Letterbox’d Summary: For two sisters from a family of witches, falling in love is the trickiest spell of all.

Sally and Gillian Owens, born into a magical family, have mostly avoided witchcraft themselves. But when Gillian’s vicious boyfriend, Jimmy Angelov, dies unexpectedly, the Owens sisters give themselves a crash course in hard magic. With policeman Gary Hallet growing suspicious, the girls struggle to resurrect Angelov – and unwittingly inject his corpse with an evil spirit that threatens to end their family line.

My first impressions: I thought this was movie was sooo cute! It’s womanhood from start to finish. I haven’t read the book so my review is solely based off of the movie.

The story starts off introducing you to the Owens bloodline of witches and the curse that is bestowed upon their family where every Owen’s husband ends up dying. The two sisters, who as adults are played by Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman, (I did NOT recognize her, I’m not sure if I had ever seen her pre Stepford Wives), and how they choose to live their lives under the guise of the curse, with the help from their witchy Aunts, played by Stockard Channing and Dianne West, (who were giving me major Aunt Hilda and Zelda vibes from Sabrina the Teenage Witch!).

The sisters have a psychic link in a sense and help each other out throughout the movie. All the women in the family are spiritually connected to each other and it’s lovely to see portrayed across multiple generations. They are known in their town for being witches and ostracized, but they always are there for each other. Both sisters have to come to terms with their identities and embrace them in order to beat the big bad and live in their truth.

I did tear up early in the movie but it’s not a sad movie overall. There is romance in this movie, pure romance, destined romance, and love spells gone wrong, but really the sisterhood and the matriarch Owens family is where the real love is. Some of the Owens women meet tragic fates as well due to their inability to handle the curse, but the ones who are left embrace their magical gifts to help each other out. Almost all of the characters in the film are women minus the male love interests and it was refreshing.

Aesthetically, I loved their house, high up on a seaside cliff, a dreamy garden and backyard, open windows and doors. It was my personal taste but also what you would expect from witches attuned with the Earth. The outfits were nice too, I loved a couple of the dresses they wore. The town itself is typical of small town America, but pretty one dimensional. In the end, all the roads lead back to the house on the cliff.

There were a handful of child actors in this movie but they weren’t annoying and added a nice touch. I love how they show the witch’s intuition from all the girls, even of the youngest age. There’s no “oh is she a witch or not?” No, every single woman in this family is born with gifts, but whether or not they use them or embrace them is the real conflict.

Overall, this is a feel good movie, not quite The Craft since it’s about adulthood and womanhood and the notion of having a family, raising kids, soulmates etc. It’s also not very Halloween-y in my opinion either, most of the movie takes place in warmer months and they are usually dressed in Spring or Summer clothes.

6.5/10 - not a traditionally romantic film like the rest of the movies on my list, but I can’t knock the uplifting of women societies (covens) in times like these. It’s not too serious of a movie, it doesn’t delve too far into the occult, but if you are familiar with any other kind of 80s or 90s girly witch saga (Teen Witch, The Craft, Sabrina, Charmed) you’ll be able to follow along seemlessly. It has romance, it has love, it has family. Enjoy on a cozy night with your best witches brew and candles. It ends on that classically cheesy 90’s note, but have fun with it and go along for the ride.

And that’s it! Definitely one of the most light hearted movies I’ve done yet, but I wanted a departure from the tragic fleeting lovers trope I had been seeing so much since I started this series. There’s a lot of ways to portray love and it’s important to keep that in mind. Until next time!

Letterbox’d summary: A young girl irrevocably changes the course of several lives when she accuses her older sister’s lover of a crime he did not commit.

Well first off, I liked this movie. As with most historical pieces, the setting is beautiful, regal, scenic and set the mood. But it takes place around World War II, so although the beginning might seem dreamy, as the course of the movie unfolds, it comes all the way back down to Earth. The movie mainly follows 3 main characters, the one we meet first, Briony (Saoirse Ronan), her older sister Cecilia (Kiera Knightly), and the male romantic lead Robbie (James McAvoy).

Our lovers are Robbie and Cecilia and they are the purest kind of romance: the star crossed lovers, the few fleeting moments that stick with you for life, the forbidden love, the odds against us all. I enjoyed their chemistry, their moments together are all sweet and pretty. (Side note I was in love with Kiera Knightly’s make up the entire movie). The other main character Briony is the one whose the crux of the story. She starts off young when we’re first introduced to her, and a bit irritating, but as with all war movies, everyone grows up fast under circumstances. She’s a very real character flaws and all, and honestly I’m not sure that you ever feel sorry for her, but I did get her and I felt for her too. The Letterbox’d reviews are all filled with hate comments towards her, which I don’t necessarily disagree with, but time makes a fool of us all.

She’s played by multiple actresses throughout the movie and each one nail her. You know it’s her, but then you can see how she’s changing and growing and learning too. I think the casting for this movie across the board was impeccable. The two young lovers are timeless and forever while all the actresses for Briony give new sides to her.

