Blonde (2022) Review

Time: 167 minutes
Age Rating:
Cast:
Ana de Armas as Norma Jeane Mortenson/Marilyn Monroe
Adrien Brody as The Playwright, Arthur Miller
Bobby Cannavale as Ex-Athlete, Joe DiMaggio
Xavier Samuel as Cass Chaplin
Julianne Nicholson as Gladys Pearl Baker
Director: Andrew Dominik

A look at the rise to fame and the epic demise of actress Marilyn Monroe, one of the biggest stars in the world.

I distinctly remember the lead up to Blonde’s release. The idea was certainly intriguing, Ana de Armas was cast as Marilyn Monroe, and it would be directed by Andrew Dominik, who made The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford, Chopper, and Killing Them Softly, and this would be his first movie in 10 years. Not only that, but the source material it was based on seemed to indicate that it would be a very different and unconventional biopic. Then the controversy started, from the spread of awareness about the highly questionable source material which was a fictional take on Marilyn Monroe, to the announcement of it getting an NC-17 rating, to the eventual polarizing reactions of the movie itself. I admit that the very strong reactions caused me to put off my viewing of the film. However, with de Armas being nominated for her performance, I decided I might as well check it out. Unsurprisingly, I ended up being very conflicted about Blonde.

I should clarify first of all that I don’t know much about Marilyn Monroe, nor have I seen any of her movies. I think it’s fair on Blonde’s part to acknowledge that it isn’t meant to be a straight up Marilyn Monroe biopic. It is an adaptation of the book, which is itself a fictional take on the icon. While I can sort of get what Andrew Dominik was going for here, perhaps it would’ve been better to have a fictional character based on Marilyn Monroe instead. I understand that focussing it on such an icon would be more impactful for people, but there would’ve been more freedom to tell the story he wanted instead of having to tie it in with true events. As I said, there is a lot of controversy over the way that Marilyn Monroe is presented, mainly with it having her being subjected to abuse and more. Even as someone who doesn’t know much about Monroe, I get the impression that some people don’t want to be confronted with any tragedies that she went through, at least not without an optimistic or upbeat end to it. Even if some of the more extreme content was toned down, people wouldn’t take too kindly to this sort of story for her because it doesn’t reassure them that everything is okay. That being said, it’s still on the creators to handle these topics and events with a degree of care and delicacy, and sadly I have to say that some of the scenes border on exploitation for me. It’s not a full on sensory overload of bad stuff happening, but it is very drawn out. There are sex scenes and nudity but considering the controversy, it wasn’t nearly as bad as I thought it would be (although the uses of them do come across as weirdly prominent). It’s just that there are a few key scenes that are somewhat problematic. The rape scenes are very mishandled, a moment in the third act particularly signalled that I was about to check out of the movie entirely. There’s a scene that particularly garnered criticism for being potentially anti-abortion, with the inclusion of a CGI fetus talking to Marilyn Monroe. Even if it was to convey a feeling of guilt, it was misguided at best. The last hour is where the movie really leaned into just making everything worse for Mariilyn Monroe, and that’s where my tolerance wavered. I had has a reveal that twists the knife further, and it turned me off the last minutes of the film entirely. So as someone who doesn’t know much about her, it isn’t exactly a flattering portrayal. If you’re a fan of her in some capacity, I imagine that this would be very difficult to watch.

That being said, I had heard lots of these criticisms before going in. So I decided to try to view this version of Norma Jeane/Marilyn Monroe as if she was a fictional character. I do see what Andrew Dominik is going for with Blonde, he’s going for a tragic portrait of a rising and falling star, of someone that Hollywood and everyone used, abused and spit right now. We first see Norma Jeane in her childhood and it highlighted things which would stick with her throughout the rest of her life. Then when it jumps from childhood to adulthood, it’s very startling and strange. Her rise to fame is jarringly fast, and it feels like it skipped past some critical moments and details. There are multiple threads relating to Norma which Dominik goes for, but there is a real lack of depth and it feels very shallow. The approach to these aspects are very obvious, and that continues to the dialogue too. It comes across as pretentious at points, especially when they state the obvious over and over again. One notable thread is how there is a difference between Norma Jeane the real person and Marilyn Monroe the star. It is conveyed by some very on the nose dialogue, for example, Norma talks to her mother about Marilyn Monroe rising in popularity and says “I guess there isn’t any Norma Jeane”. Blonde also emphasizes the way that men look at Marilyn, her relationships with men, and how men abuse and take advantage of her. By that it usually just has men treat her horribly and have more on the nose dialogue like “Am I meat to be delivered?” . Norma not knowing her father is a massive part of the movie, introduced at the start and carried through to the end. She is constantly searching for him and holds onto any little bit of hope that he’s still out there. Dominik also conveys this by having Monroe refer to her husbands as “Daddy” (and you’ll be hearing that word a lot in the movie). The repetitive and grim nature only makes the nearly 3 hour runtime unbearable and tedious. If it was cut down to 90 minutes, it wouldn’t be missing any key moments or details that would take away from the main points, because Dominik doesn’t give it that much depth.

