Zimm score Movie Guide

Marking the 25th year since its release, Pulp Fiction won an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and was nominated for six other Oscars. Streaming on Netflix, and seen by many as Quentin Tarantino’s masterpiece, the movie created a watershed moment both for independent cinema and roles that celebrity stars would accept in the future. As my last review of award-winning movies on Netflix before the 91st Academy Awards this Sunday, let’s look at Pulp Fiction. 

Tarantino placed the sequences of his film to form a random, or non-chronological narrative. In my view, as the view is of some others, this clearly is an artistic display of postmodernity that began in the late 20th century. In addition to this randomness, the film also contains three interrelated stories to form a multi-plot structure, as opposed to one main central plot throughout a movie. 

Arguably the strongest point in Pulp Fiction in my view is the script and its harmony with visual motifs and colors used throughout the story. From prophetic passages in Ezekiel to fast food vernacular in Europe, Tarantino wrote gripping dialogue that works, even if it may be at the expense of veering at times on didacticism. Such dialogue won’t be for everyone, of course. Such dark humor throughout the movie that butts up against graphic images won’t win some people over who haven’t seen the movie. 

This also doesn’t include the fact that Tarantino makes extensive use of the word, “n*****”, something controversial at its release and still will be for many today as it was for me after rewatching it. In an interview with Variety, fellow director Spike Lee sees Tarantino as infatuated with the word, and wondered if he wants to be “an honorary black man.” Though Samuel L. Jackson’s character uses the word in the film and defends Tarantino’s use of it, it’s a scene with Tarantino’s character in it that makes me feel the most uncomfortable. 

Aside from the script and dialogue, John Travolta, Bruce Willis, and Uma Thurman all bring strong performances to their characters they take on. For Thurman, this would be a breakout role for her career. Travolta’s career would be revived because of his role as a co-criminal, and Willis would pioneer a course for future actors in their decision to choose a role in independent films, something that’s as strong as ever today. 

One element I take some issue with, however, in Pulp Fiction is the conveyance of violence. Apart from the quantity of violence in the film, for me the issue stems more from how much it seems trivialized. Though some justify it on the basis of humor and the humor that surrounds it, it’s the humor and apparent lack of consequence embedded in the violence I take issue with. 

Pulp Fiction is a solid piece of art that embodies postmodernity in more ways than one. Themes of materialism, consumerism and greed that journeys through the random plot only add weight to this game-changing crime film that would change cinema in the decades that followed. Though I think it’s a bit overrated when viewing it 25 years later, there’s no question that Pulp Fiction was a turning point in the way films were made that still influence writers and directors today. 

Zimm Score: 8/10

One reality I never have mentioned in movie reviews I’m blogging about involves the gap between when a movie comes out and when a person first sees that movie. Many films, for example, were groundbreaking for the industry at its release, or served as a zeitgeist that captured the period in which it was released. 

Yet for some people who first see the film decades later for the first time, or are from a different generation entirely, the film doesn’t add quite the punch that it may have were the person to see it at its release and was conscious of the times it was released in. This may all go without saying, but thought it was still worth mentioning. One such classic that I don’t think would have this effect as much on younger audiences is the war epic streaming on Netflix, Apocalypse Now. 

When being sought after for a classified mission during the Vietnam War, a military captain with PTSD returns to the field in search of a US colonel who has gone insane and is now leading an evil cult. But when he learns that another operative was sent on an earlier mission identical to his and had now joined this insane colonel, captain Benjamin Willard (played by Martin Sheen) must embody the madness required to take down a mad villain. 

Apocalypse Now, in my estimation, not only portrays the mood of war for those of us who have not served, but also portrays the mood of the 1970s in America. For me, and for anyone born after the seventies, Apocalypse Now gives over two short hours of darkness that bled throughout the Vietnam War and the various events of horror that took place during the seventies. 

In some ways, this is what makes Apocalypse Now such an incredible and classic movie. Though it’s a “Hollywood” movie, I never sensed any Hollywood glitter sprinkled over this epic. War is truly hell, and the film puts this on like a coat. Many members on set experienced extreme mental anguish and even contemplations of suicide when making the film. Language abounds, warfare abounds, and psychosis preys on every character we see. 