I don’t normally like war movies at all, but this had just enough war in it to get the point across on how each character’s lives are uprooted by it. The war scenes are shot very well too, in a seamless way where the characters walk and talk but so much is going on behind them to show the fast paced and desensitizing nature of it all. James McAvoy shines in these segments, all of his emotional scenes really are amazing and felt true.

I think this is one of the only movies I’ve done so far where I was genuinely tearing up at the ending (which was one of my goals when I started, I don’t cry easily during films). It was reminiscent of LaLa Land in that one way but done sooo much better, in my humble opinion. The storytelling was formatted in an interesting way too where you normally see Briony’s perspective first before it jumps back to what actually happened with the other characters. Sometimes jumpy narration can get annoying or gimmicky to me, but this was necessary, and it fully pays off in the end. The first twist scene I thought, ok it wasn’t that crazy, but at the end, the rewinding helped tie everything together in one last emotional punch.

It’s a pretty movie, it’s a sad movie, it’s beautiful, sweet, sombering. It’s a lovely experience when you just want to live a love that’s timeless forever. 9/10

And that’s it for me. I’ve been watching more period pieces than I ever have before, but there is a niche beauty in them (painted cinematography and classical set ups) that I see is so popular. I really love pure love above all other kinds and this was a great find! Until next time….

Letterbox’d Summary: After his long-time girlfriend dumps him, a thirty-year-old record store owner seeks to understand why he is unlucky in love while recounting his “top five breakups of all time”.

To be blunt, I thought this movie was okay. I never knew I wasn’t a huge fan of meta acting until watching this. In some movies, a character saying a line or two to the audience is fine for me, but this movie relies on it very heavily as a narration device and I didn’t really enjoy the sad boy woe is me acting and line delivery. I almost felt that talking to the camera might be harder to convey than just acting out the scene with other people, because it would be less forced.

Rob, played by John Cusack, is an unlikeable guy. If you were a fan of the “Is having a boyfriend embarrassing?” article, I doubt this movie will change your mind. However, I do think he was supposed to be unlikeable (maybe not annoying though, which he was) in many of the scenes. He’s just a guy.

The first half (maybe 3/4) was a slog for me to get through. It’s mostly spent with him lamenting about his first two ex gfs he’s had, which were both grade school relationships. The first relationship he was stuck on, someone he “dated” for 6 hours as an eight year old, was the most irritating. He’s in his thirties, I kept thinking who cares??? Even if the point of the movie was that he was working through his past, him drudging that up and having a complex about it was eye roll inducing. I wouldn’t go so far to say that scenarios like this are unrelatable to some men and that it’s not something that doesn’t happen, but it was over the top and very cringe to me for it to have such a dedicated presence. The next girlfriend from high school, he was evil to all the way till the end, and there was no redemption there. Again, not saying there was supposed to be, because one of the most heartfelt moments shown in ANY of his relationships, where his ex basically says she was assaulted somewhat in part because of how low he made her feel, was played for gags and Rob continued to be an asshole to her. This is when the “male director” cue card flashed in my head. I was not rooting for him at all up till this point in the movie.

When the film switched to him revisiting his adult relationships, it got better for me. He’s mostly stuck on his current on and off girlfriend, Laura (played by Iben Hjejle), and I thought their romance was okay. Nothing that brought tears to my eyes, but this was for the most part a grounded story, the storytelling aiming more for realism than deep unending emotions. The last adult relationship he explored before the Laura plot came to a head, was with a baddie that left him named Charlie (played by Catherine Zeta -Jones). I enjoyed her as a character because after seeing how he treated his high school girlfriend, it was definitely a taste of his own medicine. He did have another adult girlfriend in the earlier parts of the movie, but the relationship was pretty inconsequential and more filler. Rob never becomes that much of a “good guy”, but for the most part he comes to an understanding with others, which I think is the only thing the movie was trying to do with him. I think however much you sympathize with his character is how much you’ll get out of this movie. If him as a character speaks to your soul, you’ll love it. If not, hopefully you at least loved the music they played, which was another narrative device and selling point of the film.

The side characters were likable, Jack Black played the same guitar slinging guy that he’s played in films much of his career, even now. There were a lot of familiar faces sprinkled throughout. Lisa Bonet does have a small famous part in the movie, but honestly her character doesn’t do much. Rob is trying to get over Laura and she serves as the quickest of distractions and maybe just film eye candy, focusing on strong camera closeups of her beautiful face.

So overall, not a love for me, certainly not even close to how I felt about last week’s movie. I do think there is an audience for this film, it’s just not me. The ending was cute I guess, things wrap up, although I’m not sure really that the main characters truly resolved their relationship issues. They more just went through their own personal things and decided sure whatever. Rob even has a stint where he almost entertains someone else, making a mixtape (one of the most musically romantic things you can do!) even after getting back together with her. But there’s no conflict this time, Laura just laughs and smiles the rest of the movie.