There are some good performances, with standouts in the supporting cast being Bobby Cannavale and Adrien Brody, and they bring believability and nuance to their characters. However the star of the movie is Ana de Armas as Norma Jeane/Marilyn Monroe. The best thing I can say about de Armas is that she gives a very committed performance. She gives little glimpses of further humanity, and there are opportunities where she gets to shine. However, the script mostly calls for her to be fragile, to cry, and be abused. It really doesn’t help that her character isn’t fully formed. This brings me to the key problem with Blonde: it is hard to get a clear idea of the character. It paints Norma as a tragic figure, someone with traumas and who is abused by so many people. However, there is nothing else to say about her, there are only a couple times where she is shown to have any personal drive or motivations. Despite the movie being in her psyche for a few hours, I didn’t understand her beyond the surface level. There are moments which I can tell would’ve hit harder if I was right there with Marilyn, but we are distanced and disconnected from her. Other tragedies on film like Diana Spencer in Spencer (a fictional take on a real person) or Laura Palmer in Twin Peaks (a fictional character) gives their subjects a clearly defined character. Blonde does not do that with Norma Jeane/Marilyn Monroe.

Andrew Dominik directs Blonde, and he certainly has a unique vision for the film. It’s directed incredibly well on a visual level. The cinematography is stunning with some compelling imagery, and there are some interesting camera techniques. On the editing front, it does make some unique choices, the aspect ratio and colours change often, and there are some creative transitions. Dominik is also great at making scenes feel uneasy, with much of the movie having a very nightmarish and dreamlike feeling. This is only helped further by the excellent, melancholic, and haunting score from Nick Cave and Warren Ellis. That’s not to say that all the technical and directing choices were good. As said before, some of the handling of the sex and rape scenes were in bad taste, whether it be what it showed or how long they went for. Other stuff like the aforementioned CGI fetus imagery is terrible, even with context.

After reading all the negative takes on Blonde, I made a strong effort to meet the movie halfway. There are some good aspects; some of Andrew Dominik’s direction is at least interesting; the cinematography is stunning, and the score is amazing. Additionally the performances are solid, or at least committed. With that said, even if you were to remove the uncomfortable portrayal of Marilyn Monroe, I don’t think Dominik’s take on this story succeeded. It lacks the depth and nuance that it sorely needed, and while I tried to not focus on it too much in the review, the feeling that its subject was being exploited really doesn’t help matters. I’m not really sure that I could recommend it, but I guess if you know what you’re going into, maybe it’s worth checking out. If you’re hoping for a Marilyn Monroe biopic though, Blonde is the last place you should look.

Advertisement

See How They Run (2022) Review

Time: 98 Minutes
Age Rating: Violence
Cast:
Sam Rockwell as Inspector Stoppard
Saoirse Ronan as Constable Stalker
Adrien Brody as Leo Köpernick
Ruth Wilson as Petula Spencer
Reece Shearsmith as John Woolf
Harris Dickinson as Richard Attenborough
Charlie Cooper as Dennis Corrigan
David Oyelowo as Mervyn Cocker-Norris
Director: Tom George

In 1950s London, plans for a movie version of a smash-hit play come to an abrupt halt after a pivotal member of the crew is murdered. When a world-weary inspector and an eager rookie constable take on the case, they find themselves thrown into a puzzling whodunit within the glamorously sordid world of underground theater, investigating the mysterious homicide at their own peril.

I saw the trailers for See How They Run and I was initially interested in it. It appeared to be another comedy whodunit film and featured an excellent cast, including Sam Rockwell, Saoirse Ronan, Adrian Brody and more. I did end up enjoying it, but I understand the somewhat mixed reviews.

