Edgar Wright is my favorite movie director of all time. I’ve loved so many of his works like Shawn of the Dead or Scott Pilgrim v.s. the World. What really sets him apart from other directors is that the way he shoots his scenes is so captivating and pleasing. His movies, though admittedly not for everyone, can still be enjoyed by a wide array of audiences while still having something bigger to digest for people who want something to think about when watching a film.

Baby Driver is Wright’s most recent filmwork and it’s a film that really accentuates everything I love about this director. It’s an action movie with some jokes sprinkled in here and there. Now, action movies usually aren’t known for their plot, and yes, this film doesn’t have an amazing revolutionary story and, admittedly, almost made me want to go to sleep at times. However, this movie tells its story in such a unique way, accentuated by Wright’s direction and writing, that it becomes much more engaging than a typical action film.

The film is about a driver nicknamed “Baby”, a young man in his late teens to early 20s, who acts as a getaway driver for heists, after being picked up by a Atlanta kingpin as a protege as a kid. Initially, Baby is a quiet and distant character. He always has earphones on because he suffers from tinnitus, which he acquired after a car accident that killed his parents. He also always wears his shades and never shows any type of emotion. Even the colors of his clothes, white hoodie with a black vest-area, make him radiate this aura of coolness. This costume is actually very important to him as a character because the shades and earphones show his tendency to drown-out the bad things he does, by distorting his vision and blocking out noise, and the black and white clothing he wears show how he has a black and white view of the world. However, over the course of the film, he evolves as a character. He starts to show emotions like remorse for the people he’s helped kill or love for the characters he’s become attached to. He starts removing his earphones and shades more often, and from black and white, his clothes start to adopt grey or become blood stained. He visually evolves throughout the course of the film, which already sets him apart from a lot of other action movie protagonists: he actually develops as a character instead of just remaining the same badass he was at the beginning of the film.

Now, what I really want to talk about is how you can tell from the very start that this movie was directed by Edgar Wright. The way he shoots his scenes is so visually stunning because of how stimulating they are. Perhaps his most well-known signature in direction is linking the music being played to the actions happening on screen. As someone who is exposed to video editing, I know that this is something that is quite challenging for most filmmakers to do for a single scene, let alone multiple action scenes so I can really appreciate just how difficult many of the clips from his movies are. This signature is shown better in Baby Driver than any of his other movies.  The synching of his scenes is done everywhere from casual car-door-closing to full-blown shootouts where the guns end up becoming the instruments. Every time these scenes are shown, I go anywhere from “That’s so cute” to giving a jaw-dropped “WOW”.

This movie is so action-packed and fun to watch, that I can recommend it to anyone who wants to watch an action movie that isn’t completely mindless.

F For Fake is an interesting film. It is shot in a similar manner to a documentary, which is usually a type of film that is non-fictitious, and full of facts. In fact, if it weren’t for Sir Ty explicitly telling the class before the viewing that the film is not a documentary, I would’ve assumed it to be one because that was the only thing I felt I could make sense of from the film. However, after reviewing the film and studying it, much like many of the other films that were shown in class, I found an appreciation for its unique style.