Again, I don’t necessarily think the film was trying to say much of anything other than people go through things. On a positive note, I did love the simplistic life Rob and his record store side characters lived, the idea of owning a local community record store like that where you can go and just talk about the newest records with music lovers like you and pitch to other people is probably a thing of the past, which was more sad than anything else that happened in this movie.

6/10 if you know a man going through a break up, this is for him! My girls, maybe not so much, I think there’s better out there for us.

As always, thanks for reading! Until next time……

Letterboxd Summary: 1930s Korea, in the period of Japanese occupation, a new girl, Sookee, is hired as a handmaiden to a Japanese heiress, Hideko, who lives a secluded life on a large countryside estate with her domineering Uncle Kouzuki. But the maid has a secret. She is a pickpocket recruited by a swindler posing as a Japanese Count to help him seduce the Lady to steal her fortune.

Genres: romance, drama, thriller, period piece, psychological

I highly recommend watching this movie blind. I don’t include spoilers but there is context to what happens in the movie that’s given that might lead you to piecing together things before the audience is privvy to it. If you haven’t seen the movie go watch it and come back!!!!

.

.

Well first off, I really liked this movie. It was long at 2 and a half hours, but it was separated into three parts, and each part recontextualized the entire film shown thus far in a brand new and interesting way. The plot twists weren’t too crazy (but they were good, don’t get me wrong), but instead the darkness of the film is what surprised me. As noted before, I went into the film absolutely blind (I only knew that it was a romance!) and that’s how I think it should be watched. I also watched the extended version unknowingly and I do not know what the difference is between that and the theatrical release, but from some comments I guess the sex scenes were shown in full and not toned down. This movie does have sex scenes and if you are puritanical in any way, stay away, this is probably not a movie for you.

The romance itself was well done in my opinion, and for a lesbian erotica directed by a man, I personally do not feel that it was male gaze-y. There have been many times when watching movies and I instantly thought “oh this was directed by a man (derogatory),” and not just in romance but comedy, action, drama, and just any genre. But not this one. It honestly didn’t cross my mind until I was reading other reviews and saw it discussed. The characters sharing those sexual moments are important to the plot, they do make sense, and I don’t think it was gratuitous even though yes you will see body parts and the whole nine and yes they are longer than a minute without cutting away. The entire movie is based around erotica, good and bad, so I don’t think that the scenes distract from that, they are important to the message being told and to fully understand the mindset of the lead, her journey with others and herself, and to realize her full character arc. As I said earlier this movie reframes it’s own perspective multiple times throughout, so scenes that seemed shallow or banal (including intimate ones), will often lead to entire realizations that the character was making at the time that you didn’t realize before. The movie builds on itself and I loved that.

I also really loved the romance portrayed. Although the movie is long, the pacing didn’t bother me, and the romance changes intensity with each part (there’s three total). My favorite scene, the “there’s no going back” moment, was so beautiful. They give each other hope and purpose, especially for the main character who faced the most abuse and trauma, all the tools used against her were stripped powerless and reframed for her by her love in the final perspective twist. It gave me such a great feeling to watch. And I like how you can clearly see the juxtaposition between when the lovers are together and intimate and how pure hearted it is versus the other characters (aka all of the MEN) and how their lust and shallow viewpoint of the heroine is signified. The leads create a love the men in this story can’t even fathom, who only view the women as tools or mediums for their pleasures and as a means to wealth/livelihood.

The true villains are … really evil. I honestly wish they had more of a spectacular downfall. Their demise was tame in my opinion, but it was enough. The movie changes perspective a few times and reveals itself slowly, unfolding the layers, dropping the curtain piece by piece, but when the entire picture is laid bare in front of you, it’s clear who to root for and who should be taken out back. I like that they are just evil too, there’s no fake sympathy, no trying to rationalize their pervertedness. Nope, they are dirty, weird, gross, put themselves first, and that’s that. I feel that this is not something I often see in movies directed by men where the men are villains. Usually they try to explain it with a backstory, try to get you to see it from their view, “they became demented because so and so”, but I really like that it doesn’t matter and that wouldn’t have added to the story anyway. You want the protagonists to be free and the villains to get what’s deserved.

Another theme woven into the story is autonomy, especially women’s freedom around their body and their relationship to sex of their own will versus forced upon them by the men in their lives. I feel like if people watch this movie and think that it’s just for the purpose of showing women having sex, they are missing the point. The women in this movie, even outside of the protagnists, are constantly pulled around like puppets and often they must do what they’re told, and if they don’t they face torture and confinement until they off themselves, dying to be free.

