Rai's Obscure Boundary

It starts off with a very tongue-in-cheek opening. I guess they thought they were being clever or cheeky or something. Want a cheeky joke? I called them Willy Bees. So the Willy Bees are born, and the parents make it absolutely clear (to babies who don’t have a proper grasp on the English language yet) that they are not wanted. Okay… This is all less than 2 minutes in mind you. What a fresh start… So we got the boy named Tim, his younger sister Jane, and a set of creepy twins named Barnaby… for both of them. I called Tim “Willy”, Jane “Bee”, and they’re accompanied by the Tinker Twins. Wait, so the parents love each other, they don’t want kids, yet have four kids for some reason? WOT?? Suspension of disbelief can only go so far. Yes, it’s a subpar opening, but is it rest of the movie good?

Ricky Gervais plays the narrator throughout the whole animation. His delivery is rather amusing, but it feels like I was watching a YouTube video where he critiques the movie as his character is “omniscient” for some reason. That’s an odd choice. Not bad, but not good either. But I’m game. Where is this going? There’s a lot of fast-paced animation and vibrant colours, memorable designs, and… autotune singing? It’s not autotune, but it definitely sounds like it. I wonder why there’s a huge emphasis on moustaches though. Is a tash some sort of status symbol in this peculiar universe? I think it is.

BEAR BEAR! Oh, and there is reference humour. Some references work, others rely on other IPs. Obviously, I hate the latter as it REQUIRES you to be familiar with another property just to understand the joke. The main character, Willy, is very annoying. A lot of unfunny jokes and he keeps saying “what the Willoughby” for some reason. Is this like a forced meme attempt? The second act now, and it’s… Home Alone? Yeah, some of the stunts are highly reminiscent of Home Alone for some reason. Even some things are exactly lifted from there. We’re treated to more passable acting with some good performances, notably from Terry Crews. There are some stand-out designs. Even though it was predictable, it went in a slightly different direction. It was slightly above mediocre as that point… but then, the third act begins. This is one of the worst acts in the movie.

What do we have? Liar Revealed. Trying to hammer in the forced meme attempt. Things happen with no logic behind it except it’s convenient for the script. Unfunny (and slightly inappropriate) jokes. “You’re one of THEM!” I won’t spoil, but much of the third act is dedicated to literally reversing a big decision done in the first act. So… movie did not have to happen? I’ve been very negative in this review, but there are some standout features. Some of the voice acting is good. The animation is above average and rather creative. It’s very vibrant with its use of colour. The soundtrack, though serviceable, leans towards the positive end. However, by the end of it, it felt like a complete waste of time. The characters learned nothing. No one is truly dynamic. There’s only one slightly good scene near the end… with subpar execution though. It feels tacked-on and rather forced. Obviously, I didn’t really like this movie. There are some things I liked though. At the end of the day, it’s not a bad movie. Not a particularly good one either, so 5/10.

A sports movie from Happy Madison Productions… what could possibly go wrong? After watching it, I went, “Well, this was a pleasant surprise…” There are certainly some tropes, like the subpar opening featuring the barrage of product placement for some reason, the sequences where the character improves using “montage power”, a forced Liar Revealed scene, but at least there are no unfunny jokes and fart jokes this time around. It was a rather wholesome experience with good performances, decent camerawork, good soundtrack (though it’s teetering on the “music to tell the audience what they should be feeling” trope), and decent choreography. This is coming from someone who doesn’t really care about basketball too. It’s a bit strange to see football/soccer jokes (they interchange between American and European English) in a movie that primarily centres around basketball. There are even some scenes that are told in a different language altogether. But long story short, it’s definitely a breath of fresh air, still a mediocre movie, but just a few decimal points that round the total score to a 6 in my opinion.

Context

I love talking about movies. Of course, this leads to comparison of favourite movies. When I name I’m Thinking of Ending Things as one of my favourite movies (and my personal pick for my top favourite in 2020), I get a lot of strange reactions. A LOT of people didn’t understand it. Its purpose is to almost alienate viewers (on purpose). I can easily explain why, but it will delve into spoilers obviously. If you don’t want that, then just know it’s one of my rare 10/10 ratings. It may come as a surprise, but I have more positive ratings on my Letterboxd than negative ones, a bit more than 54% to be precise. I just find it easier to talk about movies negatively without spoiling. I don’t want to readily talk about The Lighthouse (2019) without mentioning why viewers would walk out with a very different interpretation of events (which works to its benefit obviously). So here’s my take about I’m Thinking of Ending Things (2020).