I mentioned that the film was shot in a similar manner to a documentary, as it has a narrator who provides commentary on characters that actually existed. In this case, it’s Elmyr de Hory, a renown art forger. After reading up on the history of the film, I found out that this is actually due to the fact that Orson Welles, the director of the film, was originally going to use its footage for an actual documentary on the artist. This is interesting because of how ironic this is. As I mentioned previously, documentaries are meant to be non-fictitious takes on reality, with commentary given by a narrator. Just having a documentary based on forgery is itself ironic, but what accentuates this is that the narrator isn’t even trustworthy himself. Though the film definitely does not take elements from most films, it does use foreshadowing, and it admittedly does this effectively. The first scene is of Orson Welles performing a magic trick on a little boy. He does so wearing a cape, and calls himself a charlatan, which is a fancy word for a “fake”. It’s important to note this because capes serve no real purpose other than to make a character appear more mystical. If you look at common media, people who usually wear capes are superheroes or magicians; characters of fiction or characters that generate the idea of being “larger than life”. In history, people who have worn capes, or at least were thought to have worn capes, are glorified figures like Julius Caesar, who are often portrayed as people who are greater than average humans, or at least they generate that idea, which is of course untrue. Interestingly, he then tells us that for the next hour, everything he says will be true. However, since he called himself an illusionist, how are we, the viewers,  supposed to believe that what he said is true? This bears fruit in the final minutes of the play when Welles declares that he lied about the story of Oja, her grandfather, and Picasso. As a viewer, this both regaled and frustrated me because it was actually fun to recall that he basically portrayed himself as an untrustworthy figure in the very first scene of the film and then most of us then trust him without question, which, in a very meta fashion, shows how easy it is to fool people. However it also frustrated me because it made me feel that the whole point of Picasso and Oja’s story was just to show that we shouldn’t have trusted the narrator. The truth is, now that we know that he lied about that one part, it’s hard to believe the rest of the film because we have no assurance whether or not he was lying or telling the truth at some parts.

Digressing, I thoroughly enjoyed having my brain be tickled by the idea that the art forger may not be the real fake in the art world, but the so-called experts themselves. If they are unable to tell the difference between a fake painting and a genuine one, then would it not make them the ones who are faking in the scenario? This was actually quite interesting and I still ponder that question until now.

Overall, I found the film to be very strange because of how its story was told, but I can say, without faking it, that I enjoyed this film.

Upon my initial viewing, my first thoughts of the film were like the first thoughts that I had for most of the films that were shown in class: “What the heck just happened?” However, upon studying the film further (and by that, I mean reading reviews of the film and watching film analysis videos of it on Youtube) I found that the film is actually quite profound, and, actually a bit like 1999’s The Matrix, really asks the question “Which is better, to live in a harsh reality or a pleasant fantasy?” The things I enjoyed the most about the film are how it asks deep questions without directly addressing those questions.

Though I cannot really talk much about the characters as individuals, I do, however, have a lot to say about the ideas that they represent and their themes. The juxtaposition between Fred and Pete is like night and day. Fred is a normal, some would argue dull or boring character. It feels as though the film has written him to be bland and uninteresting. He’s a white, middle-aged male who lives in the suburbs, so he already feels like the run-of-the-mill guy, which is actually perfect. He is a boring guy that doesn’t really have anything that is too interesting about him. This, however, has an effect on Fred as he believes that he is inadequate for his wife Renee and is unable to sexually please her. This eventually leads to him doing the unexpected by killing her and being sentenced to prison for it. What’s important to note here is that he vehemently denies that he murdered his wife, despite all evidence pointing to him doing so. This is an important plot point because this leads to him imagining the persona of Pete, who embodies Fred’s desire to be interesting to women. Pete, as a character, is far more interesting than Fred. He works a “masculine” job as a mechanic, as opposed to Fred’s life as a saxophonist. Furthermore, he is shown to be able to please women very well, as he has a girlfriend and even has the opportunity to cheat on her with the attractive “Alice Wakefield”, who uncoincidentally is portrayed by the same actress as Renee is. Speaking of Alice and Renee, I found it incredibly pleasing to know that the film basically confirms that they are the same character through the scene showing the investigation of Dick Laurent’s house, where a photograph showing Renee is shown, which is interesting because that same photograph was shown previously to have both Renee and Alice. Renee as a character is just as bland and uninteresting as Fred. Both of these characters, together, represent the blandness that is absolute reality; as these characters feel very flat and generic with nothing about them being “larger than life”. Alice, however, is portrayed as someone incredibly attractive and is even the love interest of a mobster, which make her far more exciting. Together, Alice and Pete are characters that represent fantasy; being something out-of-the-ordinary.

What I really like about the film, though, is when these lines between reality and fantasy are blurred. As Pete suddenly starts to turn back into Fred towards the end, which I feel like is the time in reality where Fred actually has to face the inevitability of his sentenced execution. Even until the end, Fred is running away from the truth, which he previously escaped by imagining the persona of Pete but can no longer do so. When the film ends abruptly, and Fred screams in the darkness, this is what I feel is the point in reality where Fred dies. This was a very interesting choice to make in storytelling because it was hard to understand at first, but after thinking about it, it actually made a lot of sense and made me appreciate the film further.