Marriage and the losing of one’s autonomy to your husband is analyzed, and it becomes a metaphorical and physical prison for these women. I watched a play through of the Silent Hill F video game and it’s another Japanese media that heavily features the same theme and scrutinization of losing your identity in marriage and in society. In The Handmaiden it’s taken much further where marriage to one villain will lead to almost certain death, while marriage to another seems like it could work at first, but that’s subverted in an interesting way too. This is my second lesbian filmed I’ve reviewed and I notice that just like in The Portrait of a Lady on Fire, forced marriage, autonomy, and the willingness of the women involved in their own love lives, are large centerfolds. And it makes sense really, in a period piece about women and taboo, these movies are all about the freedom to decide, whether or not you’re allowed the privilege to be an active participant in your own life, and what these characters are willing to do to have that.

As with many period films, the cinematography is beautiful. I’ve come to really appreciate how many films make it a point of looking like a painting with each still, taking the time to craft a visually interesting scene. There’s really a skill to it. And it’s something that I never thought much of before starting this series, but now I understand just how much it can enhance the storytelling. It can’t make up for weak writing or acting, but like in this movie, it can be the cherry on top to an already thoughtful experience. I loved the scoring too, especially that last scene in the library, soooo beautiful! It melted my heart.

Final thoughts: I really loved it! Of course this movie is not without its controversies and I don’t think it’s for everyone either. There is abuse, raunchy explicitness, and there’s just some material that can be straight up uncomfy for someone never exposed to something like that in media. But it was art to me, and it was a story about taking agency over your life, what true human connection can do for a person’s mental wellbeing and outlook on life, reclaiming your livelihood and experiences that were stolen from you, and of course pure love!

10/10 but only if you are willing enough to go along for the ride. The journey gets dark, fucked up, twisty, and uncomfortable, but it’s lined with a light that only gets stronger as you get to the end

That’s it. I think out of every movie I’ve seen this one deserves a second watch, knowing what you know at the end. It’s a plot twist movie where everything is different the more you know. As the Lunar New Year has just passed, this was a great way to remind myself of the joy of immersing myself in art and the power of great storytelling with a message that begs to be told, something I hope to do all year.

If you want to discuss the movie in spoiler depth, leave a comment. Until next time!

Letterboxd Summary: Still grieving after the murder of her boyfriend, hairdresser Justice writes poetry to deal with the pain of her loss. Unable to get to Oakland to attend a convention because of her broken-down car, Justice gets a lift with her friend, Iesha, and Iesha’s postal worker boyfriend, Chicago. Along for the ride is Chicago’s co-worker, Lucky, to whom Justice grows close after some initial problems. But is she ready to open her heart again?

Poetic Justice (1993) is regarded as classic 90s film. The setting starts off in LA where Tupac Shakur plays a mailman named Lucky, and Janet Jackson, her character named Justice, works in a hair salon. I’d say a huge plus for this film are the two leads. They are cute and likable, and past all the constant cursing and misogynist disrespect (which I’ll get into), by the time they get together towards the very end of the movie, they share a sweet scene and it’s nice.

But I can’t say that the romance in this film is built up very well. The main leads fight probably at least 2/3 of the movie and their switch comes about when Lucky’s close friend, Chicago, is fighting his girlfriend Iesha and punches her in the face, prompting Justice to step in. When she steps in, Lucky steps in too and defends her, then after that they are sweet with each other. I knew that they would get together before I even started watching the movie, but I’m not sure that it was a slow burn romance done particularly well. Yes, there was some obvious tension in the beginning, but it was a will they, won’t they all the way through.

At the end (spoilers)

.

.

.

Lucky’s cousin is killed because they are late arriving to Oakland and he blames Justice for it and storms off. Um okay? So as soon as we get the romance, it’s ripped away from us by the same annoying behavior shown throughout the entire movie, from the very first scene that caused Justice’s boyfriend’s death in the first place: fragile male ego. I’m not sure that the movie was glorifying it per se (nor condemning it, it was more just for honest portrayal), but regardless, it was seriously grating on me the entire movie the way all of the characters talked to each other, even the ones that were supposed to be romantic.

Just about every character in this film, especially the men, love to resort to calling the women bitches, sluts, hoes, raggedy and whatever else, every time one does something they don’t like (and I saw a lot of men on Reddit saying this was a chick flick nonetheless). No the woman aren’t perfect, and they often participate in the dragging of themselves to each other, which just further fuels the never ending misogynoir. It was extremely annoying for me, literally almost every other scene was someone getting cussed out and most likely a woman (but the men did do it to each other also).

I do understand cultural nuance and how it was “realistic” for that time and in that area, but as someone watching this today and not in 1993, (no I’m not from LA either), it was a part of the movie that didn’t age well for me. I do very personally think there are things about the culture that shouldn’t be romanticized and this is one of those things, and the constant berating and demeaning throughout the entire film was on full display for me to the point where it was distracting, you will hear fuck you slut, bitch, hoe, keep your bitch in check, keep your hoe in check, etc etc, over and over again from start to finish. If a guy calls me that severely out my name over and over then no, I will not be able to be romantic with him later on.

My favorite scene was the family reunion. I liked when the movie leaned on the comedy a little bit. The family cookout was mostly sweet and when Tupac’s character is nice and charming, he really sells it. I wish the movie leaned more into that, I think that was the strongest part about casting such an iconic male lead, being able to capitalize on his persona and magnetism.