Review (Spoilers)

The movie is about self-loathing, and even ends with suicide. The title itself is a double entendré: it’s framed as if it’s about a relationship ending, but it can also mean contemplating suicide. After watching it as many times as I had, it’s definitely the latter. I watched this again before this review, so the idea is fresh in my mind. By this time, around 6 times. At the very end of the movie, it is revealed that the entire movie takes place in this elderly janitor’s head. That can explain why a lot of elements seem very surreal despite the fact that there is a grounded foundation at times. The character portrayed by Jesse Plemons, Jake, is the same exact character as Guy Boyd’s character, the janitor. The movie itself is VERY confusing. A lot of elements are very bizarre, so it’s quite understandable it may alienate audiences. It’s somewhat unfortunate that it was marketed as a Netflix exclusive as the main targeted demographic for Netflix definitely will not find this to be accessible at all.

I read the book. The ending wasn’t my thing at all as it devolves into full horror (slasher at that point). I definitely don’t feel negatively towards one or the other, but the movie gave me more to chew on, definitely something to think about, giving it a sort of “open-to-interpretation” feel to it despite the fact it arrives at only one conclusion. To talk about the technical aspects, the movie is shot in 4:3 aspect ratio, which I personally admired. It is definitely a bit jarring given that the majority of Netflix original titles have been shot in 16:9 or 21:9. What is admirable, to me at least, is how they were able to communicate the information in a limited space. There were some great dreamlike shots, really great framing, amazing shot and scene composition, but what really steals it for me is the story.

The story is rather frustrating, openly retcons its own continuity (the janitor is obviously experimenting with what would be the most optimal way to tell the story), there is an IMMENSE amount of self-loathing, all the characters are literally extensions of Jake (the janitor, Guy Boyd), and the framing is purposefully very uncomfortable and nightmarish at times. Like I said, there are a lot of different elements in play, even comedic elements like Toni Collette’s over-the-top performance and the jab at Robert Zemeckis. For me, it definitely suited as the main characters (younger version of Jake and the girl) commonly talk about media in general. As for the former, I mentioned that the characters are extensions of Jake (or in Toni Collette’s case, an exaggerated memory of the character). Also, they did get permission from Robert Zemeckis. He was thanked as well in the credits.

I mentioned that there are a lot of references to media earlier. I’m known to hate reference humour as it definitely relies on the viewer’s knowledge on another property. But here, it’s more like an added bonus if you know it. When I first watched this movie, I didn’t watch A Woman Under the Influence (1975). Later, I did. I rewatched this movie afterwards, and I discerned that it didn’t detract or benefit me at all. My experience during that scene was the exact same as my experience before I watched the other movie. It was an added bonus to know it, but the ultimate summary of that is that the characters are knowledgeable about media in general and “enjoy” discussing ideas with each other, making way for great “chemistry”. During my second watch, I realised that they’re simply avatars of Jake just bouncing ideas around. There are a lot of hints that both characters, young Jake and the girl, are the same as well. I say the girl because Jake literally changes her backstory several times throughout the movie. She doesn’t have one set name. At one point, she’s a physicist. She’s an artist in another scene. Again, Jake is clearly experimenting with what would be the most optimal way to tell the story.

About the pacing, nothing feels wasted in this film at all. There doesn’t seem to be a single filler element. Literally every scene can be broken down. Again, I’m not saying the book is inferior. Iain Reid, the author of I’m Thinking of Ending Things (2016), was involved in the 2020 production. I just thought the book had a very blunt ending whereas the movie had a very interpretive ending. When it comes to the movie, I really liked the use of music. It evokes this unsettling feeling in the first half which really set the tone, especially since the movie is going for a somewhat psychological horror type of feeling. The makeup looked fantastic. It was very appropriate that they went all the way with the old age makeup in one part of the movie (even down to the teeth, and the acting complimented it very well) and made it look intentionally fake in another part of the movie to give a contrast.

“There’s only one question to resolve. I’m scared. I feel a little crazy. I’m not lucid. The assumptions are right. I can feel my fear growing. Now is the time for the answer. Just one question. One question to answer.” Obviously, this movie is meant to be watched multiple times, at least twice. I was definitely confused during my first viewing, but I got a lot more out of it during a second watch. The other viewings were just because I enjoyed the movie. However, this is such a heavy movie, one of the most soul-crushing experiences I ever watched. I actually had to loudly exhale with a “HOO!” when the credits began rolling during my second watch, no exaggeration. This is mainly due to the fact it deals with a lot of themes, being an existential drama on top of psychological horror. When I first watched it, I was torn between a 7 or an 8. I had more questions over time, so I watched it again, and that action made it a 10/10 experience for me.