God’s own country

This movie made me smile sm at the end. Its about a Johnny a Yorkshire lad who hates working on his dad’s farm and has casual sex with random guys UNTIL Gheorghe, a guy from Romania arrives at the farm to help out, I think because all the sheep are giving birth?? The movie is so raw? if that makes any sense and despite being about gay sheep herders it IS NOT a brokeback mountain remake, theyre two pretty different films with different themes and, spoilers, gods own country has a happy ending. This is a beautiful film that is sad and happy and surprisingly emotional. Explicit sex and straight up animal births also be prepared to LITERALLY watch a man skin a lamb no joke, be warned. 9/10

The feels

Ummm this was boring as shit?? lmao. I wanted to like it but I just couldn’t. There just isn’t anything interesting about it, it’s watchable but don’t expect to have a good time. I just care so little for this movie. Its like watching a boiled egg. idk 3.5/10 cause it was better than my own private idaho.

Brokeback mountain

Ok so i KNOW this is kind of one of the most popular lgbtq movies ever made BUT I’m still gonna review it cause I want to. Brokeback mountain is SO SAD when I watched it I literally cried for like half an hour. Jack and Ennis are cowboys who fall in love on Brokeback mountain BUT Its the 1960s so it can never be, their relationship lasts for I think like 20 years? but only in secret. The movie does a great job of lowkey giving you hope only to RIP it away in the sadest way possible. I’m not really explaining it well but this movie is actually amazing and is probably one of my favourite movies fr. Its a pretty important film in terms of what it did for gay representation in media and stuff like that so it’s sort of something you should watch someday anyways but 10/10 even if Jake gylenhall doesn’t look like a real person (I can’t explain it)

Heat (1995)
Lag Time: 21 years
Dir. Michael Mann
Starring: Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Val Kilmer

Heat is arguably the crown jewel of crime cinema. Rarely are crime dramas executed with such care and precision. And rarely do they ascend to the category of “important.” This one has the cinematic and narrative chops to earn that title. Heatcan really be viewed as a crime epic, for a variety of reasons not the least of which is its run-time and sheer sense of scope. At the immediate center of the story: a thrilling face-off between two equally-matched and fearsome forces – cop and criminal – that feels incredibly human. The media certainly leaned on the Pacino-De Niro dynamic to sell the film, and rightly so. However, the film’s brilliance and power stems from the fact that this showdown means so much more. The story evolves from the deadlock between two men on opposite sides of the law, but the point of the story is that the ensuing battle engulfs all that they carry with them. Spoilers follow.

For a film and plot driven by violence,Heat is refreshingly critical of the violence it depicts. This is where the film’s heart lies, and where it stands out against lesser films. It refuses to trivialize the violence it relies upon at every turn, and this is where it becomes apparent that this film is really about the collateral damage incurred by a conflict that seems to be between two men. It condemns the violence in how it handles character deaths. It is a very patient film in that it takes great pains to make the deaths in the film mean something, to let them be felt, and it does this with a couple of devices: one of them more narrative and one of them more structural.

The primary force behind the film’s awakening to collateral damage is the dominant themes of family and relationships. Like I said, the conflict between Pacino’s and De Niro’s characters consumes everything about their lives, including the other lives connected to them. They bring networks of souls with them to the literal table when they sit down face to face over coffee in a tiny diner. This is one reason this film is really a drama first and thena crime genre film. The family lives of not just these characters but of so many of their associates are brought front and center. Heatspends ample time exploring the personal lives of these families so that when Lieutenant Hanna (Pacino) and McCauley (De Niro) butt heads, you truly feel all that is at stake. It builds up care both ways. You know that family members will be in the line of fire, something that begs for the violence to stop. But it also makes the deaths of combatants much more powerful. A secondary cop character gets shot down, the camera lingers, and the death resonates because you came to know that character by seeing his family life, and you know by name the family he is leaving behind.