Though, I am normally not a fan of avant-garde films such as this one, I found Lost Highway to be incredibly interesting after delving into the psyche of its characters.

Among the many film names that were found in the syllabus for the class, I was hard pressed to find anything that I had previously watched; that was until I saw 2016’s Kimi no na wa or just “Your Name”. I was immediately excited to rewatch it because it is one of my favorite animated films to date. The film has a unique love story that transcends both space and time, immaculately visualized in Japanese animation, with an amazing soundtrack that blends in perfectly with the scenery while still being catchy and enjoyable enough to be enjoyed on its own. Though I had read analyses of the film on websites such as Rotten Tomatoes and participated in discussions on the film on Reddit, I could never really grasp a complete understanding of the film, so I’m glad that this movie was one of those that we would be discussing in class.

The first thing that I’d like to talk about from this movie is just how weird the plot is. From the very first scene, it follows a non-linear storyline and progresses in a very odd fashion. We start off with our male protagonist, Taki, as he is as confused as the viewers presumably are when he finds himself in a teenage girl’s body. What confused me upon my first viewing was that in the very next scene, we are shown how the girl, who is our female protagonist Mitsuha, would’ve acted on a normal day, which suggests that Mitsuha is living a life a day after Taki took over her body. We are also shown Mitsuha and how she reacts to being in a male’s body. Though body-swapping isn’t exactly a new plot point in media, just look at 2003’s Freaky Friday, this is, what I feel, is one of the few times it is portrayed realistically. Taki, being a teenage boy, would of course be mystified and amused by the phenomenon of having breasts. In the same vein, Mitsuha would also be shocked to find out what having a penis feels like. Though this was portrayed in a rather humorous fashion, it was a realistic yet unique portrayal of the concept. However, what I liked most about this body-swapping is how deeply this lends itself into the development of the relationship between Taki and Mitsuha.

To swap bodies with someone would be taking the saying “Put yourself in another person’s shoes” literally. It is primarily through this way that Taki and Mitsuha build their relationship. Over the course of their interaction, they develop a strong emotional bond with each other as they quite literally live out each other’s lives, learning the struggles of their lives and the people whom they have to deal with on a daily basis. This is made more emotionally gut-wrenching during their last body swap, as Mitsuha scheduled a date for Taki with his long-time crush. However, Mitsuha wakes up from the swap in tears, presumably because she was jealous that Taki was about to go on a date with another woman. Through this sequence, we understand how deeply Mitsuha cared for Taki despite never formally meeting him.

The storytelling is further enhanced by the visuals that the film has. This movie is absolutely gorgeous, and it feels like every single shot of the landscape can be used as one of Microsoft’s stock background photos for Windows. However, the visual storytelling and the symbols in the film are also genius. One example is how part of the meteor breaks off from the main comet and it hits the town. This can be taken literally, but it can also symbolize how there are two realities that existed within the show that were changed through Taki and Mitsuha’s intervention: a “red” reality where the town, and consequently a third of its population, was destroyed by the meteor and a “blue” reality where everyone was evacuated and saved.

Perhaps what I liked most about the film is its soundtrack. Primarily composed by RADWIMPS, a Japanese band, I actually found out through the class’ discussion of the film that the reason the integration of every song felt so seamless and perfect was because they actually tailor-made each song to be used in the film by collaborating with the animators. The soundtrack features amazing songs that fit perfectly with each scene that they’re paired with, like the high energy “Zen Zen Zense” during the body-swapping montage as well as the calming “Sparkle” contrasting the panic that the Mitsuha and her friends must’ve felt during the sequence that they were trying to evacuate the city.

After all has been said and done, I thoroughly enjoyed Kimi no Nawa, and though I may never completely understand the film, that will not stop me from enjoying it every time I rewatch it.