Technically speaking, the production design and cinematography struck me early on and was visually stunning. A war movie even today would be hard-pressed to compete with this epic that was released in 1979. In fact, it’s the cinematic work that really captures the central antagonistic force throughout the story: the Vietnam War. I realized slowly throughout that this wasn’t a villain against Willard but rather the warfare itself that hindered him from beginning to end. 

Apocalypse Now is a heavy and dark war epic that exudes the emotional weight of war, in this case the war in Vietnam. Critics argue whether it’s a pro-war or anti-war film, and though I side with the latter, it’s easy to see why some argue for the opposite, seeing the film rather glorifying the brutalities of war and the destruction of nature. Though I wouldn’t flippantly label it as a must-see movie, the movie is a technical success that captures the “horror of war” and the personal consequences that can follow for those who serve. 

Zimm Score: 8.5/10

Annie Hall was always a classic where first of all, I knew it was one of the greats. Second of all, I knew it beat Star Wars for Best Picture in 1978! Yet I had never seen Woody Allen’s great directorial achievement. Now streaming on Netflix as part of a selection of Oscar nominees in preparation for this year’s Academy Awards, Annie Hall I think is one of the best rom-coms of all time. Blended with seriousness and comedy, Allen highlights the dichotomy between the “real” and the “reel,” all the while bringing laughs from beginning to end. 

After going on a movie date with an aspiring singer (Annie Hall, played by Diane Keaton), a neurotic comedian begins to replay how his relationship with her failed a year ago. When he recalls the time when she moved in with him and also learned that she was seeing someone else, as well, Alvy Singer (played by Woody Allen) comes to learn that love is essential, even if it may be “crazy” and “absurd.” 

Allen served as director, writer, and lead actor in Annie Hall. As one of the all-time great screenwriters, this was one story where I felt the script carried the entire film. Sure there is solid acting from both Allen and Diane Keaton, as well as competent work behind the camera that Allen directs. But multiple techniques that Allen uses in the script highlight a lot of laughter at times, while other areas are simply brilliant. 

One scene that I thought was funny, for example, contains not only the dialogue of what we hear the characters saying on the surface. But we also read “mental captions” simultaneously on the screen of the subtext that each character is thinking. Normally, the subtext is something that we the audience pick up from the way characters are acting on-screen without anything being said. This scene was so creative, I actually had to restart the scene because I first thought there was an error with the subtitles on top of the normal subtitles I had already playing! 

Additionally, Allen’s comedic creativity was something just fresh to see and so unique. One scene makes use of a split screen, where two families end up in dialogue together. Another scene involves Keaton’s character in bed with Allen literally removing herself from her body that we see, as she sits down on a chair. Most prominent of all, though not unique whatsoever, are the multiple times Allen’s character (and perhaps Allen himself?) breaks the fourth wall with narrative dialogue he has with us in the audience as he stares right into the camera. 

Annie Hall I think is rightfully seen as one of cinema’s best romantic comedies. Though I still will need to face the fact that Star Wars didn’t win Best Picture, Woody Allen crafted a movie with comedic genius, a brilliant script, and two great performances by Allen and Diane Keaton. Wait, along with Christopher Walken as a minor character and Jeff Goldblum as an extra? Whaaat?! 

Zimm Score: 8.5/10 

Like many movies, Pixar’s The Incredibles from 2004 spawned a fan base that patiently waited for the one… incredible sequel. Sorry, I had to. 14 years later, and much longer than the length of years we normally need to wait for the average sequel, Incredibles 2 made its way to screens last year. Now nominated for an Oscar in the animated feature department, and streaming on Netflix, Incredibles 2 is a fun home video selection for families, with a provoking message for parents and adults. 

After superhero efforts become illegal in the city in response to collateral damage caused, Helen Parr with the alias Elastigirl (voice acted by Holly Hunter) decides to accept secret missions that will potentially regain public trust in superheroes, and provide for her family in the process. Yet when she successfully tracks down a mysterious supervillain who doesn’t appear to be the source of projecting hypnotic images across television screens, Helen Parr and her husband Bob (voice acted by Craig Nelson) will need to learn that some things are simply out of our control. 

