Music Shoutout: Bernhoft

TV Shoutout: Killjoys

What it is about: Bounty hunters Dutch (Hannah John Kamen) and John Jaqobis (Aaron Ashmore) are the best Killjoys working at their side of the galaxy. But a warrant involving John’s brother, D’avin (Luke Macfarlane), lead them to new adventures.

Why you should watch it: Killjoys, contrary to what the name might suggest, is just so much fun. Killjoys never take themselves too seriously, but they never, ever insult your intelligence. It’s just the perfect blend of action, humor, crazy stories, and great characters.

No kidding, Dutch is my favorite female character in TV, ever. She’s the baddest of all badasses–and nobody is gonna argue her for that. She’s strong and tough and soft in the way that I rarely see from other badass female characters.

Her relationship with John is also one of my favorites. They have extremely strong bond as working partners, which serves as the heart of the show. Their relationship is platonic, but extremely warm. Also, John is a badass nerd, so I automatically like him anyway.

Also, set in a somewhat far future, the worldbuilding in Killjoys is amazing. The world feels otherwordly, worn, and lived-in–and most importantly, alive. Believe me, sexy monks is a thing in Killjoys, but they absolutely don't feel out of place. Interplanetary politics, space monk, warlord bartender, killer harem–all of it are in Killjoys, and they all make excellent ingredients to make entertaining stories.

Who should watch it: Anyone who wants fun TV with badass characters! And obviously, sci-fi/space opera fans who yearns for something fresh.

Where you should start: Honestly I think you’re gonna be fine watching any episode because they’re gonna be so much fun you wouldn’t mind if you don’t understand a few things, but like anything worth watching, for best experience start from the first episode for the characters. I guarantee you won’t regret it.

Status: Season 3 ongoing.

Review: Birdman: Or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)

Rating: 8.5 of 10

Before I say anything, let me just remind you that Birdman was hyped to extraordinary degree. Seemingly every movie site and every single movie critic loved it. Academy Award fell all over for it, and if you don't pay attention you might think they're talking about The Second Coming or something. It was crazy, and I purposefully waited to watch and and review it (just because that's how I am). Spoiler alert: Birdman went on to win Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay, Best Directing, and Best Cinematography in Academy Award. All of which are pretty well deserved, actually, so here it goes (non-spoiler review):

Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is a washed-up actor, primarily known only as the guy who played "Birdman" in the movies three times over. He desperately tries to—risking everything he's got—to reach industrial relevance again by curiously adapting a play based on Raymond Carver's "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love". In an unexpected turn of events, big-time Broadway performer-slash-a**hole Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) agrees to join the play at last minute.

In short, Birdman is a brilliant satire. It expertly examines the absurd dichotomy between entertainment and art, relevance and irrelevance, ego and confidence, fantasy and reality, man and icon, in the way that's almost impossible to not see the parallels to the real world (whatever that is). That, of course, is intentional. The movie blurs the line between fiction and reality: it name drops several things from The Hunger Games to Robert Downey Jr. (whom Riggan might or might not hate). Heck, even the play itself is based from a real writer and a real short story. And guess what? In a further satirical twist, Michael Keaton actually played Batman back in 1989 if anyone remembers, and one would have to be literally blind to not see the parallel between the two superheroic icons. 

This super-realist theme really is a part of something genius once you consider its unique faux-one shot approach. The whole movie—almost 119 minutes of it—was shot and edited to make it look like it’s all done in one continuous shot. Birdman is reverse-escapism, in a way. It traps you in the same way Riggan is trapped with his poor pathetic life, and you can’t escape from the scene no more than Riggan was able to escape his own body.

While I’m not sure if Birdman is as revolutionary as I’ve been led to believe, I can definitely see how it appeals most deeply to the cinephile and theater crowd. Snobbery, fickleness of fame, and fight for relevance are themes that they know all too well, and it must be fun to see a movie that pokes fun at it so gleefully, sternly, stylishly, and artistically fresh.

