call that a reward :P).

I saw this in a theater, but I’ve been really wanting to watch this at home, with my own strange noises

adding to the creep factor. (Streaming on Hulu and Shudder and available to rent on other platforms.)

But my faith … isn't in your God. Because that God tells me what I'm supposed to do at home. But He

doesn't tell me what to do on the mountain. What's happening here is a completely different situation. This is

my heaven. I believe in another god. I believe in the god that Roberto keeps inside his head when he comes

to heal each of my wounds. In the god that Nando keeps in his legs and that lets him continue walking no matter

what. I believe in Daniel's hands when he cuts the meat. And Fito, when he gives it to us without saying which

of our friends it belonged to. That way, we can eat it without... without having to remember their faces.

That's the god I believe in.

This is a retelling of the true story of the 1972 Andes flight disaster (which was, incidentally, a key inspiration

for the series “Yellowjackets”). There had been another movie based on this story – 1993’s ALIVE. I have

never seen that version, but I do know that it has an awful lot of white people playing Uruguayans. SOCIETY

OF THE SNOW is harrowing and heartbreaking, and even if you can’t quite put names to faces (I certainly

had difficulty), you’re attached enough to these characters and understand enough of their dynamics to be

compelled and invested. The crash is intense and deeply upsetting, and that’s only the beginning of these

people’s trials. There are numerous avalanches, failed escape attempts, and of course the much talked about

cannibalism, which survivors were forced to resort to after discovering the rescue attempts had been called

off and there was no end to this nightmare in sight. What struck me the most about this story was that there

was no miracle for these people, no fortuitous rescue. They had to rely on each other, and their true saviors

were the two survivors who trekked to Chile to search for help. This movie puts you squarely in the wilderness

with these people, and you fully understand why they make all the decisions they make. It breaks my heart

that the real survivors faced backlash after coming home and after news of their cannibalism broke (they had

tried to keep it secret, at least in the beginning, so they could talk to their families about it first). What this

movie does really well is make you feel everything they were going through and how hard a decision that

was. I can’t imagine judging them for it. (Streaming on Netflix and still in some theaters.)

Everyone keeps telling me how my story is supposed to go. Nah, I'ma do my own thing.

I should have Spider-Man fatigue by now. I remember when they announced they were starting the new movies

with Tom Holland thinking it was too soon for yet another Spider-Man series (it already felt too soon when the

Andrew Garfield movies started). But this movie and its predecessor feel like such a fresh vision of this character

and this story, and this movie in particular kicks things up several notches from the already incredible INTO

THE SPIDER-VERSE. The animation is so beautiful (all of the scenes in Gwen's universe are breathtaking and

I never knew you could convey emotion like they do in those scenes) and the stakes could not be higher. I love

the new Spidey characters and all the meta references in the Spider-Man headquarters (even the pointing

meme!). And I reeeeeaally love the whole concept of "canon events" and Miles is disrupting that. The buildup

to the final reveal and cliffhanger is heart-stoppingly great, and as awesome as Gwen's final call to action is

(YES, I AM IN!) it's so frustrating (i.e., awesomely frustrating) that that's where they leave it, making you

need to see the next movie immediately. (Streaming on Netflix and available to rent on other platforms.)

Evil loves children. And children love evil.

The scariest movie of Fantastic Fest and (for me) the best horror movie of the year. It’s a demon possession

movie, but not like one I’ve ever seen before. This movie takes place in a world where demon possession is a

known thing that everyone is aware of and that there is a very specific way of dealing with (as well as a list of

things *not* to do). For everyone who watched this and complained that it was unrealistic what bad decisions

these characters make, I would like to ask if they have been on this planet for the past four years. I found these

characters’ ill-thought-out plans, and especially the denial (as if this couldn’t possibly be actually happening

to them), to be incredibly plausible while also being extremely frustrating. The most horrifying part of the

movie, though, is the way the demon uses children and weaponizes them against adults. There were parts of this

movie that reminded me of WHO CAN KILL A CHILD?. We’re instinctively trusting of children and want to

protect them, so when they turn on us, what do we even do? This movie is bleak as hell and I kind of loved it

for that, especially as it doesn’t go the route of this just being a metaphor or somehow not really happeningexcept inside someone’s head. Bad shit is happening, mistakes are made, and it just keeps getting worse

until everyone is dead. (Streaming on Shudder and AMC+ and available to rent on other platforms.)