WHERE TO LAND

Please don’t treat this like a traditional review. I am a big Hal Hartley fan and pretty biased. Much like his last feature film; Ned Rifle, the band has gotten back together again on a slightly smaller scale. Ned Rifle featured almost every Hal Hartley stock actor from every era of his filmmaking. This time around the movie stars all of his “day ones”: Robert John Burke, Bill Sage and Edie Falco (non-day one Hartley regular Dwight Ewell also makes an appearance). Even the score, done by Hartley himself, is reminiscent of early stuff like Unbelievable Truth and Trust. Just off of those aspects alone, I am very nostalgic. It’s difficult for me to shake all the underlying history associated with Hartley’s latest film (again - do not take this as a traditional review).

Where To Land is extremely meta to Hartley’s life. I know filmmakers don’t always like when critics or analysts forcibly connect events in a movie to their personal life but the story is about a once popular aging semi-retired filmmaker of romantic comedies who’s having a midlife crisis. He doesn’t have any children and is unmarried. He’s drawing up a last will and testament and suddenly wants to stop filmmaking all together and work as a groundskeeper (he develops a fascination with cemeteries). He also may or may not be the biological father to an aspiring young film writer. Because of all these recent changes in his life, everyone around him mistakenly assumes he’s going to die soon when in fact he’s just making arrangements for later in life and is looking to do something new.

I can’t speak to Hal Hartley having a mid-life crisis because I don’t know him, but he is a filmmaker who’s output isn’t as steady as it used to be. He doesn’t have any children and while his movies are considered “art house” or “indie”, they are in fact romantic. Love and romantic relationships are a major part of almost every film he’s made over the last 40 years. 

Speaking of “arthouse” - Hartley makes sure to portray his cinematic-self as a down to earth “every man” instead of a pretentious cigarette smoking artsy filmmaker that dresses in all black. I’m not saying that’s an accurate description of art house filmmakers, but from Bergman to Godard, there’s this basic American SNL/Simpsons stereotype of the depressed artsy filmmaker. Of what little I know about Hartley outside of filmmaking, he’s a very nice guy that’s down to earth (he is from the working class neighborhood of Lindenhurst, Long Island).

Hartley even throws in a self-referencing easter egg. How else am I supposed to take this??

Where To Land

Bill Sage 30 years apart in similar scenes/moments in Hartley's Flirt and Amateur...

Flirt / Where To Land

Not only is Flirt (1995) one of his most romantic films, but it’s also the film he’s most proud of (he said this years ago in an interview for the AVclub).


Another interesting Easter egg is Hartley’s ongoing nod to Godard. After almost 40 years it could be seen as lazy to keep comparing Hartley to Godard, but he certainly goes out of his way to reference or namedrop Godard in his work…

Where To Land

Hartley referencing Godard over the years...

Alphaville / The Book Of Life

Alphaville / The Book Of Life

Oh, Woe Is Me / Henry Fool

First Name Carmen / Simple Men

First Name Carmen / No Such Thing

Band Of Outsiders / Amateur

It’s common for filmmakers to have one of their regular actors play them in their own movie. Both Harvey Keitel and Matthew Modine have played iterations of Abel Ferrara. Denis Lavant has played slightly fictitious versions of Leos Carax throughout their 40 year actor/director relationship. This time around, Bill Sage plays a slightly fictitious version of Hal Hartley. Who better to play "Hartley" than his most regularly used actor?


This isn’t a movie that you just stumble upon. You’re either a Hal Hartley fan like myself that sought this out, or a film critic/writer that covers independent cinema. At this point, Hartley is an American independent film legend so his features will always gain attention from specific publications and journals (this is his first feature in over a decade).
I know this is a contradiction but Where To Land is one of my favorite films of the year but I would only recommend it to other Hal Hartley fans or folks that are in to interesting independent/art films outside of movies that might play at an AMC.

On a personal note, as someone who questioned their morality a lot this year (due to serious health issues which have now been dealt with) and was constantly surrounded by loved ones - it hits close to home when one of my personal favorite directors makes a film dealing with the same stuff.