The Endless is a film about people being toyed with by a playful God-like entity who sticks them into time loops, forcing them to live the same moments, over and over and over again. Ironically, the film is actually about change. Over the course of the events of the film, we see how the dynamic of the two main characters, the brothers Justin and Aaron, change and evolve, despite the theme of the film being the idea of being “stuck in a loop” or living the same events over and over again. Overall, the film’s strongest suit lies in its characters, their relationships, and seeing how they develop as a result of the oddities.

In the first few scenes, we are shown the power dynamic between the two main characters, Justin and his younger brother, Aaron. The former seems to have control over the decisions that they collectively make as a family. This is evidenced by their no longer being associated with the community, as Justin wanted to leave despite his younger brother’s opposition. Being a younger brother myself, I understand this power dynamic all-too-well. This dynamic is even enforced subtly. Early on, Justin would repeatedly state that the community was a cult, while Aaron would vehemently argue against this belief. This framed the dynamic as less about Justin being the wiser sibling and Aaron being the dumber one, but more about Justin wanting to be in control, ironically seeming more immature in the process.

Justin’s lust for control is well-highlighted throughout the course of the film. In addition to wanting to be the shot-caller when it came to decisions that he and Aaron had to make together, Justin is inherently defiant of the enigmatic entity that controls the camp and its surrounding areas. We see how Justin is disgruntled when he loses against the entity in “The Struggle” which is literally a tug-of-war between the participant and the entity, showing how prideful he is. Furthermore, he is so hell-bent on leaving the camp, and becomes even more so when he finds out about the time loops. His desire for control is just as much about himself as it is about other people. We understand that Justin wants to live his own life, and not have to bow down to other people, even if one of those happens to be an all-powerful, time-twisting entity. Ironically, by not being stuck in a time-loop, he loses control of his life by subjecting himself to the uncertainty that is reality. By not knowing what will happen next in his life, he has to fear death since he won’t be brought back after a reset.

I do like that eventually, Justin learns how to give-up his control out of love for his brother. Up to this point, I haven’t really talked much about Aaron because I honestly don’t find him as interesting as Justin as a character. To me, he lacks any free will of his own and constantly has to beg to Justin in order to get his way, even for just a little bit. This is evidenced by how he has to repeatedly ask Justin for just another day at the camp when he could simply leave his older brother’s company and stay with the community, where he believes he will be happy, for good. Back to Justin, it eventually comes to the point where he has to leave the camp or he will be stuck in another reset. Aaron, though, insists on staying. Once Justin realizes that his younger brother won’t change his decision, he concedes, and as a result, Aaron decides it’s time to leave as well. I really liked this scene, and the scenes that followed, because it showcased how Aaron earned his older brother’s respect. He asks to drive, then Justin lets him. He checks the fuel gauge, then Justin says that he should handle it. It feels as if the entity’s time loop was not the only loop that the brothers escaped, but they also escaped the loop of their previous power dynamic into something entirely new.

Overall, I didn’t enjoy the film on my initial viewing. However, after discussing and reflecting on the characters, I found the film to be incredibly deep and worthy of appreciation.

I love Sorry To Bother You. For once in this class, I didn’t feel the need to look deeply into the film to understand it as it was a film that, though still niche, was meant for a more general audience. It’s an enjoyable film that pokes fun at a lot of the things in contemporary society like internet memes, abstract art, and societal norms while also tackling bigger issues such as racism and capitalism. Furthermore, it has a diverse cast of characters that really appeal to a wide array of audiences, not just because of their racial differences, but also because of their personalities and motivations. Finally, what I liked most about the film was its writing. This movie is, despite its heavy social commentary, is a movie that was made to make people life and by all means it did through clever writing, pop-culture references, shock factor, and sometimes a combination of these things. Watching this film was an amazing experience that made me leave CSR feeling like every box on my “What makes a film good” list was checked.

