2024 - IN REVIEW: TOP TWENTY FIVE BEST FILMS: #25 - 21

Let's get onto the good stuff finally.  I am not going to do any honorable mentions, this is it, my top 25 of 2024, and while the title of this list states that these are the "best" films of 2024, that is not really the case, these are my "favourite" films of 2024.  Alright, enough talk, lets begin with my: 

 

TOP TWENTY-FIVE BEST FILMS OF 2024

25. KINDS OF KINDNESS

I am a massive Yorgos Lanthimos fan, and I have a feeling that while he continues making movies, they will always end up on my end-of-year lists. I just connect with his messed-up comedy vibes, and love the style of uncomfortable cinema that he creates. His collaboration with Emma Stone, that once seemed so unlikely, also continues to produce gold. While “Kinds of Kindness” isn't his best movie, it does feel like a kind-of homecoming, like a return to his very weird roots. This film sees Lanthimos telling three different stories, all acted by the same cast members, although there is no real connection between any of the stories besides one, very small, character who appears in all three. As you would expect from Lanthimos, these stories are all weird, messed-up, disturbing and sometimes extremely funny creations, and while I do not think he pulls off a consistency that we normally see from him, there is enough brilliant moments in each story for them to remain memorable. The first story is about a man trying in vain to escape what he believes is his pre-determined path in life, the second story is about a cop who begins to doubt that his wife is the same person he married after she returns from her drowning, whilst the final story is about a woman who has been given the task of finding “the chosen one” that has been prophesied by a very odd cult. The main actors are Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons, Margaret Qualley and Willem Dafoe, who each have varying degrees of screen time depending on which story is being told, but they are all excellent and fully onboard with all the madness happening onscreen. Stone, does a ridiculous (and quite ugly) dance at one stage that is so hilarious, that is then topped off and one-upped in the following scene as only Lanthimos can. No, it's not his best film, but I still had so much fun with “Kinds of Kindness”, however I think that this is only for devotees of Lanthimos's work; if you haven't liked any of his previous films, this will not be the one to change your mind.

24. THE SPARROW IN THE CHIMNEY

Being a fan of Ramon Zürcher's previous film, “The Girl and the Spider”, I knew that I wanted to see “The Sparrow in the Chimney”, so I went in totally cold and was taken aback by just how tense the film is, as it's characters are filled with so much hate, due to buried and unspoken feelings. The title of the film is essentially another way of saying “skeletons in the closet”, (although there is also actually a sparrow in the chimney early on too). The film makes a point of saying when you cannot come to terms with your past, it will eat away at you to a point where it becomes so toxic that it will destroy all the relationships in your life. The entire family is being destroyed from the inside out, and it really is quite shocking to witness the disturbing relationships between them all, because literally no one is happy, and it stems from one person, Karen, the mother of the family. When her sister, Julie, arrives with her own family to celebrate Karen's husband's birthday, it is the catalyst for old wounds to be reopened and hidden truths revealed. What I really liked about “The Sparrow in the Chimney” is that it is filled with a large number of characters, but they are all well rounded and fully developed, all with their own issues and problems, and that the relationships and connections between them all feel real and lived in. They feel like a real family, dysfunctional to the extreme, yes, but you believe that they have a shared history together. While the film is a complex look at a family destroying itself, it really boils down to one person, Karen, but deeper than that, it's Karen's poisonous relationship with her own dead mother that is the ultimate source of all this pain, and her need to face this head-on, come to terms with it, and begin to live life once more, because right now while she maybe present in person, her mind is forever elsewhere. Despite how dark in tone it is, the film has been shot by Alex Hasskerl, Zürcher's regular cinematographer, who gives the film a warm, inviting look, brightly lit giving the outdoor scenes a beautiful lush look to it and not being afraid to use bold, bright colours too. Both the score, and particularly the sound design are excellent to help build a world that lives outside the frame of the images onscreen. One aspect that I loved was Zürcher's ability to create atmosphere and then to be able to hold it for the entirety of the film. The tension is so intense at times that you feel uncomfortable watching it. The situation is incredibly toxic too, and yet it is amazing how this tension totally dissipates when the adults (along with their emotional baggage) go for a night out on the town, leaving the kids at home to just have fun and enjoy themselves for once. “The Sparrow in the Chimney” is an intense, and challenging watch, but also a richly rewarding one. Click here to read my original review.