See How They Run definitely has potential from its premise. The plot focuses on a murder investigation set during a theatre adaptation of a whodunit, and it effectively works as a homage and parody of Agatha Christie’s whodunits. As such, it is very self-aware and references whodunnit tropes and typical stories of the genre. There’s plenty of witty and quirky dialogue, as well as some good humour here. It also benefits from a mostly easy-going and relaxed tone. Unfortunately, like most other parodies, when See How They Run points out cliches and tropes, it ends up using some of those same tropes. It’s a very self-satisfied and overly self-aware movie that does too much winking at the audience, so that could feel a bit grating. It is clear early on that from the writing and the style that it is going for a Wes Anderson feel, especially with the snappy dialogue and quirkiness. Unfortunately, it just feels like an imitation of his films and nothing more. Even the plot wasn’t the exactly the best. It is very formulaic albeit functional, and I wasn’t fully invested in the mystery. At 98 minutes, it was probably the right length for the film.

The two lead characters of the movie are played by Saoirse Ronan and Sam Rockwell, and they were a great comedic duo and have solid chemistry between them. Ronan is the standout; she was really funny and her performance added a lot to the movie. The film would be lacking a lot without her. Meanwhile, Rockwell feels like he wasn’t given much to do, and mostly works as a contrast to Ronan. On his own, outside of delivering deadpan humour, he was underwhelming and almost drags the movie down. It’s quite possible that he was just miscast here. The talented supporting cast is impressive, however there were only a few standouts like Adrien Brody, David Oyelowo and Shirley Anderson; Brody particularly was memorable in his screentime as the main murder victim. The rest of the cast including Ruth Wilson and Sian Clifford are good but aren’t utilized the best.

The direction from Tom George is generally solid. The cinematography is nice, and the outfits and production designs definitely take you back to the 1950s. The score from Daniel Pemberton is also great, among the best parts of the movie. Once again though, it feels like much of the film is trying to imitate Wes Anderson’s style (especially seen in the editing), but feels like a half hearted imitation. It’s trying to be quirky and offbeat but it felt hollow like its missing something.

See How They Run is a decent, quirky, and enjoyable whodunnit comedy, but I wish it was better than it actually was. The mystery was passable but wasn’t that riveting, the overt attempt at mimicking Wes Anderson in the writing and directing didn’t really work, and the underutilisation of most of the cast really hold it back from being as good as it could’ve been. But there’s some good parts. Some of the humour and meta nature of the writing works, the score from Daniel Pemberton is really good, and some of the performances shines, particularly Saoirse Ronan. As a whodunnit comedy, See How They Run may not be among the best (even in recent years), but it is at least fun to watch.

The French Dispatch (2021) Review

Time: 103 Minutes
Age Rating: Offensive language, nudity, drug use & sexual references
Cast:
Bill Murray as Arthur Howitzer Jr.
Owen Wilson as Herbsaint Sazerac
Tilda Swinton as J.K.L. Berensen
Benicio del Toro as Moses Rosenthaler
Adrien Brody as Julien Cadazio
Léa Seydoux as Simone
Frances McDormand as Lucinda Krementz
Timothée Chalamet as Zeffirelli
Lyna Khoudri as Juliette
Jeffrey Wright as Roebuck Wright
Mathieu Amalric as The Commissaire
Stephen Park as Lt. Nescaffier
Director: Wes Anderson

A love letter to journalists set in an outpost of an American newspaper in a fictional 20th-century French city that brings to life a collection of stories published in “The French Dispatch.”

At the New Zealand International Film Festival, I managed to secure tickets for three movies I wanted to see. The first was Wes Anderson’s The French Dispatch which I’ve been looking forward to. I had been interested in it from the cast, the trailer and of course Anderson directing, who has made a lot of movies I really liked. But I was especially looking forward to it after going through his whole filmography from beginning to end, and by the end I liked him even more as a director. So I was excited for The French Dispatch, and I thoroughly enjoyed it from beginning to end.