Operating with the family theme is how the movie structurally elevates what we could call “periphery deaths” to true moments. This goes beyond how the family element makes the death of a cop carry impact. This is about the film giving story to characters who seem on the surface not to matter. The most important character here, for me, is Dennis Haysbert’s. His first scene shows him applying for his first job out of prison, as a fry cook. We can tell the scene is setting something up, but we’re not sure what. A second scene shows his wife supporting him through his transition back to society as he questions his own value; at this point, we are officially questioning his character’s relevance to the Hanna/McCauley drama which is already stretching on quite long. Finally, we get the relevance. McCauley knows him. He comes in to the diner to recruit him as their getaway driver, because the cops are onto their usual driver. Haysbert’s character quits his terrible fry cook job on the spot and steps back into a life of crime. Then, the getaway. At the start of the climactic shoot-out scene, they begin to speed off from the scene of the crime with Haysbert behind the wheel, and he very quickly becomes the first casualty of the action. Four scenes, two of them unconnected to the main conflict, to set up a character who dies almost immediately upon his entry into that main conflict, when there was already a getaway driver introduced in the story. They did not need to set the heat upon the first driver. They could have made him entirely available. So why did they add onto the long runtime to set up a seemingly unnecessary character who would be slaughtered on the spot? Whatever the original intention, you have to admit: you feel something when that driver dies. You get to know his wife, you come to care for the two of them through the care they show for each other, you cheer for this “peripheral” character as he works his way back to a normal life, and as soon as the main conflict draws him in, his life and all its newfound hope comes to an end. Much ado about a minor character whose usefulness in the plot is questionable. But it makes you hate the violence.

A similar moment occurs when one of the wild card criminal characters kills a young prostitute he encounters. You don’t see the death on screen. But you see a prelude to it between the two of them, and you see the crime scene afterwards. Yes the scene itself serves to reintroduce us to the criminal character. But the post-crime scene quickly escalates when, as with the other characters, the young woman’s family arrives on the scene. Family comes into play once again, but the most notable device at work here is the score. Most of the film’s score so far has been very electronic and minimal, and music for similar procedural-type scenes might even be absent. Here, composer Elliot Goldenthal develops a searing string threnody as Hanna comforts the grieving mother. A character who received less than a minute of screen-time in a scene which, again, feels entirely accessory to the main drama, earns the most impassioned musical statement of the film. Why? Because death matters.

Periphery character deaths are turned into cinematic moments because death matters. Death happens. It consumes bystanders, people who have nothing to do with the main drama at hand. Even characters who get caught up in the drama, as with Haysbert’s, matter when they die. The film focuses not just on the families of the central characters, but on those of characters who seem at first like dead-weight in the plot. The film very painstakingly shows us that violent crimes all too often claim more victims than is “fair,” and that those victims are more than just bodies that drop when the climax gears up. The film’s many very intentional choices regarding narrative, structure, and even music give lives to those who die. This is how the film indicts the violence it makes a spectacle out of, as a crime film. I could not help but feel some resonance with Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. While the two central characters can hardly be said to be in love, although another critic is welcome to look at this film through that lens, the story reveals a greater conflict between two houses where senseless violence takes a great toll. The point is that the body count grows higher than it has any right to be, and by making the viewer painfully aware of that, the film holds its mirror up to nature.

UHF (1989)
Lag Time: 27 years
Dir. Jay Levey
Starring: ‘Weird Al’ Yankovic, Michael Richards, Kevin McCarthy

UHF. This is either Weird Al’s love letter to pop culture or a love letter to himself. Either way, there are few movies that take on the personality of its creator like this one. No matter what it does or doesn’t do as a film, let this be heard loud and clear: this is a movie that was made for the fun of it, and that much is evident from start to finish. Quotable, feel-good, indulgent, and fun to indulge in, UHF is in a class of its own. As parody incarnate, it naturally sets itself apart from other films in how it looks at them from the outside and weaves together a daydream narrative of overt recreationthat separates what Weird Al does from the crass referencestyle parody of the 21st Century “[BLANK] Movie.” It’s individuality makes it hard to critique. I could comment on how Weird Al is the epitome of amateur acting, caught somewhere in between really good high school drama star and bad mainstream secondary character actor, but this film doesn’t take itself seriously enough to deserve that criticism. I would comment on how the blatant Asian stereotyping for comedic effect does not hold up under modern social grace but this film doesn’t take itself seriously enough to warrant that sort of attention. I should comment on how this film irresponsibly evades writing in a hard lesson for the main character about the exploitation of the mentally handicapped for entertainment and profit, but I realized half way through the film that it was not going to take itself seriously enough to do that. This funny, over-the-top, under-budgeted film could be a production of UHF Channel 62 itself. In fact, there’s probably an alternate universe where this movie was produced as a film of films within a film withinthe film. But under no circumstance is there an alternate universe where this film takes itself seriously. Because Weird Al transcends dimensions, just as this film transcends conventions of cinematic criticism. Thisis UHF.