Birdman is unique artistically not only because of the editing, but also because of the soundtrack. The soundtrack is of drums, all the time, throughout the movie—drums that are out of tune and kind of broken to reflect the state of mind that Riggan is in. (Bonus: How they made the soundtrack. It’s impressive.) Director Alejandro González Iñárritu clearly had a unique vision and he made it all happen with ease and brilliance. That said, I must say the only actor that really jumped at me in Birdman is Edward Norton (despite Keaton is a front runner for Best Actor for his role). The others are good too, but for me Norton clearly outshines them as the rude Broadway prodigy.

TL;DR While originally I wasn’t that impressed with Birdman, it really is one of those movies that gets better the more I think about it. Is it revolutionary? I don't really think so, but is it brilliant? Definitely.

Review: Ada Apa Dengan Cinta? 2 (2016)

Rating: 8.0 of 10

The first Ada Apa Dengan Cinta? (2002) told the unlikely teenage love story between the literary junkie, anti-establishment, mysterious Rangga (Nicholas Saputra), and the “it-girl” of her high school, Cinta (Dian Sastrowardoyo). A movie full of romantic poems and je ne sais quoi chemistry between the two leads (think Heath Ledger and Julia Stiles in 10 Things I Hate About You (1999)), AADC was a historic hit in Indonesian film industry, and 14 years later, we finally get to see what happens next.

Cinta and Rangga are now adults, and 10 years had passed without any contact from one another. Rangga now lives in New York, US and Cinta is engaged to be married to Trian (Ario Bayu), but one faithful day brought them together again in Yogyakarta.

True to its spirit, of course, Ada Apa Dengan Cinta? 2 also brought back Maura (Titi Kamal), Karmen (Adinia Wirasti), and Milly (Sissy Prescillia) as Cinta’s BFF (Alya’s disappearance is addressed in the movie, if you’re wondering). They do still have distinct personality--Maura is girly, Karmen is protective, and Milly is the slow-one--but I’m relieved to say that they do not adhere to their stereotypes too much, which is a flaw I found in the first AADC. Surprisingly, Milly is an excellent ice-breaker and comic relief, and she actually ended being one of my favorite characters, along with her husband and fellow former AADC co-star, Mamet (Dennis Adishwara). Karmen is the only one to show any sign of passage-of-time in her character, although a lot of times her signs of growth conveniently goes away when its not related to plot.

But why are we back if it’s not for Rangga and Cinta, anyway? A true definition of a whirlwind romance in its first movie, AADC2 managed to update their story into a grown-up world. 10 years of feelings dumped into a few hours, AADC2 is filled with love, heartache, and nostalgia. But oddly, AADC2 is very understated in each approach, as if to say that “Yep, we’ve grown up, alright”. In fact, instead of its own predecessor, AADC2 reminds me a lot of Before Sunset (2004) instead (which is not a bad thing at all), especially when AADC2 walks us though all these different faces of Yogyakarta that we don’t often see. Rangga is also a little bit different in this movie--less standoffish, more loving--which makes sense for the character, although unfortunately we get to see much less of his subplot than Cinta’s. However, Cinta is every bit as how we remember her last time, and all of it ultimately paid off with a sweet, although somewhat clunky, ending.

TL;DR With a more adult approach to love, Ada Apa Dengan Cinta? 2 is a worthy continuation of the story of Cinta and Rangga.

Review: Black Panther (2018)

Rating: 9.0 of 10

At first, I wasn't that impressed with Black Panther. Now, I am happy to tell you that I was wrong.

I think the reason I was initially underwhelmed by Black Panther is because I struggled to grasp both the big picture and all the nuances that Black Panther has to offer. I thought it was a mere origin story*, but in truth it is deeper than that.

While the production is excellent through-and-through, I thought the movie was a bit aimless at the start and only begin to find its direction after Erik Killmonger (Michael B. Jordan) is revealed. But in retrospect, it actually all work with the theme. At first, T'Challa (the titular Black Panther, played by Chadwick Boseman) really is aimless. He just lost his father in a violent and traumatic event, and he struggled to find out the kind of King he wants to be.