The French Dispatch’s plot is about a magazine with the same name, with the movie beginning with the death of the editor (played by Bill Murray). The story we follow is about the magazine, and the articles in it. As such, the film is essentially an anthology movie, made up of some short stories. With it being an anthology movie, it comes with the typical trappings. The tone changes with every section, and some sections are better than others. However, I liked them all. In a way it is his most messy and disjointed film, but it compliments his style. I do think that it’s a strong contender for his least accessible movie, I wouldn’t recommend this being your first Wes Anderson movie. As someone who has seen all his other movies, I really enjoyed it. It was very entertaining and delightful with some great humour. Each of his story very clearly has Anderson’s wit that we’ve come to expect from him, especially with the memorable dialogue. However it’s not only a very fun movie to watch, you really feel the passion behind it. Essentially, The French Dispatch is a love letter to journalists. I’ve seen some people say that this movie feels emotionally distant even by Wes Anderson’s standards, but I thoroughly disagree. There are some genuinely tender and heartfelt moments across the three stories. The anthology approach to the overall story made it feel like you are reading a book or magazine at times, which was for its benefit. All the stories are at the very least enjoyable to watch. There is an introduction segment following Owen Wilson, which is light hearted and fun to watch, definitely a good way to start the stories. The first of the main three stories follows Benicio Del Toro as an artist in a prison, and this is probably my favourite of three stories. The second of the stories is about a student protest, and stars Timothee Chalamet. I do like this story but its distinctly my least favourite of the three. I really didn’t know where it was going, and I don’t mean in a good way. The pacing is inconsistent across the film but this was the only case where it really started to weigh on the movie. The third of the stories follows Jeffrey Wright and its about a kidnapping. It was nearly my favourite of the three and it was a great story to end on.

The French Dispatch has an absurdly large cast, by far the largest cast that Wes Anderson has worked with. In terms of the main actors in the stories, the first story stars Benicio Del Toro, Lea Seydoux, Adrien Brody and Tilda Swinton, the second segment has Timothee Chalamet and Frances McDormand, and the third segment has Jeffrey Wright, Mathieu Amalric, and Stephen Chow. There’s also the head of the newspaper played by Bill Murray. The cast are all welcome to see and are fantastic in their parts, even though most of them are only here for brief appearances.

Wes Anderson is the director and you can clearly feel that throughout. In fact this film is so Wes Anderson you could almost call it a self parody. It’s his most unique movie and that’s really saying a lot, with some shots in this that aren’t anything like he’s done before. It is aesthetically pleasing with fantastic visuals. We’ve come to expect this from Wes but every time he somehow surprises. It flips certain shots from black and white to colour, it even shifts aspect ratio, and even changes between live action to animation. The Alexandre Desplat perfectly fits the movie and the overall tone.

This is the most Wes Anderson movie possible, and I’m not sure if everyone will like it. I think it’s definitely a contender for being one of the more divisive Anderson movies. However I really liked it. I loved the anthology approach with three distinct stories, with each having something to love about them. I loved the performances from the stacked cast (with Jeffrey Wright and Benicio Del Toro being among the highlights), and I loved the direction from Anderson. Definitely among my favourite films from 2021 thus far.

The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) Review

Time: 99 Minutes
Age Rating: Violence, offensive language, sexual references & nudity
Cast:
Ralph Fiennes as Monsieur Gustave H.
Tony Revolori as Zero Moustafa
F. Murray Abraham as Mr. Moustafa
Adrien Brody as Dmitri
Willem Dafoe as J. G. Jopling
Saoirse Ronan as Agatha
Tilda Swinton as Madame D.
Edward Norton as Albert Henckels
Mathieu Amalric as Serge X
Jeff Goldblum as Kovacs
Harvey Keitel as Ludwig
Tom Wilkinson as Author
Jude Law as the Young Writer
Bill Murray as M. Ivan
Jason Schwartzman as M. Jean
Léa Seydoux as Clotilde
Owen Wilson as M. Chuck
Director: Wes Anderson

Gustave H. (Ralph Fiennes), a concierge, is wrongly framed for murder at the Grand Budapest Hotel. In the process of proving his innocence, he befriends a lobby boy (Tony Revolori).

I remember The Grand Budapest Hotel as being one of the earlier movies I saw from Wes Anderson, and it was the first movie from him I watched in the cinema. I had previously seen Fantastic Mr Fox and Moonrise Kingdom and while I liked them when I saw them for the first time, I wasn’t really into his work that much. I remember the experience in the cinema back in 2014 watching it because I found myself surprised at just how much I loved it. A rewatch upon watching all of Wes’s movies only confirms to me that it is his best, an unbelievably delightful and charming movie that entertains from beginning to end.