Though director Brad Bird has directed some amazing movies (e.g. The Iron Giant, Ratatouille, and The Incredibles), I don’t seem to emotionally connect with his films as much as other Pixar directors (Pete Docter, or Andrew Stanton). Having said that, I come away from Bird’s films with a very profound message that is either encouraging or thought-provoking. He does the same with Incredibles 2. 

Bird uses the television screen as a potent motif throughout the film to challenge viewers (as we watch on a screen!) to consider the hypnotic and numbing control that our screens have in the Western world. As a fan of motifs in films, this was a pleasant addition. Because of this motif, in turn, control is a universal that runs through the story, showing the polarized consequences of those both with and without control. 

Bird also plays with a certain character early in the film to take light jabs at our sitting president and billionaire. Phrases like “Make superheroes legal again,” a large mansion the Parr family lives in that’s owned by an “eccentric billionaire,” and the same character showing Helen Parr their city from the air all may hint at President Trump for older audience viewers. 

Incredibles 2 is one great selection on Netflix for families looking for something fun for kids and thought-provoking for adults. Though it may have a bit more mature content than its predecessor, director Brad Bird still brings ample adventure, comic relief at times, a relevant message (by default), and fun that everyone can enjoy. 

Zimm Score: 8/10 

Returning to Netflix once again is Steven Spielberg’s Jaws, along with all the poor sequels that followed in the Jaws franchise. Though it’s not a great time in January for a “summer blockbuster,” it is awards season, and Jaws was nominated for multiple Oscars. It’s also become one of Hollywood’s most influential films of all time. As a Millennial born in 1984, when high-concept blockbusters had already solidified their supremacy in the US, I was unaware until recently how much influence both Jaws and Star Wars had during the seventies in revolutionizing the way studios produce films, and the way that mass audiences would go to view them. Film history aside, let’s review and revisit Jaws itself as a movie, and weigh it against Spielberg’s other all-time greats. 

After being notified of a deceased young woman and seeing her washed ashore, an island’s local police chief with a fear of drowning enters a world of fear over local shark attacks. But when his own boy goes into shock at the sight of yet another death by a monstrous shark, Martin Brody (played by Roy Scheider) must come to face his fears before Amity Island loses any more of its residents. 

Jaws is a classic thriller I didn’t grow up with, as perhaps many young children didn’t grow up with as well! Because of that, I may not have as much nostalgia or love for the film, having seen it a few times now later in life. Intended by Spielberg as a horror flick, and seen by some critics at the time as a horror, it ultimately by today’s standards works as a suspenseful thriller. 

What went not to Spielberg’s plan in not showing as much of the shark essentially worked in his favor, solidifying him as a premier director with great talent and a promising future. The animatronic shark looks pretty lousy by today’s standards, and even was for some during the seventies. Yet Spielberg directs with such gripping shots and angles with the camera that each little glimpse or hint at the monster in the water is simply terrifying. 

Along with Spielberg’s direction, which is masterful, is the menacing music by John Williams. Even for those who haven’t seen Jaws, many around the world know the minimalistic notes in minor that reverberate in the waters below during the movie. It’s no surprise that the movie won Oscars for Best Sound and Best Original Score. Seeing Jurassic Park when I was nine years old in the theater I suppose is the closest resemblance to what it may have felt like to see Jaws on the big screen with the haunting music that accompanies it. 

Returning to Netflix, Jaws is a solid film. It’s filled with suspense, a couple horrific moments, surprisingly some laughs, and convincing performances from Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss, and most notably Robert Shaw. Though I think Spielberg directed some even better films later in his career, he paved the way for many filmmakers in their attempts to replicate both thriller and horror films that either keep the audience in spectacular suspense or in sending them shivers down their spines. 

Zimm Score: 8/10 

One confession of mine is that I like all the action, humor and cheese that comes with the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It now makes up over 20 movies in the franchise, and yet it may have received substantial influence from just one superhero movie in 2008 not a part of the franchise. The Dark Knight I think is one of the early century’s greatest films overall and the greatest superhero movie of all time. In this post I revisit and review Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight, streaming on Netflix. 