23. THE GIRL WITH THE NEEDLE

Wow! And I thought “The Sparrow in the Chimney” was dark......“The Girl With The Needle” makes it seem like a fun Disney animated film. This is probably the most intense and nihilistic film I watched in 2024, and as excellent as it is, as I mentioned in my original review, it may be a long time before I can put myself through watching it again (and this is coming from a life loving horror fan, totally desensitised by any gore and violence). It goes without saying that “The Girl With The Needle” is for brave audiences, but as disturbing as it is, it is well worth it, particularly because of just how well the film has been put together from a technical point-of-view. Unfortunately, this is a film that gets its strength from knowing little about it beforehand and being surprised by the turns the story makes, but it starts at despair and just gets darker from there until it becomes almost unbearable. One aspect of “The Girl With The Needle” that should be mentioned is that this is a story about women. Almost all of the characters are women, and the few men that are there, are damaged and essentially useless. This makes sense from a narrative perspective as the story takes place just after the end of World War I, so most of the men have been killed and those who have returned are both physically and mentally scarred. So the story is about women doing whatever it takes to survive in an already bleak world. The look of “The Girl With The Needle” is just stunning. It is shot in a black and white impressionistic style, via very carefully composed and controlled images. Whilst the images themselves are gorgeous, paradoxically they expose the dirty, grimy world that the story takes place in. This is a cold, dark and bleak world, uninviting and dangerous to the women that inhabit it. I think the choice to film “The Girl With The Needle” in black and white was almost forced upon the filmmakers by the story itself, as it is so dark (particularly where it ends up at the end) that it would've felt wrong in colour and potentially too much for the viewer to handle. I have to make note of the very impressive performance from Trine Dyrholm, who plays Dagmar, the owner of a black market baby business that Karoline (our main character) becomes involved in. I can say without giving too much away that Dagmar's lolly shop is really a front for her business where she accepts babies from young and poor women who cannot look after them themselves, and relocates them with rich families who, for whatever reason, cannot have children of their own. There are two sides to Dagmar, and Dyrholm is entirely believable exposing both sides of this very complex character. She is excellent in every moment she is in, and ultimately steals the film. Frankly that is all I can mention about the film, other than to say that it really is a fantastic film, but probably the most disturbing thing in the film is just before the final credits roll and a card comes onscreen stating: “based on a true story”, which sent chills down my spine. Click here to read my original review.

22. CONCLAVE

As I have already mentioned “Conclave” was my biggest surprise of 2024, and to be honest, I think it probably would've ended up higher up on this list if I hadn't seen it so late in the year and thus only had the chance to watch it the once. I was initially skeptical that a film about a bunch of priests sitting around and voting for who would be the new Pope, could not only hold my interest for an entirety of the film, but that it could be entertaining as well. As we now know, I was totally wrong, because “Conclave” is an immaculate movie that plays like a political thriller filled to the brim with secrets, double crossings, manipulations, voyeurism, and conspiracy. This is a movie for adults, and has been superbly written by Peter Straughan (based on the book by Robert Harris), expertly directed by Edward Berger complete with colour coded production design using deep reds, blues and whites to shade his story, and which has been cast impressively well, with all the actors involved being at the top of their games. Ralph Fiennes must be singled out for his lead performance as Cardinal Lawrence, but Stanley Tucci, Isabella Rossellini, Lucian Msamati, Sergio Castellitto and particularly John Lithgow (in his best cinematic role since last working with Brian DePalma) are all excellent. While I know that there are some (actually a lot) people who dislike the ending to “Conclave”, personally it did not bother me at all, I found it another interesting wrinkle to the story and I felt that it worked with all we heard learned beforehand in regards to the now deceased Pope. I highly recommend “Conclave”, because it is a smart and serious thriller, that we no longer seem to get as much in cinemas these days any more.

21. FEMME

The revenge film is a staple of action movies and thrillers and as such, I am usually a big fan of them. However, “Femme” could possibly be the saddest revenge film I have ever seen, as it focuses on the human cost to all involved when someone goes out for revenge. In “Femme”, you understand pretty early on, that if Jules does succeed in his quest for revenge, no one really wins from it. In “Femme”, we follow Jules who is a flamboyant, extroverted gay man, famous for his drag performances at a local gay club. One night, after one of these performances, Jules is viciously bashed by Preston, an incel who is egged on by his gang-member mates. The attack leaves Jules a shattered man, unable to work nor leave his house, becoming introverted in nature. His friends, worried about his health, try to get Jules to get out there, and at least leave the house, and Jules eventually does so by going to a gay sauna. By coincidence, he comes face-to-face with his attacker, who does not recognise Jules as he is not in his drag get-up. Jules suddenly realises that perhaps Preston, the perpetrator to his own homophobic bashing, may himself be a closeted homosexual man (something his friends would disown him for if they knew), and sets about a plan to get his revenge. “Femme” is such a powerful film and, like I said above, an incredibly sad one too. The greatest strength to the film are its performances from it's two leading men, Nathan Stewart-Jarrett and George MacKay, who play Jules and Preston respectively. Stewart-Jarrett is amazing at showing his vulnerability and his ability to exude more female or male qualities depending on his “audience” or if he is in drag at certain times. While he wants his revenge, you can tell he has not thought out the consequences of his actions, and is just going with the flow of it in the moment, rather than sitting down and plotting it all out. George MacKay is the real surprise here, as he is so good at playing a terrible human being, who may be more complex than we initially expect. He is so aggressive when we first meet him, but we soon learn that his true nature is something he is fighting within himself (because of the company he shares) and that he is a much softer person who needs the love of a good man in his life. He also hates himself for this at the same time, because he has been brought up to believe that these traits are not natural. At times you can see Jules wanting to help Preston break free from these restraints and help him be who he really is, while fighting with this urge because this is the man he ultimately wants revenge from. If you have seen George MacKay in anything else, like this year's “The Beast” (where he is so seductive, lovely and gentlemanly), I think you will be stunned with just how great he is playing this initially despicable human being. “Femme” ends up being a white-knuckle thriller, filled with such suspense as you wonder whether or not Jules will be able to go through with his revenge, and if he does, how much of himself would he have lost in the process of trying to get it. This is a fantastic, complex film, that also crackles with energy, that I wholeheartedly recommend to all.