I enjoyed the roadtrip aspect of the movie too. Part of me thinks the entire movie would have faired better if that was the main crux, but judging by the way the roadtrip progressed and ending of the trip in such a bitter way, I think there were other more pressing themes and messages the director was trying to say. The romance itself could’ve been a lot stronger if the movie was more self contained and focused on actually building it.

Some of the characterization falls a bit flat, like Lucky talks about his music career once or twice but ??? that detail goes no where other than he takes his cousin’s equipment at the end. I didn’t mind Justice’s poetry, I think it did a good job showing a soft, smart side of her character that wasn’t shown narratively otherwise. None of the characters have much growth, the character arcs complete with Justice liking someone for the first time since her boyfriend’s death and Lucky apologizing and that’s it. Who knows what became of Iesha and Chicago, hopefully not back together. The closing shots are in typical 90s fashion, cute and a little cheesy, but good vibes that make you root for the leads and their potential.

Overall, this was a romance movie, almost enemies to lovers, but it was very slow burn. I think a lot of the aspects of that time period portrayed didn’t age well for me, the way they talk to women and the way the women talk about themselves to each other (catty and degrading), just gave me the ick throughout the whole film. The main leads are iconic in their own right and continue to be. Tupac was a beautiful man, his confidence and charisma really shined. He was gone too soon, RIP.

4/10 maybe watch if it’s nostalgic for you, or to see Tupac being handsome, but otherwise the romance aspect is the smallest stepping stone of the larger cultural message and themes at play

And that’s it…. Until next time! I did like a lot of the music in the film, despite what this review might suggest I am a 90s baby! A good score can do a lot for a film honestly.

Hopefully the next romance sweeps me off my feet. Thank you for reading!

Letterboxd Summary:

DON’T REGRET. REMEMBER.

On an isolated island in Brittany at the end of the eighteenth century, a female painter is obliged to paint a wedding portrait of a young woman.

The summary is very bare bones but that really is the story on the surface. Portrait of a Lady on Fire is a French film storytelling a romance between two young women. Although the premise is simple, it’s powerful and effective. There’s something about painting that is just intrinsically so intimate. A painter and a muse. The quiet stroke of a brush, the glance to the throat, the blush lips. The premise lends itself to that kind of closeness.

The story starts with the main character, Marianne, being hired to paint the other main character’s, Héloïse, portrait in secret. It’s her wedding portrait, but she doesn’t want to get married, so her mom is forcing a painting behind her back. Héloïse is told Marianne is a “companion buddy” for her and thus the story begins.

In order to capture the details of her muse without being detected, Marianne constantly stealing glances at Héloïse, gazing at her, and looking over every feature of her face. It’s a slow burn romance, but not too slow, I think it’s similarly paced to almost everything else I’ve watched so far. There is a definite moment where the flip switches for the main characters and it’s a moment that’s beautiful and still, but not subtle, just like a painting.

Aside from the romance there are a lot of other strong points of this movie. I thought the B plot wonderfully added to a story about forced commitments and living a life that you want of your own choosing. More than just seeing a relationship between the main characters, I felt this was really the point of the movie. It’s not so much that the main characters fall in love for a moment, but what that represents: a life of your own. The friendship, which adds a younger woman, the maid Sophie, is well done between all 3 of the leads and the women really help each other and care for each other in the short time they have together. The b plot isn’t frivolous or unnecessary, it’s another facet used to hammer down the main themes.

It’s honestly surprising how many romance movies the main characters don’t ride off into the sunset. For this movie, a period piece lesbian film (or most lgbtq romances), that might not be an expected ending to begin with, but I find even in modern day stories, it’s not as common as I thought. The more I continue this series, the more I notice that capturing a moment in time is often more powerful. So many people long for that one moment in their youth, that one person they can’t see again. And often brief romances carry more weight, the love hasn’t run its course and grown sour. It permeates you, changes you, and moves on, leaving you to process before you can understand it’s affect on the rest of your life.

This was a great addition to the list. It was artistic and simplistic in a way that was enjoyable, subtle but detailed, had friendship and romance, and highlighted true depth behind art frozen in time. It was well shot and cinematic in its framing of the women. Although it’s a lesbian film, I felt that it was strong in its female gaze and there are a couple of scenes that made me think, “yeah this is for women.” I don’t have much negative to say, other than the romance might not be the key takeaway from the story. It’s more of something that aids the overall message than the sole defining substance. Which is not negative in my opinion, what I’m learning is that romance as a genre and an entity is very multi faceted and layered. Just like in real life, there’s more to falling in love than falling in love.

9/10 beautiful and precise, but the romance is not end all be all of the movie. The ending is striking, but not a happily ever after

And that’s it, the journey continues! I’m dedicated to watch all the perspectives on romance and find the one that changes my life. My world views are opening though and it’s a beautiful ride….