After being informed of a local terrorist involved with multiple bank robberies, a crime-fighting business owner decides to capture one of the key accomplices connected to the robberies. Yet when he continually fails to reveal his true identity behind a costume and a mask, Batman (played by Christian Bale) must realize that for people to have a face associated with heroism, oftentimes a sacrificial lamb is required. 

The brilliant reality with The Dark Knight is the gravitas, deep resonance, and thematic material that weaves throughout the story. Unlike most superhero movies over the last decade, which is more light-hearted and/or simply lacks a sufficient script, The Dark Knight contains emotional weight, a spectacular script, and thematic resonance with the audience. 

This is all in addition to some marvelous performances (most notably Oscar winner the late Heath Ledger as the Joker), visual effects, sweeping cinematography, and a musical score that is both eery and pulsating. Most notably, and in my opinion what makes or breaks a movie at the end of the day, the direction of Christopher Nolan is precise with every shot, scene, and recited line that’s delivered. 

Now in a time where filmmakers and critics are beginning to give a bit more attention and consideration to otherwise unnoticed genres, The Dark Knight sorely missed out on such a time. Arguably the best picture of 2008, it was snubbed by other films that I think lacked the all around supremacy that Nolan brought to the table. Ironically, Black Panther is a superhero movie that’s been nominated for best picture, ten years after The Dark Knight failed to be nominated for both best picture and best director.  

With multiple premises and themes, the movie also proves to be substantially thought-provoking. Tragically, it incited a young man four years later to open fire in a movie theater while taking up the persona of the Joker. Ironically, it plays with the idea that at the end of the day, you can’t reason with a terrorist. President George W. Bush, at the time of the film’s making, saw himself at war with terrorists in the Middle East. President Barack Obama would even go on to say, “ISIS is the Joker. It has the capacity to set the whole region on fire. That’s why we have to fight it.” 

The Dark Knight proved to be highly successful and influential, even if not always in the most positive sense. Though it may prove to be too grim or dark for some, the movie otherwise in my opinion is a must-see, if for nothing else but to wrestle with themes dealing with our belief in what is good, the real villains we face in this world, and sacrifices that at times must be made. 

Zimm Score: 9/10

Today, many will recognize the big-name Hollywood actors, Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. Yet Good Will Hunting, a 1997 movie that Damon and Affleck co-wrote, is what really put these two young actors on the Hollywood map. Ending with a successful box office in North America against a $10 million budget, the film would go on to win an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay and help the late Robin Williams win for Best Supporting Actor. I personally love this story, but if you haven’t seen it, take a look at my thoughts to help guide your decision on whether to stream it! 

After solving a genius-level mathematical problem at MIT, an unruly young janitor from South Boston reluctantly enters the world of therapy and counseling. Yet when he finally begins opening up to a therapist who’s unafraid to challenge him, Will Hunting (played by Matt Damon) must wrestle with what it means to make the most of the opportunities placed in your path. 

Good Will Hunting succeeds through its script and acting. Though there’s one scene of violence and strong language throughout, this isn’t a high-octane action flick that both Damon and Affleck would experience many times in their future careers. This is a drama that takes you on an emotional rollercoaster, bringing tension, tears and laughs to those watching the conversations between five central characters. 

In other movies, I’ll notice how one scene ends tragically or negatively. Immediately after, the next scene begins with something meant to be light or humorous. And yet it doesn’t work because I’m shoved too forcefully into the next scene when I’m still dealing with the “loss” of the previous scene. Yet Good Will Hunting has a phenomenal rhythm to it, where this up-down emotional path still occurs, but fluidly. 

For example, there isn’t a death of a key character that is followed by light-hearted jokes in the next scene. There is, for example, a very serious and tense scene that is followed by a fun and light-hearted date in the next scene that just works. Point being, there needs to be an up-down rhythm, but not so extreme that transitions simply fail.

The writing of Damon and Affleck (who plays Will’s best friend, Chuckie) also brings humor, which may be a bit surprising for a drama that confronts such painful scars from one’s past. Though the story as a whole may be a bit predictable for some, I found that this goes unnoticed. The humor, tension, monologues, and moments work so wonderfully that any predictability goes either unnoticed or permissible. 