The Grand Budapest Hotel’s screenplay is again written by Wes Anderson, and I have to say that it has to be one of his most polished and complete works, if not his most. This movie is one of the select number of films which I can say I found genuinely enthralling. Wes Anderson’s strongest movies with the likes of The Royal Tenenbaums and Rushmore had me interested generally throughout. However, The Grand Budapest Hotel had me invested from beginning to end and was endlessly entertaining. The movie feels completely original, and the story is heartfelt and endearing, features quirky and entertaining characters, and some unique and hilarious comedy. The dialogue was great, quick witted and memorable, and it’s perfectly paced across its 100 minute runtime. The plot itself is intricate but never confusing, and is also the largest scale movie from Wes Anderson. The Grand Budapest Hotel really gives you a sense of adventure and escapism, while also having melancholic and darker qualities and themes that you don’t expect at first.

Wes Anderson is known for his massive and talented ensemble cast, but this may well be his biggest cast to date, and that’s saying a lot. Ralph Fiennes as Gustave H. gives not only one of his best performances of his career, but one of the best performances from a Wes Anderson movie. He’s charismatic, his line delivery is absolutely perfect, he really does handle the dry humour perfectly and fully portrays his well written and memorable character. Tony Revolori is also one of the leads and shouldn’t be overlooked, he’s really great too and shares great on screen chemistry with Fiennes. There was quite a supporting cast including Willem Dafoe, Jeff Goldblum, Adrien Brody, Saoirse Ronan, Edward Norton, Tilda Swinton, F. Murray Abraham, Harvey Keitel, Tom Wilkinson, Jude Law, Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, Mathieu Amalric, Lea Seydoux and Owen Wilson. Everyone is great in their parts and make themselves stand out in their respective scenes, even if they are in just 1 or 2 scenes.

Wes Anderson’s direction is phenomenal, even when compared to all his past work. His style is instantly recognisable once the movie begins. The cinematography is beautiful and vibrant. It is said with some movies that every shot could be framed as a painting, The Grand Budapest Hotel is one of those movies. The changing of the aspect ratios was also effective, moving to 4:3 for most of the film. The production design and costume design were outstanding too. The score by Alexandre Desplat is unique and amazing, and it really fits perfectly with the rest of the movie.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is an enthralling and delightful adventure, perfectly written and directed by Wes Anderson, and features an outstanding ensemble of great performances. It’s like he took everything great from his past movies and put it all in here with this one. Having gone through his entire filmography, I can say with confidence that this may well be his magnum opus. It is also firmly one of my favourite movies, especially from the 2010s. It’s an essential watch for sure, and also a great place to start with Wes Anderson if you haven’t seen any of his movies before.

The Darjeeling Limited (2007) Review

Time: 91 Minutes
Age Rating: Offensive Language & Sexual References
Cast:
Owen Wilson as Francis
Adrien Brody as Peter
Jason Schwartzman as Jack
Director: Wes Anderson

After the death of their father, three brothers (Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody and Jason Schwartzman) set out on a train journey across India, in an attempt to rediscover their lost bond. The experiences that they have force them to introspect.

Of the movies from Wes Anderson that I hadn’t watched, this is the one I knew the least about. Apparently it was something like a trip movie and I recognised the main actors but that was it. Having seen it, I can say that it is one of his oddest movies, not in the sense that it’s weird and does odd things like The Life Aquatic of Steve Zissou, but in the sense that I don’t really know what to feel about it. I do like the movie, it is well made and I think it is pretty good. However it didn’t really stick with me as I was hoping it would.

The Darjeeling Limited is by far Wes Anderson’s simplest movie, and it is very short at 90 minutes long. However I can’t help but admit that I found it to be a bit bland in large portions. I wouldn’t say that it ever got to the point where I was outright bored, I was paying attention throughout, but my interest wasn’t exactly consistent and I got quite close to being bored. The movie is a lot more smaller scale (especially considering Anderson’s last film with The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou) despite how far these characters travel, and it is his most grounded movie since Bottle Rocket, his debut back in the 90s. It was heartwarming in parts, and there are for sure some particularly strong parts. The film at its core is an introspective exploration of grief, it is just this trio of brothers going from place to place across India with a lot of baggage (both literal and figurative). There’s quirky dialogue, as to be expected from his movies, there was some comedy though there wasn’t a lot of it in this movie, or at least it never got hilarious or anything. The story and some parts of the writing I found to be lacking and was probably the weakest part unfortunately, I can’t entirely pin down what didn’t work for me. I can say however that it can feel a bit tonally unbalanced. There is a certain scene involving a river, which was very effective, however the abruptness of the tonal shift was jarring to say the least. I can’t tell if the tonal shift is the reason why, but a while after that moment, that’s when the film started to fizzle out for me, even though I was still on board with it.