Minority Report (2002)
Lag Time: 14 years
Dir. Steven Spielberg
Starring: Tom Cruise, Colin Farrell, Samantha Morton, Max von Sydow

Here we have one of Steven Spielberg’s most unique but ignored films from his 2000s filmography: Minority Report. I explore what about it makes this film underrated and what weaknesses have buried it outside our cultural memory.

Spielberg’s 2002 thriller is very clearly in the company of other film adaptations of the works of story-teller Philip K. Dick. A coupling of futuristic vision and plot-twisting action, Minority Report represents the famed author well as it places itself among the higher-quality adaptations. And yet, despite very positive reviews, this film does not attract very fond retrospection. It remains frequently overlooked.

We see elements compete throughout the film. The story, taking place in 2054, is set-up quite well in the exposition. We learn that a special police force called “Pre-crime” has been channeling the clairvoyant powers of three gifted “pre-cogs” to catch murderers before they commit their crimes. While certain mechanics of the plot are directly introduced, there are many moments that reveal Spielberg’s knack for handling details, for setting up characters and situations without drawing attention to the fact that exposition is happening. One thing that makes this director so great is how slyly he wields Chekhov’s gun. The Pre-crime system is set-up incredibly well with an engaging opening scene and rising action. These first forty-five minutes are, however, weighed down by special effects that do not quite seem ready for this film’s demands, and by editing that is not quite fast enough to support action which is nevertheless intriguing and original.

The middle of this movie is its most puzzling part. While in the interest of world-building and resisting the temptation to fill that world with two-dimensional stock characters, the second forty-five minutes are characterized by a weirdness that seems more or less arbitrary. There are moments in the scenes with the botanist (the “inventor” of Pre-crime) and the surgeon (with an interesting but distracting backstory) which wind this movie a little less tightly than other Spielberg works. The vines that attack protagonist John Anderton and the subsequent antidote scene are an instance of the extraneous world-building detours that do not really fit the tone or the plot and only distract the pace. I believe these weird moments and characters are there for that pace though. In distracting the flow, they make up for what would likely be an under-stimulating and slow-paced middle segment. But that rescue job is achieved by bizarre and burdensome intrigue alone.

The plot takes us to events of foreseen homicide, and we seem to be gearing up for an unsatisfying conclusion. A climax nears but it seems contrived and premature, with an unimaginative dramatic theme about thwarting destiny. Perhaps because of what came before, I was expected to be let down as I expected the movie to come its end. But then the plot twists. And it does so quite well. I fell for some story-telling sleight-of-hand, and so the twist was truly unexpected. What evolved in the final act was the most entertaining and successful part of the whole film as plot elements which before seemed under-cooked began to evolve. The story’s concept is engaged to the plot’s extreme benefit in what is really some excellent screenwriting work by Scott Frank and Jon Cohen. The film’s mystery is at its most rich in these final forty-five minutes. They redeem the film, if I do say so myself, and make it well worth the watch.

The screenwriting is not all this well written. There are a few weak lines which mainly serve as your basic dramatic padding. And there are too many puns revolving around eyes. While not a fault of the writers, the screenplay does not always seem to match well with the direction by Spielberg and the editing by Michael Kahn, most evident to me in the scenes in the greenhouse and the surgeon’s apartment. The production gives these scenes (and more) a faster pace than the writing warranted. These issues of pacing, if it is not yet apparent, seem to be the most impressionable issues of the film as I look back on it.

There are moments of the score by John Williams which really standout as mature and individual in his ouerve. At other moments, you can hear that he was rushed into this score from his work on Attack of the Clones. They are stylistic siblings, genetically linked. The design of this film also stands out. The movie, if anything, is the realization of a great effort of cinematic future-building. Beyond the production design, the visual style itself is inspired yet sometimes gets in the way of the film’s clarity with Kamiński’s overlighting and desaturating with the film.

Each of these elements - from writing to visuals and more - supports the overall film well but also each have their moments of weakness which work to unwind the film. In short, this film has taken the back-seat in Spielberg’s filmography, likely due to its inconsistency and an occasional strangeness which can be off-putting for viewers. The weaker scenes reveal the dissonance between art and action. But there are elements which are strange in just the right ways, and where the art and the action merge is the realm of pure mystery and cinematic tension, the latter of which for sure is right in Spielberg’s wheelhouse.