THE SCHOOL OF DAVID LYNCH: THE CHAIR COMPANY *UPDATED*

Lost Highway / The Chair Company

If you read this blog regularly then you know I hate the term “Lynchian” or when any recent movie/tv show/online skit/whatever gets compared to the work of David Lynch. I’m saying this as a fan of his work. It’s not just that the comparisons are usually bad, but it always gets whittled down and simplified to something “weird” or “goofy”. I don’t deny that there are in fact weird and/or goofy moments in Lynch’s work or that he played a part in his own memefication, but there’s so much more to what he does. There is some thought and a lot of craft that went in to his films but it always gets over simplified to something random or surreal as if David Lynch is the only filmmaker to ever explore surreality. He’s not. And the more people call something “Lynchian”, the more I’m convinced they don’t actually pay attention to his movies and only go off of out of context clips they see on Twitter, TikTok, YouTube and Instagram.

Recently I’ve seen a lot of people compare Tim Robinson’s The Chair Company to the films of David Lynch and I blindly protested against it in a very overly protective way on behalf of one of my favorite filmmakers. It’s not even that I dislike The Chair Company. I’m enjoying it so far. I love just about anything that Tim Robinson does even if I do feel the Tim Robinson fatigue slowly approaching. But comparing a comedy or anything that can be easily memefied to Lynch’s work always feels cheap to me.

But I went back and rewatched episodes of the Chair Company and now I’m starting to rethink my stance.

Wild At Heart / The Chair Company

 

The overall plot of the show isn’t really something David Lynch has explored, but isolated moments and sequences are starting to feel quite Lynch-esque.

I’ve compiled some visual comparisons below that I’ll be adding on to as The Chair Company isn’t finished yet. But for now I’d like to apologize for my cynicism and pushback. Maybe in this one particular case, the Lynch comparison actually makes sense… 

Lost Highway / The Chair Company

Lost Highway / The Chair Company

Lost Highway / The Chair Company

Lost Highway / The Chair Company

Twin Peaks / The Chair Company

Inland Empire / The Chair Company

Twin Peaks / The Chair Company

Twin Peaks / The Chair Company

Twin Peaks / The Chair Company

Inland Empire / The Chair Company

Mulholland Drive / The Chair Company

Lost Highway / The Chair Company

Blue Velvet / The Chair Company

Mulholland Drive / The Chair Company

Blue Velvet / The Chair Company

THE WOMAN IN THE YARD

I don’t think it’s any mystery that Jordan Peele’s influence has a grip on modern day Black-centered horror films and television. And for those that don’t know what I’m talking about or want to play dumb, just look at the last few years alone: Lovecraft Country, Them, Ma, Queen & Slim, Run Sweetheart Run, Opus, The Front Room, Tyrell, Master, Alice, Tales From The Hood Part 2 and more. Whether you like it or not - all these movies have Get Out’s DNA in them in one way or multiple ways.
And to be clear - it’s more than just “scary stories with Black people in them”. All of these movies are some variation of “watch out for the white boogeymen/boggeywomen”. Even Sinners sort of falls in to that category/genre of film. I have a personal issue with this because it’s like Black films can’t exist without white people haunting us. I don’t need a history lesson on the relationship between Black and white people in this country either. I get it. Trust me. I’m a large young Black male. I’ve experienced plenty discrimination and racism. But these days so much of our identity is tied to being scared of white people. I just think that gets a little tiring. And in an abstract kind of way, it’s reverting back to the bugged sweaty Black caricature from old Hollywood who’s always scared of something…

(I’m a little conflicted using this image of Stepin Fetchit because he was a talented man that absolutely paved the way for Black actors of today and often doesn’t get his recognition because he played a part in stereotyping Black people on film)


I thought The Woman In Yard was fine at best. More importantly, it served as a sign that perhaps we’re sort of moving in the right direction. It certainly has elements of Jordan Peele in the story but this time it isn’t some variation of Get Out. It’s more in line with US. Jordan Peele’s sophomore feature didn’t have the same impact as Get Out but it’s still part of the modern day Black film canon. It’s been memefied, parodied and referenced in pop culture in more ways than one. The story of The Woman In The Yard is pretty similar to US. A frightened family stays inside of a house due to a boogeyman/woman making their presence known on the outside. US is hardly the first movie with this basic premise. It’s the fact that US and The Woman In Yard are grief-heavy Black-centered horror stories where the mother is keeping a major secret from the rest of her family which is the reason they are being terrorized. I think it’s pretty hard to deny the similarities even on a surface level.

