Trainspotting is a peculiar film. The film revolves around a bunch of addicts and their shenanigans to achieve their individual goals. We see their trials and all of the terrible things that they have to do and live with. As I knew the film was going to be about drugs, I was expecting the movie to be “trippy” and while some scenes did meet that expectation, ultimately the viewing experience was more grounded than expected. I enjoyed the film because of its plot, characters, and theme, and I also praise it for its ability to be gritty and realistic while talking about the harsh realities of the life of an addict yet always remembering that at its core, it is a comedy, and a good one at that.

One thing I’d like to praise the film for is its structure. When I was watching, the plot went all over the place while simultaneously keeping my interest. One minute, it’s about Renton trying to get over his addiction, then he’s doing drugs again, and then all of a sudden, he’s part of a drug deal. Though the film was shot in the point-of-view of a certain character in particular, the overall sequencing of the scenes gave us enough insight on the thoughts and motivations of each member of the group allowing us to see that each character is messed up in their own special little way.

Speaking of characters, Trainspotting does an exceptional job of showing that almost all of its characters are definitely not good people. The drugs were, by far, the least toxic thing within the movie. We see most of the movie in Renton’s point-of-view, so the flaws in other characters are highlighted while we see him as our “hero”. Personally, I didn’t like Renton. I found his lack of conviction to be off-putting for a protagonist as he would constantly go back on his word for one final hit. However, I do recognize that this was likely the intention of the author of the book that the movie was based on. Having Renton be unable to completely move on from drugs showcases the reality of how hard it is to truly overcome addiction. Then there’s Begbie, the most obnoxious character I’ve seen in recent history. He lacks any redeeming quality. Throughout the film, we see that he’s a menace to everyone around him. To society, he’s an aggressive man-child who will start a bar fight for no real reason. To his “friends”, he’s a parasite, leeching off their success while burdening them at the same time. Another parasitic character is Sick Boy, who is perhaps the least trustworthy within the group. As he openly admitted to being tempted to steal the bag of money given to the group after celebrating their successful drug deal, we also understand that in addition to being untrustworthy, he’s also not very bright. However, his redeeming quality is that he was the only member of the group able to show emotion when baby Dawn died, likely because he was her father, meaning that he at least has some level of humanity to him. Then, there’s the most “human” character of the group, Spud. He’s not touted as a devil like Begbie, or perfect like Tommy, as a character he’s just there. He isn’t very bright so he gets influenced easily, but he at least tries to be a decent human. Definitely the most decent of all the characters is Tommy, who had everything going for him: a good attitude, money, good looks, and a girlfriend. Of course, he ended up losing all of these things due in no small part to Renton’s actions.

Loss is what I believe to be the overarching theme of the film. At the park scene, Sick Boy gives his theory about having something and then losing it, which echoed throughout the film in all of the characters. Tommy’s loss is the best example. He lost his sex tape, then his girlfriend, which made him lose his will to live, making him turn to vices, leading to his loss of money, looks, and eventually life. In him, we see a character lose his innocence despite the initial action not even being his doing. Renton experienced a different type of loss. His loss is that he lost his “friends”. He took the money and ran, losing the trust that they placed in him. Though, I wouldn’t consider it a loss as his friends were parasitic, he did lose the only constants that he had. The losses of the other characters aren’t as deep. Begbie lost the money, Sick boy lost — who is suggested to be — his daughter, and Spud lost his freedom by being sent to jail. Then, throughout the film we see physical instances of loss such as Renton losing his television after Sick Boy sells it. What’s interesting is that almost all of these instances of loss were orchestrated by other members in their friend group, who are supposed to be the people that help each other.

The movie’s dark tone of storytelling complemented its brand of comedy well. The movie never took itself too seriously and took liberties with being odd. Though I could do without the gross-out humor, the dialogue in some scenes, such as when Renton was cursing his Scottish heritage, made me laugh and feel bad while doing so.

All of these factors combined gave me a memorable viewing experience, and I’m glad to know that Trainspotting has a recently released sequel so I can continue to follow the lives of the characters I’ve grown to hate, yet still be intrigued by.

Godzilla is one of the most iconic movie monsters to ever be created. There have been many different imaginings of the monster, and I’m glad the one in Shin Godzilla takes it back to its Japanese roots. Because of this, I got a better view of the Japanese people, such as how they do things and what they value. Overall, I found plenty of enjoyment in the film for its action, ability to get me asking questions, and, at times, its accidental comedy.