First, it is a film that really allows itself to thrive in its era while still having timeless themes. As the film was released in 2018, it throws a bone to the people of the era with jokes about the internet, game shows, and the much beloved Terry Crews. Despite this, I can still see it being relevant in years like 2040 because of how constant the things it talks about are, particularly capitalism and its alienating effect on the lower class. The film clearly shows how people are willing to do bad things or support greedy business practices in order to promote their own personal self-interest. It also shows that motivations for doing bad things. For example, we were shown how Cassius’ uncle was struggling due to debt, and when Cassius gave him his paycheck after accepting his new position as a power caller, we saw how his uncle celebrated and thanked him. There will always be people who believe that more money is better, but not only for themselves but also for their families and the people they care about.

The diverse cast of characters is also something to write home about. The film represents various people of color taking up important roles, which is always something nice to see. However, we also see that they’re all fleshed out and have their own personalities. Squeeze and Detroit just want to fight for what’s right, Sal wants to be there for his best friend, while Cassius has to debate whether to keep his honor while remaining poor or get rich, at the cost of his morality. It’s also interesting to see how these characters all interact with each other. Detroit and Cassius start off loving each other, but then as the latter gets absorbed in his work, which the former does not approve of, their relationship starts to deteriorate, which reflects to real life.

What I really love about the film is its writing. The film’s jokes hit more often than they miss, but what’s interesting is just how deep these jokes run. For example, the whole rap scene was funny because of its shock factor. However, the joke runs deeper than that. It is a commentary on how the privileged, “white” people view those beneath them and their culture as modes of entertainment instead of what they truly are: the struggles of the underprivileged. This is just one example of how deep the writing in this movie is.

Overall, I enjoyed the film and it really made me question the ethics of the capitalist system, how it affects people, and the motivations and drives of those who spearhead it; something I’d have never thought of saying after watching a comedy.

I would define a “stoner” film as a movie that doesn’t take itself too seriously while still having dialogue or scenes that come off as deep or philosophical. Usually a movie that would fall under this category would be something that has a ridiculous plot, or in the case of a movie such as say The Big Lebowski no concrete plot at all. Due to this, a movie of this nature is usually carried by an excellent script. Another thing to note about these sorts of movies is that usually, they’re watched with low to nonexistent expectations, thus people emerge from their viewing experience thoroughly amused. This is exactly the case with Repo Man. This comedy’s dialogue combined with its quirky feel made for an enjoyable sober viewing experience.

Repo Man’s dialogue is what makes me call it a stoner film. Some of its most memorable lines include “Let’s go eat some sushi and not pay” and “Let’s go do some crimes.” These lines are worded so awkwardly; so absurdly, that they just work. By deconstructing the dialogue in this way, the writers had no need for overused one-liners or obvious jokes; the film does not try to be funny, it just is. I would also like to acknowledge that the delivery for these types of lines is spot on. The deadpan, “I am unaware of how ridiculous this line sounds so I will say it in a completely serious way” style that the actors used for the dialogue assisted in making the film more comedic. The film also has the philosophical deep lines that make stoner films so unique. Having these intelligent, sometimes pretentious, lines in a film that is not supposed to be thought-provoking is another joke in itself. Overall, the dialogue was written and delivered very well and I could definitely see myself quoting the movie in the future. Sadly, I don’t think most people would get the reference.

I really enjoyed the overall tone that the film has. Set by the dialogue, the film does not take itself seriously and in effect, becomes unafraid of experimentation. One example of this experimentation is its use of debranding all of its food items. I’m sure the director had a reason for wanting to do this but I am just glad that I would not have to complain about annoying product placement in this film. Even its effects, from its sounds to its absurdly bright green car, though dated, all have a unique touch to them. I find it to be quite fitting that the film also uses a lot of punk rock music, a music that is founded on the idea of going against the norm; perfect for its overall style. I would also like to commend the fact that I have no idea who any of the actors were. By not knowing anybody, I allowed myself to see the characters for who they are instead of seeing actors playing a role.

I found Repo Man to be incredibly enjoyable. It is a diamond-in-the-rough and I am glad that it was shown in class because I do not think I would have discovered this film without it.

“Music has the power to change your life forever.”