One undisputable good thing about this movie is the characters and the actors who play them. Chadwick Boseman is as captivating as T'Challa/Black Panther when he was first introduced to us in Captain America: Civil War. Letitia Wright is the clear breakout star of this movie, as she displays equal level of intelligence and playfulness as T'Challa's little sister, Shuri. Lupita Nyong'o, Danai Gurira, and Angela Bassett all excellently play strong, confident women. And don't forget Michael B. Jordan, Winston Duke, Forest Whitaker, Martin Freeman, and Daniel Kaluuya who each believably play characters of their own convictions and believes.

It all get very interesting once we realize how the characters mirror or parallel each other. Most obviously, Killmonger is the opposite of T'Challa, but perhaps purely by circumstances. T'Challa grows up in the safe haven of Wakanda, while Erik Killmonger grows up in Oakland (one of the most dangerous US cities) knowing that his father's home country abandoned them. T'Challa has supportive family and community that includes strong, intelligent women, while Erik grows up without any role model to speak of. As good as Nakia's (Lupita Nyong'o) character is, she still disagrees with T'Challa and Okoye (Danai Gurira) on some level, and also has similarities with Killmonger's worldview. Shuri's youth scares M'Baku (Winston Duke) whose tribe fear that their technology could destroy them some day. I would not discuss the intricacies of the characters and their relationships at length (because there are already a lot of articles written about them by people more informed on the matter than me), but there are a lot of nuances and subtleties that speak not only of the fictional universe but also of our world, now. Story-wise--like I said before--Black Panther is not that impressive if we break it down beat-by-beat, but becomes infinitely more interesting once we consider the interactions between all of the characters.

The other best thing about Black Panther is its worldbuilding. Ryan Coogler (director) and his team had to create a new culture from the ground up--free of our inherent perception of what an African culture and nation should look like. In Marvel universe, Wakanda is the most technologically advanced nation in the world, hidden and untouched by the outside world including by collonialism. Visibly supported by a lot of research and care, Black Panther movie succeeded in showing us how that world would look like in the visuals that are fresh, believable and empowering.

TL;DR Worth to see Wakanda realized on-screen alone, Black Panther is a movie proud of its black heritage and filled with interesting, well-rounded characters.

-

*Yes, the character Black Panther first appeared in Captain America: Civil War, but for all intents and purposes the Black Panther movie is his origin story. In Black Panther, his entire worldview changes and his experiences in it shape who he is as a superhero and as a person for the rest of his life.

Review: Rise Of The Guardians (2012)

Rating: 9.5 of 10

From Dreamworks and the group of people who brought How To Train Your Dragon to life (according to the poster), here comes another animated tale called Rise Of The Guardians. And it was just as brilliant.

Jack Frost (voiced by Chris Pine), is a menace. He is a far cry from Santa Claus a.k.a. North (Alec Baldwin), Easter Bunny (Hugh Jackman), Tooth Fairy (Isla Fisher), and Sandman who each did hardwork and vowed to protect and care for the children for ever. But somehow, when a new threat in the form of Pitch “Boogeyman” Black (Jude Law) came into town, Jack Frost was picked to help the rest of The Guardians.

The premise is not exactly new, and the choice of characters are definitely not new. Santa? Easter Bunny? They each have been portrayed in stories hundreds of times before (or thousands in the case of Santa Claus), but not quite like this. Santa, or North as the movie calls him, is two-parts Russian/one part biker/one part pirate/one part handicraftsman. Bunny is the ultimate macho-man, Tooth is a woman-bird-dragonfly hybrid with tiny little helpers, and Sandman is the cutest mute sandy being of all time. Jack Frost is a punk, and Pitch Black is a skeevy, slithery villain in black robe who turns dreams into nightmares (I’m amused that he’s Jude Law, in a role I always imagined him to be). Every hero (yes, because they’re basically superheroes protecting the children) and villain is definitely fully inspired by the myth and lore we are familiar with, but with clear enough twist to make the universe felt new, exciting, and lived in. Did you know that Yeti, not elves, is the one that makes toys for Santa? 