Worth a watch? Definitely. Worth remembering? I can see why it hasn’t been. Worth reviving? I think so. Whether the new television show does that, I have yet to see. But looking back to the film is certainly a fair use of anyone’s time.

BOMBSHELL.

I just had the honor of watching the new film called Bombshell. This film is a true story. About women at Fox News coming forward and calling out sexual assault. The things they were forced to do to ‘get ahead’, and 'make it’.

Bombshell is calling out the belief that to make it in this world women must bend to the wills and urges of men. That the men control our lives and have the power to make or break us.

I am so proud of this movie and I think that every single person should see this.

CALL IT OUT. STAND UP. YOU HAVE EARNED YOUR PLACE.

Please see this film. Especially today; International Women’s Day.

5 stars. Taylor Swift’s “The Man” in movie form.

@taylorswift

Who can name the caracter “garbage boy” from the famous movie…

Sardar Udham Is A Film That Is Truly Patriotic

Rashmi Rocket is a movie based on a battle of player in real life

Rashmi Rocket is a movie based on a battle of player in real life

‘Summer After’ Looks at Heart-ache

Jeremiah akes a look at the new release from Americana Pictures and Josh Cox, Summer After.

‘Firestarter’ Fizzles

REVIEW – Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (2022)

Another fun and charming adventure with the world’s fastest hedgehog and dare I say it, better than the first one (which I also enjoyed). Click here for FULL REVIEW on my website.

(warning: spoilers ahead!)

Cast:

Komatsu Nana: Mochizuki Natsume
Suda Masaki: Hasegawa Koichiro, or “Kou”

Oboreru Knife follows the story of teen model in Tokyo Natsume, who had to move to her father’s hometown. Away from the city, Natsume had to deal with her new life in the village, which meant that she could no longer do the things she used to do. 

She then met the mysterious Kou, the heir to a respected family in the village. Kou seemed to be a free-spirit, wandering about even at restricted areas. Deeply attracted to his aura, the two began dating. 

An incident, however, changed their fate.

On the day of a procession in which Kou took part in, Natsume was led away by a family friend, who convinced her that her grandfather was in trouble. He turned out to be an obsessed fan and tried to rape Natsume. Kou went to her rescue but was ultimately unable to do anything, until the other villagers came and rescued her. Since the incident, Natsume blamed Kou for not being able to save her, while Kou blamed himself as well for being unable to protect Natsume.

A new term in school began, and Natsume had fallen from grace. A movie that she had previously been invited to act in was no more, and she became the target of gossip. Kou began mixing around with bad company and was getting nowhere in his life. Each at a standstill in their lives, Natsume and Kou, now broken up, drifted apart from each other.

Ultimately, what I got from this film is that there is always this special someone who you’ll go back to no matter what. Kou was a free-spirit, but aimless in life. Yet, Natsume, who regarded him as her “god”, refused to let go of him. All she ever wanted was to have Kou look only at her. 

Kou wanted Natsume for himself as well. Both of them are imperfect in their own ways, but ultimately they can’t let go of each other.

Both Suda and Komatsu have put up a pretty convincing performance in their film. I felt their pain, their loss, and their attraction to each other. Like all teenage love, their portrayal of their respective roles conveyed the feeling of fleeting romance very well. Suda was especially charismatic in this film, truly living up to his reputation as one of the most talented young actors in Japan.

(I am, however, very confused with the last part of the movie. Was it all a dream? Was it just a movie? Please do let me know if you know what’s going on!)

(warning: spoilers ahead!)

Cast:

Sato Takeru: devil / postman
Miyazaki Aoi: ex-girlfriend

If cats disappeared from the world, how would the world change?

If I disappeared from the world, who would be sad for me?                                  

The story begins with the protagonist delivering letters to people in the neighbourhood. He works as a postman, and one day while working he collapses, and later finds out that he has a brain tumour and will not live for long.

Unable to accept the fact, the distraught protagonist returns home. He then sees someone who looks exactly like him. The person introduces himself as the devil and offers the protagonist a chance to prolong his life. To do so, the protagonist must agree to let the devil erase an object from the world. Unsure of what this means, the protagonist agrees to the proposal.