This is probably the first Wes Anderson movie since Rushmore where it doesn’t have a huge ensemble cast, even with the inclusion of Bill Murray in a brief cameo. The main trio are Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody and Jason Schwartzman, and they do very well on their parts, they are the strongest parts of the movie. The film quickly establishes these characters at the beginning of the movie, and the actors have very believable chemistry, and they are really convincing as brothers. I didn’t really connect with the characters but the performances were really good, Wilson particularly gives one of his best work here.

Wes Anderson directs the movie very well, and the stylistic aspects that you would except from him are definitely here. Everything with the visuals is great, the cinematography by Robert Yeoman is a stunning, the use of colour was really good, and the production design is very well detailed. Additionally, the music choices were good too, and fitted the moments well.

The Darjeeling Limited didn’t completely work for me, I wasn’t invested with the story as much as I wanted to be, and I just don’t see myself getting more out of it through rewatches. I don’t dislike it by any means, I actually still think it’s pretty good. The direction by Wes Anderson is top notch as to be expected, it has some strong moments, and the lead actors in Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody and Jason Schwartzman are very good. It is still worth checking out for yourself, though if you’re not a fan of Wes Anderson, you’ll probably not like this one.

The Brothers Bloom (2008) Review

Time: 114 Minutes
Age Rating:
Cast:
Mark Ruffalo as Stephen Bloom
Rachel Weisz as Penelope Stamp
Adrien Brody as Bloom Bloom
Rinko Kikuchi as Bang Bang
Maximilian Schell as Diamond Dog
Robbie Coltrane as Maximillen “The Curator” Melvile
Director: Rian Johnson

Twenty-five years of swindling people are too much for Bloom (Adrien Brody) and he wants out of the business. His brother, Stephen (Mark Ruffalo), convinces him to work on one final hustle, targeting an eccentric East Coast heiress named Penelope (Rachel Weisz). The con game fails to play out as planned when Bloom falls in love with the irresistible woman.

The thing that got me most interested in The Brothers Bloom was the fact that it’s directed by Rian Johnson. Then I heard the likes of Adrien Brody, Mark Ruffalo and Rachel Weisz were in the cast, and that interested me even more. I actually knew very little about what the movie was even about before going in, so I wasn’t sure what to expect. Even though it’s not at the level of Johnson’s other movies, I still enjoyed The Brothers Bloom considerably.

Movies about conmen have been done before, but The Brothers Bloom is a lighthearted and quirky comedy for the most part, and it’s rather original and entertaining. The movie does have a lot of twists, and I think most of them worked well. Looking back at the plot itself, it seems to be going all over the place at times, there were some periods where I wasn’t quite following along with the story. There were also a few scenes where nothing much seemed to be happening. At times it stopped feeling that fresh and reverted back to scenes typically seen in most conman/heist movies. However, even then I still had a good time watching these characters, they’re generally what makes this movie work so well. The Brothers Bloom mostly has a whimsical tone throughout, and at times some of the more emotional side of the characters and story isn’t shown quite as much as I think it should’ve, even though they do display that in the first two acts. The movie only really starts to get serious towards the end and it’s a rather sudden and dramatic turn in tone. I feel like if the movie had a tone that was a blend of the lighter and serious tones throughout, I think it would’ve been worked a little better. With that said, Rian does deliver on the emotional side in the third act, and the endings for each character were very fitting, without spoiling anything.

Adrien Brody and Mark Ruffalo are great as two brothers who are conmen who are distinctly different from each other, they share some great chemistry. The two of them are in a con group with Rinko Kikuchi, who also gets some hilarious moments of her own despite not really having any lines of dialogue in the movie. However, it’s Rachel Weisz who’s really the standout of the cast, really lighting up the movie whenever she’s on screen. Even Robbie Coltrane gets to shine in his brief scenes.

Rian Johnson directs this movie very well, it’s a distinctly different movie from Brick, and that definitely extends to the direction and look of everything. You can really tell that he gained a considerably higher budget and has progressed a lot since his debut movie. The Brothers Bloom is very stylistic and visually (especially with the colour pallet) at times resembled a Wes Anderson movie, and I do mean that in a good way.

The Brothers Bloom is probably the weakest movie from Rian Johnson but it’s still quite good for what it is, and it’s not bad having this as your worst movie. It’s quite colourful and entertaining, mostly smartly written, and the cast and memorable characters are great, with Rachel Weisz being a particular stand out. Definitely worth a watch.