Letterboxd Summary: Feel the heat, keep the feeling burning, let the sensation explode.

Two neighbors form a strong bond after both suspect extramarital activities of their spouses. However, they agree to keep their bond platonic so as not to commit similar wrongs.

This movie is very self contained, mainly taking place in a singular small hallway and the same few rooms, but this works in favor of the specific emotions it wants to capture. I saw another review that described this movie as “visual poetry” and I think that’s an apt description.

I would have loved to experience watching this in a theater. I think the silences would have been so expressive and loud and would have made the aura of the movie more enchanting than on a smaller screen. It’s a movie that’s visually felt and emotionally taken in with your eyes. It’s one of those movies that begs to be watched with full attention and no distractions, which people nowadays might find hard, there is no bombastic plot going on. There’s a lot of the characters merely walking or standing, aided on by well crafted framing. It was beautifully shot, and with little action and little dialogue, the atmosphere was captured well.

Story wise, it’s a movie about neglected/isolated spouses that find solace in each other, but one I enjoyed much more than the last “romance” movie I watched about this same topic (rhymes with Smost in Translation). The movie never shows you the actual spouses of the two main characters, only a hairstyle or a voice is ever shown and a fake out moment or two, highlighting their absences even more. You never forget that they exist though, they are always referenced by the main leads (my husband this, your wife that) and many subtle shots of their weddings rings, but they are merely shadows over the lives of the characters we’re following.

I’m learning that many movies that are classified as romance are not so in the traditional sense. When I first started these reviews, I thought that many of the movies I’d be watching were going to be the quintessential boys meets girl, falls in love, kiss, happy end credits, but through this series, I’ve learned that romance is a matter of perspective. And in the case of In the Mood for Love, tension and what if’s, are very much apart of the romantic experience, sometimes just as much as actually having a relationship with someone. It leaves a different kind of imprint on you and your life experiences. The leads never do physically cheat on their spouses (although it is heavily suspected their own spouses are having an affair as well), but they fight against the impulses and just find comfort in company with each other.

The main characters were likable, relatable, and down to earth as was the entire movie. I neither rooted for or against their relationship, just followed along for the ride. This was not a vivacious drama or even a full bodied plot, it is just about two real people existing with jobs and societal expectations and living a paralleled mundane life with all its nuances. The closing words that flash on the screen, “It was a moment in time,” further reinforce that this was a slice of life. It happened, the magic existed, it ended, and time moves on.

7/10, there isn’t too much of a story, but the film is poetry in motion for those that like moody environments and romances that never were

And that’s it for this week. I love the way that through film you can see the way different cultures portray romance in their societies. There’s so many facets of life that come into play on whether a relationship will come into fruition or not, no matter where you are from or how you are living your life.

The journey continues! Thank you for reading.

Letterboxd Summary: A former Secret Service agent grudgingly takes an assignment to protect a pop idol who’s threatened by a crazed fan. At first, the safety-obsessed bodyguard and the self-indulgent diva totally clash. But before long, all that tension sparks fireworks of another sort, and the love-averse tough guy is torn between duty and romance.

The Bodyguard (1992) was a movie whose reputation proceeded it. I had heard of the movie, the unspeakable love between the leads that’s still mentioned today, and of course the soundtrack (I love 90s pop music), notably one of Whitney’s most famous hits I Will Always Love You, but had never watched it myself. Until now.

As the summary details, Kevin Costner plays a Secret Service agent who becomes a bodyguard to Whitney Houston’s character, a pop star. It’s a simple plot and a simple execution as well.

The first thing that stuck out to me when watching the movie was the chemistry of the leads. From the first time they lock eyes, there’s a palpable energy between them. That chemistry cannot be faked and leads lacking chemistry in a romance is one of my biggest pet peeves, thankfully that’s not the case here. Although the characters don’t share a ton of dialogue in the film, his calm, cool under pressure demeanor and her wild, misunderstood antics are a match. He gets her without trying and the attraction and slow burn between the actors is felt.

Like I said earlier, the plot is simple. This movie is not just romance, but a thriller and suspense. Someone is hunting Whitney’s character, sending her threatening letters, placing bombs in her dressing room, breaking into her house and stalking her. Her manager and bodyguard spend the movie trying to figure out whose behind it all, while keeping her alive.

There are a few red herrings, after all famous people have a lot of enemies/fans near and far. I predicted one of the villain twists, but not the final big bad before the reveal, but even so, it was not too jaw dropping. More like an oh. I can’t say that the conclusion (or movie overall) really has an emotional punch the way you’d want a romance movie to. Even at the climax and fall out, I thought …hm is that realistic? And then when I looked up what they had originally written it made more sense. But alas, romance readers (viewers) love their HEA and this movie follows suit.

The soundtrack is a strong point. It sold millions and millions of copies back when the movie was released and rightly so. It’s hard to go wrong with Whitney’s silky smooth vocals and the movie does a good job of peppering her songs throughout the film whether she’s the one singing them or not.