The devil then decides to erase phones from the world. This reminds the protagonist of how he met his ex-girlfriend. They came to know each other after a misdialed phone call from his ex-girlfriend. As phones are erased from the world, so is his memory and relationship with his ex-girlfriend.

Having prolonged his life for a day, the devil proposed once again to erase another object in exchange for a day more for the protagonist to live. This time, the devil took away movies. The protagonist then recalls his best friend Tatsuya, who is a movie buff. Tatsuya would lend a DVD every day to the protagonist. At this point, we can come to the conclusion that Tatsuya was the one who led the protagonist into becoming an item with his ex-girlfriend, who happens to be a movie enthusiast as well. But as movies are erased from the world, so is his friendship with Tatsuya.

The third object the devil erased from the world is clocks. The protagonist’s father, a watch repairman, is a taciturn person, and it is hinted that the father and son do not share an amicable relationship.  With clocks erased from the world, so is the protagonist’s relationship with his father. At this point, the protagonist starts to wonder what will happen if he disappears instead?

Anyway, having lived for another day, the devil makes his last proposal. This time he is going to erase cats from the world. Unlike the previous three times, the protagonist shows a greater reaction this time. Earlier in the movie we see the protagonist rescue an abandoned kitten when he was younger and was ultimately allowed to keep the kitten by his mother, who is actually allergic to cat fur.

Here we can deduce that cats signify the protagonist and his relationship with his mother. The fact that he showed such great reaction to the thought of cats disappearing from this world shows that he values his relationship with his mother the most. The thought of losing his relationship with his mother scares him so much that he tells the devil not to erase them.

It is then revealed that the devil did not exist, and is, in fact, the other side (or the inner devil) of the lead. All this time he was talking to himself because he couldn’t accept his condition, and was coming up with ways and scenarios to prolong his life. He had placed his life as above everything else but finally realises that there are certain irreplaceable things. Coming to terms with the other side of him made him also come to terms with his impending death.

With that, the protagonist reverts to his normal life. As he approaches the final day of his life, he writes a letter to his father as an attempt to reconcile their relationship. He also meets his ex-girlfriend and Tatsuya for the last time.

The film ends with the content of the protagonist’s letter to his father, which basically reflects the feelings of the protagonist about his existence in the world. However insignificant his presence was to the world, he believes that there is still a difference between the world where he exists and the world where he vanishes. To him, however small the difference may be, it is still proof that he has once lived.

I honestly expected myself to cry while watching, but sadly I did not. Sato’s acting is, of course, great, and I actually enjoyed the movie. This movie has introduced a new perspective to life and has made me realise that nothing is replaceable in life, especially memories and relationships we share with the people we love and care about. We should cherish everything we have in life before it is all too late. Not a tearjerker, but definitely an inspirational piece worth watching.

(warning: spoilers ahead!)

Cast:

Nakajima Yuto: “Shiraki Rengo”/ Kawatori Dai
Suda Masaki: “Kawata Daiki”/ Naruse Ryo
Yagira Yuya: Shiraki Rengo
Kaho: “Ishikawa Sally”/ Mikami Rei 

Pink and Gray begins with Kawata Daiki (later Kawatori Dai), who has just moved into the neighbourhood. He meets Suzuki Shingo (later Shiraki Rengo) and Sally, and the three old them become good friends.

Opportunity strikes upon Kawata and Suzuki one day when a fashion editor scouts them to become fashion models. Suzuki, with his talent and affinity with showbiz, soon became a movie star, while Kawata eases himself into the background, becoming a supporting character of sorts to Suzuki. At this point, Suzuki adopts the stage name Shiraki Rengo, while Kawata continues to struggle with deciding on his stage name.

As Shiraki rises to fame, the crack in their friendship deepens. After their first quarrel, however, the two of them mend their friendship very fast. But happiness is cut short when Shiraki, who promises to help Kawata become famous, commits suicide by hanging himself. He leaves six versions of his will to Kawata, and “trusts that he will choose the best one”.

But here comes the plot twist.

As Kawata wails while hugging the motionless body of Shiraki, the director steps in—we now know that everything up till this point has been a movie. The “Shiraki” we knew up to this point is actually played by the real Kawata—now Kawatori Dai, whereas “Kawata” is actually played by Naruse Ryo, an actor. “Sally” is also played by actress Mikami Rei.