US / The Woman In The Yard

There are major differences. US is more fun and entertaining with jump scares and needle drops while The Woman In The Yard really plays up the grief and depression angle. *Spoiler alert* the movie is a very heavy-handed story about a grim reaper type figure trying to convince the mother to commit suicide after she accidentally caused the death of her husband.


US/Jordan Peele comparisons aside, my biggest gripe with this movie is that it could have been a short film. The first 10 minutes and the final 30 minutes could have been condensed to a 20 minute short film about grief, depression and loss with some cool references to german expressionist films...

Nosferatu / The Woman In The Yard

The film also sets up some interesting roadblocks/restrictions for the main character that don’t really go anywhere. The protagonist of the story is crippled and there’s no male presence to provide that stereotypical safety net of protection. Had this been a more straightforward horror film with those elements, it would have been more interesting to watch.


At the end of the day this a horror movie that isn’t some allegory about Black people being scared of white people so that’s a plus in my book. I need more of that.

NEVERMORE: THE RAVEN EFFECT

The idea of looking at professional wrestlers as artists is a tough sell even in 2025. There’s still a large faction of people that don’t even consider them athletes even when they’re literally doing athletic feats. So the idea of them being artists is still difficult to process for some. Believe it or not - there is a psychological element to wrestling both in front of and behind the camera. Filmed/televised matches and vignettes bring out all kinds of emotions in viewers. That’s an art whether you like it or not. Raven might not be as known to casual fans, but he is the epitome of a wrestling psychologist. He’s someone other wrestlers in the business would call a high IQ wrestler. Raven stands out from the likes of Hulk Hogan, The Rock, Ric Flair, Macho Man and more because his character/“gimmick” was a violent nihilist. The best single image to describe who and what Raven was is the image of him sitting in the corner of the ring with a scowl on his face. Typically, when wrestlers make their way to the ring they feed off of the audience and make their presence big. Raven was the opposite. He took his time to walk to the ring, he didn’t interact with the fans and intentionally sucked the energy out of the building. All of this is an art.

I know's it's somewhat lazy to look at a wrestling film through the lens of The Wrestler but there are real life events that happen even today that the film captures. Early on in the documentary we see a very uninterested Raven interacting with fans at a wrestling convention which is straight out of The Wrestler (this is sort of a reflection of the Raven character which has sort of become the real life persona of Scott Levy).

  

The Wrestler / Nevermore: The Raven Effect

Even with all the accessible information we have on professional wrestling today, Raven is often left out of the conversation of greatest ring psychologists or greatest cerebral wrestlers like Dean Malenko, Arn Anderson, Randy Orton and even Triple H. By not rightfully acknowledging Raven’s importance, it lessens his influence on the wrestling business. Nevermore delves in to the typical documentary stuff like archival footage, interviews from peers and delving in to the subject’s troubled upbringing, but the most important aspect of the film is Raven’s importance to the wrestling business and his insecurities around not being recognized enough. Before antagonistic antiheroes or likable bad guys like Steve Austin, CM Punk or Bret Hart in the late 90s, the Raven character was doing an iteration of that years before in ECW (eastern/extreme championship wrestling). Saying someone is ahead of their time is an overused compliment but it absolutely applies to Raven. Nevermore also doubles as a nice gateway in to the history of ECW and its influence on the wrestling business. By the mid 90s, wrestling was on a decline. The most exciting stuff was taking place in ECW. Not everyone could get it on television at the time making it easy for bigger companies to steal, copy and borrow from them without casual wrestling fans realizing it (I know hardcore wrestling fans don’t like to hear this but the casual fan is always considered the most important demographic to cater to). The idea of hardcore wrestling and using chairs and trash cans as excessive weapons in the ring was popularized by ECW and found its way in to the Attitude era of WWF/E and the NWO era of WCW. Obviously hardcore elements existed in wrestling prior to the 90s but ECW really innovated all of that (again - that’s an art). 