Now for the bad. The side characters were ANNOYING. The characters that you do like, such as the manager or the chauffeur, are important as far as the plot goes but don’t have huge parts, while the publicist and unwilling head of security unfortunately take up too much screen time. Almost NO ONE in her circle really cared about her and it was aggravating to watch. The publicist especially, I assume was to mirror how Hollywood treats their artist as nothing more than a cash cow even in the face of impending and moral danger, but it didn’t stop me from yelling at my screen every time he talked. He never had a redemption arc either, he was a dick till the end. Every character in this movie besides the manager acted as if Kevin Costner was doing them the biggest disservice by trying to keep the woman they all live off of alive. Like him trying to protect her was just the biggest headache for them all. An hour of this later and I was over it. It was honestly distracting from the rest of what was going on and from the love story itself.

Overall 5.5/10, good chemistry between leads but everything else fell flat

Watch if you want a dramatic soap operatic romance with well acted but not always well written characters (except the leads). I personally think this would have been a good cable TV movie back in the day, something to watch on a rainy day

Well that’s my review of the Bodyguard. I listened to Whitney’s music while writing this and I hope everyone else feels inspired to listen too. I also watched Kevin Costner’s eulogy speech at her funeral and cried. She was a true beauty and talent impossible to replicate till this day.

The journey continues next week… thanks for reading!

Letterboxd Summary: Hiroko attends the memorial service of her fiancé, Itsuki Fujii, who died in a mountain-climbing incident. Although Itsuki’s mother says that their old house is gone, Hiroko records the address listed under his name in his yearbook and sends him a letter. Surprisingly, she receives a reply, and discovers it came from his old classmate, a girl who also happens to be called Itsuki Fujii.

Love Letter (1995), directed by Shunji Iwai, is a Japanese film that sets place in Kobe, Japan during the middle of winter. The story follows Hiroko, who two years ago, lost her fiance Itsuki to a mountain climbing accident. We follow her as she navigates the long journey to moving on. Hiroko sends a letter to Itsuki from beyond the grave as a way to help cope with her loss and unexpectedly receives a reply, from the same named female Itsuki Fuiji, starting a pen pal relationship between the two women.

This film is interesting for the fact that it never shows the love interest in the present day (as he’s dead), but instead he’s only met in school flashbacks. You only ever get to know male Itsuki ithrough what other people say about him and from the two women writing about him, mainly female Itsuki’s perspective.

This film shows that even in death there can still be more to learn about a person and that a version of someone exists differently in every person’s memory that has ever met them. Another main theme is the impact that a person can have on your life, whether you’ve realized it or not, whether they’ve told you or not. The pacing of the story is told in interchanging timelines, helped along narratively by the letters. Throughout the movie there are many people that know male Itsuki and tell their perspectives of him to Hiroko, such as Itsuki’s best friend and her now boyfriend, his parents, mountain climbing buddies, childhood classmates, and most importantly the female Itsuki Fuiji.

I will say the movie subverts some expectations because who you think is the lead love interest, Hiroto, by the end of the movie that notion is somewhat flipped on it’s head. It makes for an impactful final note, but I noticed some negative sentiments when reading other reviews about it as well. Both present day Hiroto and female Itsuki are played by the same actress, so it’s another layer of perspective that is challenged and adds some mystique to the dreamier film events and parallels being shown. I find that in Asian media the idea of the first love and fated lovers are extremely powerful emotional tools and the way that this movie reveals those things to you is not so typical, but equally as important in the end.

I think this is an overall sweet and cozy movie that reminds you that everyone has lived a life with their own unique experiences and every person has their own way of seeing the world thru their eyes. Hiroko is still learning things about Itsuki she never knew two years after he’s died and while female Itsuki is writing Hiroto letters about her lived experiences, she’s also reflecting on her own childhood and her own loss in life. But in the end, time moves on and so do people.

This movie is more about grief than romance. Every character has lost someone and is coming to terms with it or reconciling with themselves in some way.

Watch this movie for a sweet and poignant story about loving someone in death and figuring out all the ways to say goodbye.

6.5/10, more nostalgic than romantic, intertwining love stories told through memories

What is love?! Three movies in and I haven’t my soul crushing romance yet… but many more movies still to go! Thanks for reading.

Letterboxd Summary: Two lost souls visiting Tokyo – the young, neglected wife of a photographer and a washed-up movie star shooting a TV commercial – find an odd solace and pensive freedom to be real in each other’s company, away from their lives in America.

First, both of their characters are married to other people. Bill’s character is neglectful to his family and kid, while Scarlett’s character is getting neglected by her husband who leaves her all day alone in Japan, often not even returning to their hotel room together. As the movie kept going on, I didn’t see how it could really progress to a love story, an emotional affair at best, and even though they share a (spoiler) kiss at the end, they don’t really ever fall in love per se. And then it dawned on me, oh it’s not really a romance. And I think that makes sense with the story that is being told. When watching the progression of their relationship as they become closer, I kept thinking, “this is alright if they are friends, I guess.” It was still creepy to me in some aspects, but more understandable.