Finally, Damon, Affleck, Robin Williams (playing Will’s therapist, Sean Maguire), Minnie Driver (playing Skylar), and Stellan Skarsgård (playing Professor Gerald Lambeau) bring great performances to a great script. It was undoubtedly Damon’s performance in the lead role (and as co-writer) that got both audiences and critics looking at another young actor with a promising future. 

For those wishing to steer clear of movies with heavy language, Good Will Hunting may be too distracting for some. Yet for a great story, filled with laughs, hurts, relationships and brokenness, Good Will Hunting is an amazing and rewarding choice for Netflix users looking for deeply thematic material and great performances from Matt Damon and Robin Williams. 

Zimm Score: 8.5/10

Nominated for eleven Oscars at the 77th Academy Awards, including best picture, Martin Scorsese’s The Aviator truly took flight, garnering five of them, including Cate Blanchett’s win for best supporting actress. With a film that gives a serious (albeit dramatized) look at the effects of psychological disorders, The Aviator is one great film streaming on Netflix, as it zeroes in on the adventurous journey of real-life pilot, engineer, and business magnate, Howard Hughes (played by Leonardo DiCaprio). 

After learning that he’s losing $25,000 per day to make an epic film, a director and pilot with obsessive-compulsive disorder still manages to achieve celebrity status with the final release of the film. But when his eccentricity and ambition leads his celebrity girlfriend to leave him, Howard Hughes must come to terms with a life without limits. 

Like my earlier review this week of Doctor Zhivago, The Aviator is long, finishing 15 minutes shy of three hours. At the same time, screenwriter John Logan (includes Gladiator, Hugo, and Skyfall) and Scorsese structure the film in a highly symmetrical fashion. When I’m ready for a twist and to enter into new scenarios and tensions, the filmmakers take me there. None of the film slugs along, nor does it leave sections too short that it feels rushed or confusing. 

Yet the acting is one of the brightest points of the film. With DiCaprio carrying the heavy mantle in his portrayal of Hughes, he succeeds with emotional believability and tragedy behind the character. And right when we enter into a new act, desiring something emotionally new or light, Cate Blanchett enters the scene as Katharine Hepburn! I think Blanchett is one of the best actors of my time without question, and it shows in The Aviator. Additionally, a stellar cast also brings us into the story, one that includes Kate Beckinsale, Ian Holm, John C. Reily, Alec Baldwin, Willem Dafoe, and Alan Alda, amongst others. 

DiCaprio is remarkable, especially as his character’s dealings with OCD worsen throughout the film. In our culture, we often hear or see psychological disorders thrown around flippantly or made lightly; not so with The Aviator. OCD is one where some today tease themselves as having in a self-deprecatory manner. Yet DiCaprio’s character displays the extreme of where OCD can lead someone: tragically into despair and isolation (like other disorders). 

On a lighter note, one can see Scorsese’s influence come through the film. For example, in one scene, Hughes argues for the approval of one of his films by the Motion Picture Association. Such a scene may remind one of Scorsese’s investment and passion he has for film preservation and the boundaries filmmakers strive to break when producing their films. 

The Aviator is a great biopic about a highly ambitious, yet also troubled figure in Howard Hughes. Though personally I struggled to find a thematic thread that wove throughout the film, aside from the clichéd tropes, “ambition is evil” or “success comes at a price,” the film is remarkable for its cinematic style that takes place during Hollywood’s Golden Age, the ensemble cast, and Scorsese’s direction. The Aviator is must-see Netflix material for those interested in a rich biography, albeit its long runtime. 

Zimm Score: 7.5/10 

Growing up, and in my recollection, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) was one of the most watched movies my brothers and I saw as kids. I recall trying to reenact the lines from the quirky, older intellectuals in the movie when I got to school with friends. Yet one iconic film I didn’t grow up with as much was its original predecessor, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Now having seen it multiple times, and with it streaming on Netflix, in this post I’ll be reviewing the action/adventure blockbuster as part of my reviews of award-winning films over the next month. 

After being told that the Nazis have discovered the possible location of the Ark of the Covenant, a snake-fearing college professor of archaeology decides to leave the country in search of it. But when he realizes there is a greater power at work after correctly locating the Ark, Dr. Indiana Jones (played by Harrison Ford) must learn to show humble respect to the God of the Hebrews. 