 

2024 - IN REVIEW: MOST UNDERRATED

 

JOKER: FOLIE A DEUX

Without a doubt, the most underrated film of 2024 was Todd Phillips' “Joker: Folie a Deux”, which could also go down as the most misunderstood film of the year too. The film was on my list of most anticipated movies for 2024 and in my write up for the sequel I mention that I was under no illusions that the film could end up going the route of every other sequel, which is by making it bigger and louder and just more than the first film, but by doing so it then loses what made the original so great in the first place. This is one of the main reasons that I think this film is so universally hated, as I think this is exactly what most people wanted or expected from a sequel to “Joker” from 2019. However, director Todd Phillips takes the story down a completely different path, and yet it feels like the correct and most natural progression from the tale told in the first film. The reason for this is because the film is not about “The Joker”, but rather Arthur Fleck, an abused and bullied man forever marginalised by society who, after reaching his breaking point, he finally snapped, and fought back under the guise of Joker.

While the film was on my most anticipated list of 2024, I actually almost didn't end up seeing it in theatres, for two reasons. The first was because the reviews were loud and clear, “Joker: Folie a Deux” was a disaster and the worst film of the year, and I found my enthusiasm I had for it dissipating by the second. Even my brother saw it, who is a massive Joaquin Phoenix fan, and outside of the opening animated scene, he thought the film was dreadful. Speaking of Phoenix, he was the other reason I almost didn't see the film in a theatre because I was very down on him, as he had recently walked away from Todd Haynes's latest movie mere days before it was due to start shooting, leaving him in the lurch and causing that film to ultimately be cancelled. As much as I think Phoenix is a very talented actor, I was appalled by his behaviour in regards to Haynes's film. It was actually due to the fact that I put “Joker: Folie a Deux” on my anticipated list that I forced myself to go see it, and boy am I glad that I did, because I loved every second of it. I thought the film worked wonderfully, and yet even while watching it, I could see why it wasn't a success. Just like Lady Gaga's character in the film, Lee Quinzel, audiences only wanted to see a film about “Joker”, and not Arthur flaming Fleck. But as we know by the end of this film, Fleck has only ever been himself, and never Joker, even when he finally fought back against society and the people who bullied him, it was never like he had a split personality; Arthur always knew what he was doing in every moment. The Joker did not take over Arthur's mind causing to become a murderer, it was all Fleck's doing himself.......after being pushed too far. That is why I love the title so much because “folie a deux” means “shared psychosis” and seeing as the film has both “Joker” and “Harley Quinn” characters, I think people assume that they share the psychosis of the title, but I am sure it really means “Harley” and the film's audience.

Anyway, I absolutely loved “Joker: Folie a Deux” even though it is one of the saddest “love” stories ever made. It is such a dark, and sad film, particularly because Arthur thinks he has finally found someone who loves him, but Lee (or Harley Quinn if you want) only has eyes for Joker, who does not exist. Even when the two of them have sex in the jail, Lee brings make up into the cell to paint his face like a clown before they do the deed. What makes it sadder is seeing the way Arthur is at the beginning of the film, walking around like a living corpse. He doesn't care about life anymore or get any enjoyment out of it. But the way he grows and finds himself once more, when he thinks he finds love is amazing to see, only for it all to come crashing down on him by movie's end. I have to mention that Joaquin Phoenix is absolutely fantastic in this film, and I could not help loving his performance despite the whole Todd Haynes debacle. Lady Gaga is also excellent (I actually think she is a really good actress when she gets material suited to her), but if I was to have any criticism about the film, I think that she is a little underused.