Undertaker’s crucifixion angle in the late 90s (right) came from Raven and ECW (left).

Steve Austin's beer drinking gimmick (right) came from Sandman in ECW (left)...

It is heavily speculated that Steve Austin (right) also got his finisher from ECW legend Mikey Whipwreck (left)...

The idea of total chaos in the ring being a weekly occurrence and not a special event came from ECW.

Successfully executing all of this on television and influencing others to imitate it is an art.


Thankfully this isn’t a WWE produced film so things aren’t hidden or sugarcoated to save face. Imagine a feature-length episode of Dark Side Of The Ring that takes its time to tell a somewhat lesser known but important story.

SISU *UPDATED*

Deleting Nazis is always a good thing. I think what draws so many of us to movies like Sisu is that we get to cheer on grotesque over-the-top violence because Nazis are on the receiving end of it. That was certainly one of the reasons I watched it. Violence against murderous racist nationalists wasn’t the only reason but it was certainly thee biggest selling point. As “gritty” and violent as this movie is, it’s still very cartoonish and intentionally silly. It isn’t rooted in reality. Outside of the basic plot involving a retired mercenary/gold prospector murdering Nazis that are trying to steal his gold, this movie owes a lot to the western genre which is also rooted in fantasy.

If you aren't a fan of movies with lots of references & homages then this may not be for you. The references aren't as obvious as a Tarantino or Robert Rodriguez movie, but there are still plenty...

The biggest influences style-wise were a lot of old Western movies - Jalmari Helander, loudandclearreviews.com

Stagecoach / Sisu


Stagecoach / Sisu

Hang 'Em High / Sisu

Sisu also owes a lot to First Blood...

I could talk a whole day about this. What First Blood did to me when / was 10 years old basically changed my life - Jalmari Helander, Collider.com

First Blood / Sisu

First Blood / Sisu

While There will Be Blood isn’t a gun-slinging cowboy movie, it is technically a western that’s about striking it rich much like Sisu...

There Will be Blood / Sisu

Even western-influenced films like the Mad Max saga seems to have rubbed off on Sisu. This could, and probably is, coincidental but the similarities are still there...

You could argue Mad Max is a western with wheels - George Miller, cinemadaily

Mad Max: Fury Road / Sisu

Mad Max: Fury Road / Sisu

Mad Max: Fury Road / Sisu

Mad Max: Fury Road / Sisu

The Road Warrior / Sisu

This is a movie that many have jumped to compare to Inglorious Basterds. I get it. On the most surface of levels these are two movies set during World War II that use the same loophole where we’re allowed to cheer on violence & murder because it’s against Nazis. Again - I’m totally ok with that. The problem is Inglorious Basterds goes too far and misses the mark because they try to rewrite history by murdering Adolf Hitler with machine guns. It sort of cheapens history and makes it cartoonish when it wasn’t. This is nothing new and I wouldn’t put this entire criticism on Inglorious Basterds. For decades the media has made Hitler out to be this cartoonish villain when in reality he was a very real person that was very very evil. Again - this is bigger than Quentin Tarantino. Movies have been doing this with Nazis and Hitler for a very long time. One minute they're fumbling idiots and the next minute they're evil masterminds (JoJo Rabbit is good example of this).
Tarantino does the same thing with Django Unchained and slavery. And folks ate it up. Especially Black folks. Jaimie Foxx whips a white plantation owner so somehow that makes everything even (I'm obviously joking but the way people cheered that movie on you would have thought that was the case). Making chattel slavery out to be a blaxploitation story just cheapens and almost lightens the atrocity that was American chattel slavery. Again - Django Unchained is hardly the first movie to do this with, but its existence certainly doesn’t help. I just don’t like revenge fan-fiction with real life events (that’s why I took issue with ending of Once Upon A Time In Hollywood)

There are some super obvious visual comparisons that can be made between Inglorious and Sisu but what I find most interesting are things like both directors using chapters/title cards the break up their respective stories...

Inglorious Basterds / Sisu

Tarantino's potential influence/connections aside, this is a fun movie with some fun scenes and good movie references/homages. Fans of all the movies I mentioned in this post will get a kick out of it.

Dr Strangelove / Sisu