In my subjective judgment, Raiders of the Lost Ark tells a phenomenal story and is one of cinema’s all-time greats. Blending the now acclaimed talents of director Steven Spielberg, author George Lucas, screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan, composer John Williams, and actor Harrison Ford, the movie at the time hit on so many levels, and still does today. All of these contributions, along with the vast remainder of contributors not mentioned, harmonize to form a movie that yields humor, fun, action, adventure, religious themes and thought-provoking questions, and suspense. 

Each and every scene contains a character with a specific intention, which is always met with conflict. Though clearly an action/adventure movie, even in scenes with dialogue between Indy and his former lover, Marion (played by Karen Allen) or other characters, there is always tension that moves us along. Additionally, scenes are edited down so acutely that one scene quickly jumps into the next, as perhaps one would expect for a movie in this genre. 

I was also reminded early in the film of John Williams’s musical work. Well into his career as a film composer by the early eighties, Williams adds a strong level of suspense through his score to many scenes, especially in the opening sequence where we are introduced to our hero. If anything, I wanted the main theme to break out even more so, instead of getting the full thing in the closing credits!

Raiders of the Lost Ark is one cinematic achievement, not only for Steven Spielberg’s career as a director, but for cinema in general. The brilliant innovation of George Lucas and the masterful supervision of Spielberg allows those of us with a Netflix subscription to catch a must-see movie. In light of some of my recent posts on far more lackluster flicks and mediocre films across Netflix in general, this is one I highly suggest, all the more so to those who may have missed this absorbing adventure. 

Zimm Score: 9/10 

As we are at the center of the movie awards season, and with the recent announcement of the nominees for the 91st Academy Awards, in this post I’ll be reviewing one award-winning film from the sixties, streaming on Netflix. Doctor Zhivago, an epic romantic drama of over three hours, won five Oscars in 1966, most of which were in the categories of craft. Seen as one of the greats from the sixties, let’s review what this elder Millennial dude thought of the movie, now streaming on Netflix! 

After witnessing the disruption of a peaceful demonstration by a Russian cavalry, a young physician is later drafted during World War I, becoming a battlefield doctor. But when he falls in love with a nurse during the war while his wife is home and away, Dr. Yuri Zhivago (played by Omar Sharif) must come to terms with what it means to play with fire. 

Doctor Zhivago is a very long movie. If you’re not willing to sit through a 193 minute (3 hours and 13 minutes) movie, be warned. Additionally, and depending on one’s take, it has either a downer ending or perhaps a bittersweet one. Within those 193 minutes, however, the movie has some great artistic achievements. Cinematography from Freddie Young and production design by John Box clearly are the standouts. From sweeping shots of snow-capped mountains (ironically shot in Spain) to meticulous set pieces, to upscale costume design, hair and makeup, placing Doctor Zhivago as an epic is not problematic in the slightest. 

Yet the greatest strength to the film is also where it suffers. When we linger on a beautiful backdrop or set piece as a character merely walks through the shot, there appears to be a lack of motion throughout the movie. I’m watching a “motion picture,” and yet I almost viewed Doctor Zhivago for three hours as though I was looking at picturesque stills at a museum and not a moving, driven film. Better direction and more emphasis on film editing in the post-production phase may have benefitted Zhivago in making it speed along a bit more like the train the characters are on halfway through the film. 

In the acting department, Omar Sharif (Zhivago) and Julie Christie (Lara Antipova) give solid performances throughout the romantic drama. Outside of these two leads, however, the acting by many of the one and done characters really bring the film down. Although Alec Guinness as a KGB general and Rod Steiger give solid supporting performances, we don’t see a whole lot of them throughout the story. Instead and unfortunately, many of the one-scene characters that the leads encounter perform on a level that is simply distracting. 

Doctor Zhivago is one I would recommend on Netflix, if for no other reason than its sheer visual ambition and as being seen as one of the great epics of the sixties, if not of all time. Because of some scenes that may seem to some as frozen as the snowy homes that Zhivago resides in, however, pacing may prove problematic for others. In the end, Doctor Zhivago offers some great lead actors with great artistic delight throughout. Just don’t anticipate the suspense or thrill of the Imperial Russian Army breathing down your neck in this epic romantic drama. 

Zimm Score: 6.8/10