The real focus of the movie is that the characters feel alone in in a foreign country. Two rich but sad Americans in big old weird Tokyo by themselves. Bill is a famous actor shooting a commercial for a quick buck, whose completely checked out with his family, and Scarlett is a young, lonely, abandoned wife, whose husband couldn’t care less about anything that isn’t his job. Japan is weird and quirky and they are two small fish in a big pond.

And even though the director is a female (Sofia Coppola), I actually felt it was male gaze-y in some parts, such as the opening shot of 17 year old Scarlett’s butt in see thru panties (guess how many gooner Reddit comments I read about this) and the fact that balding middle aged depressed and grumpy man attracts young beautiful woman in loveless relationship, just because he shows her a lick of attention.

But when I looked up reviews it shocked me how many people said this was a masterpiece and their absolute favorite movie. Huh? A lot of mentions of beautiful cinematography, moody vibes, the perfect encapsulation of haunting loneliness. And okay, I can see it from this angle. But as a romance? Or comedy? Despite one funny scene, no. I think as a character study or art film (which it is, but I went into it blind), yes, if I would have watched it under that pretense then maybe I would’ve felt differently. Aesthetics of other countries can be so beautiful and nostalgic. And traveling can be lonely and isolating, especially if you don’t know the language and are more introverted, I solo travel a lot myself. The movie is slow paced and derelict of much of a plot (not necessarily a deterrent), but the real beauty is showing the juxtaposition of being somewhere foreign and different, learning to take the good with the bad, and connecting with someone going through the exact same experience with you in a specific/challenging moment in time in your life.

In conclusion, I think this is a movie that is very of it’s time. And in some movies this works in favor (Before Sunrise) and in some movies this works against.

Things I liked about this movie: I like that you know how the characters are feeling just through watching them. Nothing is told to you, but you can really feel it. It’s a pretty movie

My rating: 4/10 Not a romance movie, don’t go into it thinking that. More of a two people need each other to not be lonely and run away from their unhappy marriages for a week. Not unwatchable, but not my cup of tea either

Thank you for reading my first time watch review on Lost In Translation! Do you view this as a romance movie or more of a Ferris wheel of life vibes? I’m still searching for the ultimate romance media….

If you could be left in a hotel room in any city which would it be? Let me know your thoughts in the comments.

Leave a comment

Letterboxd summary: An unexpected meeting on a train leads two travelers to spend an evening wandering through Vienna. As the night unfolds, they share stories and conversations about life and love, exploring new ideas while a quiet intimacy grows between them, knowing it may be their only night together

Things I loved about the movie: good writing, good chemistry between leads, no frills, simplistic

Before Sunrise really reminded me of the power of undistracted connection. The power of talking with eye contact and a conversation with intelligence, honesty, flirtatiousness, and interest. The movie is just two people, one day, one night, a long conversation, and a lot of tension between the lines. A simple plot, but that’s what makes it work. It’s grounded and realistic. Our leads are brought together by chance and are propelled by that same willingness. They want to be in the present moment with each other and see where the wind takes them. It’s pure, sincere, and lovely to feel.

This movie made me nostalgic for the time before we were overrun by technology. Before it permeated every facet of our existence and shredded our attention spans to specks. All romance suspends disbelief somewhat, but in such a slice of fated life film, I found myself wondering, could this moment happen today in this way?

I came to the conclusions: yes and no. I think yes it is possible to meet someone and go on an adventure and talk and exist, but at the same time, there were instances where I just knew a cellphone would ruin it. Quiet moments where the main characters were squirming in their chemistry, forced to bask in it, (the music booth scene), where I couldn’t help think, “hm, if this was now, how many people would pull out their phones right here?” (I love daydreaming otherwise though, please don’t click out). But phones have made it second nature to fill every space and moment, made it where we reach for it out of habit, fill a scrolling addiction, and/or unable to sit still in any kind of awkward situation. It’s such a disservice to romance. There’s a sexiness to that tension, a push and pull of unspoken excitement, the “we both feel it in the air.” But in the real world, I’m not sure the likeliness for that to play out anymore.

The ending as well, where (spoilers)...

.

.

.

…the main characters go their separate ways.

The end where they promise to meet again, write letters, and wistfully ride into the sun is just right. (Again, my thoughts invaded me: how would this moment play out today? Does it delude the dreaminess and memory of knowing that person in only that way if you can just immediately add someone on instagram? Does it soften the blow of leaving them or make it worse?) There’s magic and context to the scene that I’m not sure could exist in the same way today.

But overall, I see why this is considered THE romance movie. It’s just a straightforward plot with two characters that match each other, a night out on the town, a date you wish will never end, chemistry you can feel, the sun you don’t want to rise.

9.5/10 was a beauty to watch, but I’m not sure if it changed my life just yet

Thank you for reading.