Observant viewers will also realise that the screen has turned gray. This is important, and I will give my analysis on what this symbolises.

Up till before the greyscale, we see colours— vibrant, lively. Because I had no prior knowledge about this film, I didn’t know what I was in for, so imagine my shock when the director walked in. The title of the film then comes to mind—Pink and Gray. The colours of the film takes centre stage in the story.

Scenes shot in colour, or “Pink”, depicts the vibrant lives the two main characters supposedly have. Shiraki is depicted as a helpful friend, while Kawatori is the loyal, supportive one. The movie is adapted from a biography written by Kawatori for Shiraki, which is actually one of the instructions from the six wills left behind by Shiraki. Kawatori chose it because he thought this would be what Shiraki wants best.

However, on the pretense of fulfilling his best friend’s last wish, neither the movie nor the book was ever about Shiraki. Instead, they are used by Kawatori to showcase himself. He wants to show the audience how great and supportive of a friend he was—in other words, his good side. The movie is nothing but full of self-praise.

This explains why Naruse later tells Kawatori that the film is “boring”. He also observes that the movie may not have reflected the reality fully. I believe that his keen observation stems from him being an actor, and he is spot-on—the film is not the truth.

So what is the truth? The answer lies in the scenes in “Grey”. Here we finally see the kind of person each character really is. Naruse is a jerk, Sally is meek, and most importantly the fact that Kawatori is not as loyal and supportive a friend he portrays himself to be. Instead, Kawatori loathes being outshined by Shiraki and hates that Shiraki wants to run his life. Kawatori is not grateful for the chances Shiraki gave him and instead finds them burdensome. His frustration towards Shiraki is later shown when he slashes and destroys Shiraki’s portrait.

Shiraki is not that pure either. As Kawatori would later discover, Shiraki was a regular patron at a strip club, and even more shocking was that he, as hinted in the film, was in an incestuous relationship with his older sister. In the beginning when Shiraki’s sister commits suicide, I wondered why this is even important. It is then revealed that Shiraki had specifically chosen to die on the same day as his sister.

This begs the question. Why grey? I noticed that the scenes shot in greyscale were very dark with minimal lighting. A lot of details in the scene were hidden. These reflect the fact that Kawatori has things to hide—his true personality.

Both Pink and Grey tell the same story but from a different point of view. Pink is a lie weaved by Kawatori to fool the audience into believing that he is a kind person, but as Naruse pointed out, this is not true. Grey shows the ugly truth, and this is something Kawatori doesn’t want to own up to.

It is interesting to note that Kawatori is seen smiling most of the time in Pink, but he has never even smiled once in Grey. He wanted to believe the lie he has fabricated, but alas it didn’t work, as shown by how unhappy he truly is in Grey—in reality.

Kawatori later mentions that he didn’t want to be Shiraki anymore, and yet we see him attempting to hang himself the same way Shiraki did. Kawatori has always believed that Shiraki is the cause of his misery, but I think that on the contrary, he is the one making himself miserable—he claims to not want to live in Shiraki’s shadow any longer, yet he couldn’t resist the temptation of becoming Shiraki—successful and famous. If he were really resistant of living under Shiraki’s shadows, why would he agree to take on the role of Shiraki in the movie?

What Kawatori fails to see is that Shiraki had his own set of problems as well. He is not happier than before he made it big, but Shiraki only saw the glamorous side of his life.

In the end, Kawatori reconciles with the truth after facing Shiraki in his hallucination, and as Shiraki tells him, it is okay that they do not understand each other. The film then gradually turns from grey to pink, signifying that Kawatori is no longer hiding the truth, and is now brave enough to show his true self. Truth has come to light.

Nakajima, Suda and Yagira have all served up pretty solid acting this time round. In particular for Nakajima and Suda, who had to switch up their characters in the second half of the film, and they made it convincing enough. Nakajima went from the confident “Shiraki” to the unhappy Kawatori, whereas Suda went from the supportive “Kawata” to the evil Naruse. Props to both actors for being able to transition smoothly from one character to another.

Verdict: Pink and Gray is a compelling piece with an awesome plot twist. Recommended!

(Note: some nudity, depiction of suicide and sex. Not suitable for younger audiences)

*Gray and Grey: Gray is American English, while Grey is British. I use British spelling in my writing, but decided not to change the title of the film. I hope this doesn’t confuse anyone!

some days I’m Regina George and life is the bus