As profound as this quote is, one would not expect that it is actually a line in a song from a children’s television show known as Phineas and Ferb and, for the most part, it holds true. Music is more than just something that people listen to in their free time. People could use it as a retreat from their problems or as a way to empower themselves. As a result, people view those who create music as more than just talented individuals; they are regarded as idols, heroes, or even gods. What sets Velvet Goldmine apart from other films that follow rock stars through their career is how it shows just how empowering music can be to people, while also showing how it can humble even the most talented of stars.

Music is an incredibly powerful medium. It has the ability to both empower people’s emotions and bring people together.

I can personally speak about my experience with music amplifying my emotions. During the summer heading into college, I was not in a good place in terms of my mental health. I felt a mixture of feeling alone, angry, and miserable. I believed that nobody could fully fathom the things I felt. Around that time, I started listening to bands such as All Time Low or Mayday Parade who had songs that revolved around those very feelings. I found myself obsessed with their music. I would crash on my bed with my earphones firmly plugged into my ear canals with the volume maxed on just to completely lose myself in the music. I remember thinking “This song is about my life” or “This song is me” when listening to some of them. This is why the scene of the young Arthur Stuart pointing at the television screen while shouting “That’s me!” resonated so much with me. He finally saw someone whom he could identify with and that is how I felt when I first listened to All Time Low’s Weightless, a song about not wanting to feel stuck and helpless. In the same way that relating to an icon can make us feel empowered, listening to a song that we resonate can give us that same effect.

Music also unites people. The universal aspect of the medium was shown in the film when it united the British Brian Slade and the American Curt Wild. The former even united thousands of people through his concerts. Sadly, I have never actually attended a concert of a band that I would say I am a fan of. However, I still have felt the feeling of belongingness that music gives to people through talking about the singers or bands that I grew up listening to such as Taylor Swift or Big Time Rush. I have personally developed many of my friendships through our mutual appreciation for these certain bands, showing that even if I do not attend concerts, music can still unite people.

However, music can also bring out the worst in people. In the context of anything fame-related, fanatics will always exist. These fans are those who develop unhealthy obsessions with those whom they idolize and will do anything for them. Though usually a fanatic is just an average person, it can be argued that in the film, Brian Slade was a fanatic of Curt Wild. He was obsessed with him; wanting to be involved in his career and life. This eventually led to Slade’s downfall as he grew increasingly hard to work with. Though I do feel that the trope of having a character become increasingly unlikeable as his fame grows to be rather overplayed, I do however appreciate how something as simple as feelings can shatter Slade’s image, showing that he is indeed a normal human.

I admired many things about the film but, perhaps more than any other movie shown in class so far, I felt myself resonate so much with scenes and themes that it tackled.

My Own Private Idaho tells a story of two young men both in search of something that fulfills them and how this leads them to an emotional rollercoaster of a journey.

First of all, I would be lying if I said that the movie did not have a slow start. The starting scenes of the film weren’t the most exciting; in fact, I found myself trying to keep my eyelids from crashing down at times. Majority of the film was shot in an avant-garde style and though I realized I found the film quite enjoyable, I could not appreciate the style very much during my initial viewing as I couldn’t completely understand certain scenes. Though I did not pay much attention to the plot, I at least understood that the protagonists were on a goose-chase to find one of their mothers, which leads me to my favorite aspect of the film: Mike and Scott.

The main characters are both complex, but aren’t so complicated that they lose their relatability. It’s important to have both of these traits in a main character as complexity allows the character to be unique and memorable, while relatability allows the character to be more likeable. I find that many films are challenged to have main characters that are equally complex as they are relatable, as both counteract each other to an extent, yet My Own Private Idaho accomplishes this in both of its leads. The characters themselves were portrayed rather excellently by their actors as it felt like they just melted into their roles.

Mike fits into the “pauper” character stereotype. He’s a street hustler with family and trust issues who’s willing to do anything (and anyone) for money. What makes this character likeable, and at the same time incredibly tragic, is that he’s just so flawed and it feels like nothing really goes his way. He tried to track down his mother through the use of clues, yet ultimately nothing came out of it. He also confessed to his best friend, who didn’t return his feelings. He even had to witness that same friend fall in love and run off with a girl whom he only just recently met, abandoning him in a foreign country. As a boy of the streets, he never really knew what it felt like to have someone to rely on; a home. He tried to look for that in his work, his mother, and his best friend and just couldn’t find it. He’s a tragic character because he could never find his “own private Idaho”: a place or person that would love him.