Now unless you have been living under a rock for the past six months, you would know that “Joker: Folie a Deux” is also a musical, another reason why I think the film has not succeeded. It is what they call a “jukebox musical” which is when the songs used are pre-existing songs and not original to the movie itself. Because of how mad of an idea it was to make the sequel to “Joker” a musical, this was one of the main reasons why I was anticipating the film so much. I think it works, and I liked the music elements more on my second watch of the film, but I would've liked for them to really dive into the song and dance numbers with more gusto, similar to the way Jacques Audiard's “Emilia Perez” does. I suppose the fact that “Joker: Folie a Deux” is such a sombre affair, they may have thought by doing so, the music would fail, but “Emilia Perez” isn't exactly all sunshine and rainbows and it works amazingly well there too.

As you can probably tell, “Joker: Folie a Deux” will definitely by on my top twenty-five list, so I will stop talking about it now so I have something more to say then, but let me just finish by saying that I am guaranteed that this film will age like fine wine. Twenty years from now people will recognise its brilliance, and critics who had fun tearing it down now, will suddenly claim that they always thought the film was awesome. Trust me on that! And for that reason alone, that is why it is the most underrated film of 2024.

 

2024 - IN REVIEW: MOST OVERRATED

STRANGE DARLING

As I always mention when I do my “most overrated” film of the year, just because the film is overrated, doesn't mean that the film is bad. It just means that it didn't fully live up to the hype (or hyperbole) surrounding it, or that I was expecting something more due to all of the positive press. This year is the perfect example of this as “Strange Darling” is a good little thriller, but thanks to a quote from Stephen King, the film's reputation snowballed into something that it was always going to struggle to live up to. King's quote was that the film was “a clever masterpiece”, and that he couldn't say more because it is “too clever to spoil”. From here, positive word-of-mouth took over with people claiming it to be the “movie of the year”, “best thriller in a decade”, etc etc. It is always a joy when you find an independent genre film that takes you by surprise and just blows your socks off, so I must admit that I bought into the hype and was looking forward to finally checking out “Strange Darling”. However when I finally got around to doing so, I was disappointed that my reaction to it was essentially “was that it?!?”. It is certainly entertaining, it looks amazing, and it has been pretty well acted, but personally, I didn't think it had that extra special kick that its reputation promised it to have.

I know why people love the film, which is two-fold, but for me, these elements just didn't seem that special or brilliant as people have made out. Firstly, the film holds a massive twist within it and plays its story in a way to protect that twist as long as possible. To do this, “Strange Darling” is told in a non-linear fashion. The film is told in six chapters, but they are not told from chapter one to six, but rather it jumps around so we get different parts of the story without any context, which ends up making sense once we get the completed puzzle. Like Stephen King, I have no intention of spoiling the film for people, especially because the film exists in service of said twist, but I will say that the way the chapter's are organised in the film are as follows: it begins with chapter 3, followed by chapter 5, 1, 4, 2, 6, before ending on an epilogue. So what is the story about? Obviously I cannot go into any detail of this without ruining it so I will use what imdb uses as it's synopsis (which is short and spoiler free): “Nothing is what it seems when a twisted one-night stand spirals into a serial killer's vicious murder spree.” My biggest issue with the film is that the twist is not that hard to work out, and once it is revealed, the film is rather generic. Yes, its still a good thriller that is entertaining to watch, but it is not extra special.

There was one other thing that really put me off “Strange Darling” and that was a screen that comes up before the film begins that states in big, bold letters “THIS FILM WAS ENTIRELY SHOT ON 35MM FILM”. Okay, so I make it well known that I love when movies are shot these days on actual film rather than digital, so “Strange Darling” gets two big thumbs up for that, but I've never seen anyone make a big note of it before their film plays. It comes across as both arrogant, and desperate, like they want extra credit for their decision to shoot on celluloid. Film just feels different so there is no need for such a statement to be made, because it should be obvious to the viewer, and especially because the cinematography of “Strange Darling” is one of it's strongest elements, with colour just bursting through the screen. Interestingly, Giovanni Ribisi (yes, the actor) is the film's cinematographer and he does an amazing job here. “Strange Darling” looks fantastic!

The film's two leads, Willa Fitzgerald and Kyle Gallner, are both pretty good in their roles, where they are not named, but referred to in the credits as “The Lady” and “The Demon” respectively. Personally I think Gallner is the stronger of the two, but I believe I may be in the minority with this opinion. One other thing of note in the film that I loved was the music, which was loud and anything-but-subtle, but which works so well for the film as a whole, particularly in helping create it's atmosphere.

Again, “Strange Darling” is a good thriller, and one that I know I will revisit regularly in the future, but I still believe that it is not as clever as it thinks it is, nor is it as special as it's reputation suggests. My advice is to go into the film with expectations tempered and you will get more out of this very good genre film