Though as simple as a giant lizard that has the ability to shoot laser beams, its concept excels at making it into something that a monster should be: a problem. The 2016 Shin Godzilla iteration of the monster showcases this excellently. It’s not something that can just be destroyed with raw firepower because it’s near indestructible. It’s not something that can just be nuked because the country doesn’t exactly resonate well with nuclear weapons after World War II, in addition to the fact that because the monster is essentially a nuclear reactor, there could be a giant crater where Japan should be if said solution were to be utilized. To add, the fact that they realize that it can produce asexually increased the suspense by adding a timer, meaning that they had to come up with a creative solution, and quickly. Adding to this is the setting. Japan is not the military superpower that is the United States, in fact, they don’t even have a military. They’re a small nation that was completely taken aback by the sudden emergence of a monster. All of these factors combined allowed the movie to be more thrilling, and really got me interested in how they’d handle the situation.

Speaking of handling the situation, I admire the way the Prime Minister decided to handle the situation. Too often, I see protagonists resorting to becoming a monster in order to defeat an antagonist. This means that they go back on their values that made them respectable and becoming less likeable in the process, like Batman resorting to use guns or killing people. But not Japan. I admired how even in the event of a crisis, they checked their laws and made sure to still follow the rules set in place after World War II. They also didn’t risk civilian casualties, even if it meant losing a chance at defeating the monster. The honor that the Japanese people have was highlighted very well in this movie.

However, just to get it out of the way, if there’s one thing I disliked about Shin Godzilla, it was the silly-looking initial form of the monster. Every single time its googly eyes were shown, I could not hold back my laughter. I am very thankful that the monster took on new forms as it evolved, as I do not think I could have taken the monster seriously if I had to look at its eyes.

Monster movies have a certain charm to them, despite them having a reputation for being “stupid”. The simplicity of monster movies like Shin Godzilla, Pacific Rim, and King Kong mean that they’re not too complicated, and they don’t have to be. It can be enjoyable just as it is.

To be completely honest, I quite enjoyed Soderbergh’s Schizopolis. That is not to say that I understood its crazy scenes and incomprehensible dialogue. In fact, I completely agree with the opening statement in the film when I say that I made no effort to look into the film at a deeper level than what I saw. This is probably the reason why I can say that I understand little to nothing about this film, despite what is explicitly stated. However, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. By ‘turning my mind off’ while viewing the film, I stopped worrying about trying to understand it and find its themes, which led me to having an enjoyable experience in viewing it. In my opinion, in order to enjoy the movie to the fullest, one has to stop trying to find the hidden themes within the film or identify what modern phenomena certain scenes satirize when it isn’t already apparent to them. The film must be appreciated for what it has that is apparent to both those who watch films casually and those who perform movie autopsies: its odd, dark, and unconventional humor.

Despite its experimental and avant-garde way of storytelling, this movie is a comedy. That means that its main way of entertaining viewers is by making them laugh. For most contemporary films, this is achieved through witty dialogue, comedic imagery, or a combination of the two. However, Schizopolis takes these elements of comedy and essentially toys around with them.

The dialogue and the imagery in the film are so ridiculous that I could not help but laugh during certain scenes, despite having little to no idea as to what was going on. Perhaps one of my favorite scenes where the film’s kookiness is showcased is in the first act, where the main character comes home and is greeted by his wife and daughter. Instead of having a generic “Honey, I’m home” scene which can be seen in almost any film where the main character is a married, 40-something Caucasian male, it becomes the cookie-cutter “Honey, I’m home” scene by replacing generic dialogue with literally “generic dialogue”. In this scene, by stripping the dialogue to its bare-bones version, it satirizes similar scenes in other movies, and in the process, ironically becomes more memorable than any of them. The visual comedy in the film is also noteworthy, but the sheer randomness of the scenes is what really made them funny to me. The pants-less man being chased by policemen, the exterminator destroying stuff and beating people up for seemingly no reason, and the sudden interjections of news on the television where the anchor is saying some sort of ridiculous thing are all scenes illustrating the sheer randomness that happens in the movie. Though, these scenes do not add much to the film’s main storyline, they still add to the enjoyment of the film by being funny. These scenes served more as a reminder that despite its experimental way of storytelling, it doesn’t take itself too seriously.

In reflection, a lot of the times when watching movies, I forget that I’m watching in order to enjoy it. I try to look at the different elements such as use of color or music, or try to understand characters and character motivations. I’m not saying that doing these things while viewing a film make it less fun, but it’s just sometimes I can get a little too wrapped-up in watching a movie, that I forget to take it for what it is. Through its sheer randomness, I gave up trying to understand the film on a deeper level very early on, but that allowed me to enjoy the film completely for what it is.

Though the film does go a little too over-the-top at times, it’s still an enjoyable movie. Though I’m sure it has deep and underlying themes that can be interpreted from its nearly incomprehensible dialogue and non-linear storytelling, it doesn’t have to be in order to be enjoyed. Admittedly, it’s not a movie for everyone, but it’s something to watch if one is either looking to dissect a film and extract its deep meaning, or have some dumb fun.