Scott is Mike’s foil character. I’d consider him a “rebellious prince” type of character as he comes from a life where everything is handed to him yet chooses to be a street hustler out of choice rather than necessity. Instead of searching for acceptance like Mikey, his motivations for becoming a street hustler stem from his desire of fulfillment and enjoyment. His transition from street hustler to the “crown prince” is an eye-opening development as with this, Mike has once again lost his “own private Idaho”.

Overall, I found the film to be very quirky and unique, but undoubtedly carried by its interesting and unique lead characters.

One of my favorite things about watching a movie with a non-linear plot is asking the question “Why did the director make this stylistic choice?” To be honest, I usually dislike movies with this kind of plot structure, as I believe it needlessly overcomplicates a would-be simple and coherent story, confusing the viewer a bit in exchange for presenting the story in a different, more unique way. However, Futureless Things managed to become an exception to the stigma that I have against non-linear films. It tickled my brain, making me ask questions out of curiosity rather than out of the need to understand the film. I kept on asking myself things like “How do all these stories come together?” or “How does the title come into play?” which I think are what a “weird” film like this one should be making its audience ask. I thoroughly enjoyed watching the film because it kept my interest with its uniqueness whilst not overcomplicating itself to the point where I’d be too confused to follow the events.

I think what made the film’s non-linear plot structure work for me is that it didn’t really have a “main” protagonist. Instead, upon viewing the film, I was treated with seemingly normal, yet unique characters who had their own stories. Where most films of this type I believe fall flat is when they force a perspective on a single character, which just ends up becoming off-putting due in large part by being hard to follow. Cutting the events of the movie into slices following certain characters let me focus on what was happening then and there instead of trying to piece the events of the film as I was watching it.

Speaking of the characters, I found them to be quite unique and memorable. None of the part-timers, except maybe the lazy old worker, fell into pitfall that is predictability. The stories that I enjoyed watching the most were those of the aspiring actor, the refugee, and the aspiring English-speaker not only because I found them to be funny but also because of how relatable the characters felt to me. The problems of being judged by your nationality, how well you speak a certain language, or even just being kept from a place where you want to be due to an unforeseen circumstance are all ones that I relate to. I think what also helped make these characters relatable is that they were nothing more than convenience store workers. They’re not government officials trying to stop a rampaging lizard, nor are they Scottish drug addicts on a heroin trip, but they’re just everyday people trying to deal with everyday problems. Though they might seem “boring”, this aspect of their character allows them to replicate real life.

What I really want to talk about is how the theme of being “temporary” comes in. First of all, we’re following convenience store workers. People work at convenience stores for a number of reasons: to help contribute to their household funds, to earn some extra cash on the side, or because they feel like they don’t have anything else to do, all of which can be boiled down to the idea of working there because they feel they have to. Second, that same idea also goes for convenience store customers. Most people don’t go to a convenience store because they want to go on a date, but because they need something like food or supplies. Third, all of the stories had a certain aspect to them that made them “futureless”. The aspiring actor couldn’t get to his audition on time, putting brakes on his career. The refugee didn’t pursue a future with the man who harassed her. The english-speaker didn’t have much of a future in the language until he put more effort into it. These are only some examples of the futureless aspect of these characters. However, there is one more stylistic choice made by the director that really felt like he was putting a timer on each character: showing the clock at the beginning of each story. After catching on, I realized each character was given about 10-15 minutes to make an impression with their story, after which they would be replaced by the next one. This stylistic choice really helped in making the characters feel futureless because although they’re interesting, you really cannot get attached because they’re moving onto the next one.

Upon first viewing, I found the film to be very confusing. However, after thinking about each individual story, and then discussing the film with my peers, I found Futureless Things to be quite the enjoyable viewing experience, which I would watch again just to see if there’s anything I missed, which there probably is.