And more importantly, they built on the characters. Each of the characters have their own backstory but when you realize that each of the Guardians used to be living, breathing humans it all became that much more poignant. 

Leaving out of the theater, I started to think that maybe the biggest message from the film is not for the kids but for the adults. Sure it teaches kids that the world is full of wonder and possibilities, or that bad things might exist but we need not fear them—it even teaches self-worth and sense of duty. But we, the adults, are also reminded that the world is a magical place and we need that wide-eyed attitude in life. When North told Jack about his Matryoshka doll, or Tooth explained why she always collects children’s teeth, you start to understand the importance of childhood. Hence, it is not a coincidence that this movie is one of the most magical children’s movie I’ve ever seen.

The genius thing is, while Rise of The Guardians is not a properly holiday movie (unless you count Easter as a proper holiday—I don’t) it felt absolutely festive. It has genuinely exciting action sequences too, and in general the animation is absolutely beautiful. We slide and fly along with the Guardians and it gets ever more exciting each time. Yes it does not have an absolutely unique storyline (it follows the general trajectory of a “rise to a hero” story), but it pays its existence with a genuine heart, a sense of wonder, and believable characters.

TL;DR With its plentiful action sequences and a hint of darkness it imparted at some places, Rise of The Guardians is a magical ride perfectly suited for bigger and more cynical kids—kids, being “real” kids and the kids inside all of you.

Music Shoutout: Unique Sounds Worth Checking Out Vol. 1

There are good bands, and there are bands that makes you go, "Whoa, this is something that I've never heard before."

In no particular order and with no particular reason, these are somewhat unique sounds worth checking out. A few of these bands are actually already quite well-known in the indie world, but as with any alternative genre, fame is always relative.

1. Alt-J ( @altjband on tumblr ) In the sea of indie rock, Alt-J is really something else. I won't even try to describe their sound because I'll just fail miserably, but the mix of their nasally voice, weird lyrics, and layered arrangements really pulled everything together in the most distinct way. Their debut album "An Awesome Wave" reached quite the critical and commercial success. Their follow-up album, "This Is All Yours" has a more introspective approach, but is every bit as unique as the single-friendly Wave.

Honorable mention: Glass Animals. I heard Glass Animals being compared to Alt-J a lot by fans, for some reason. I tend to disagree because they don't sound remotely alike and I'm not even sure they belong to the same subgenre, but they do have similar spirit--at the very least, in their refusal to be ordinary. At any rate, they're worth checking out too. Click here to listen to Glass Animal’s “Black Mambo”.

2. Twenty One Pilots ( @twentyonepilots on tumblr ) Rap + indie rock. Their debut album, "Vessel", was cute enough. It was new, it was different, and basically it was a proof-of-concept that such odd pairing can work. "Blurryface" album though, was a piece of art.

3. The Cat Empire Okay, maybe I'm biased because they have "Cat" in their name. I'll also admit that I don't know much of their discography besides of their self-titled album which was released in 2003 (I also heard their newer albums aren't as good, at least a bit different). But with its fusion of ska, jazz, and Latin, damn if "The Cat Empire" isn't one of the most fun albums I've heard in a long time.

4. Wild Belle ( @wildbellemusic on tumblr ) If reggae is your jam, Wild Belle might be for you. Wild Belle is composed of siblings Natalie and Elliot Bergman. Natalie's beautiful thinly voice, along with reggae influences is the focus of their debut album, "Isles". But based on their newest single, it seems like their to-be-released sophomore album will be much different--I guess we'll just see. Recently they also had a collaboration with Major Lazer in "Be Together".

5. Milky Chance 'Stoner song' might be the best way to describe Milky Chance's sound. But don't let that description fool you, Milky Chance's songs aren't stupid nor simple--they're just damn delectable.

I hope you’ll like these bands! If you have any suggestions, I’m open to it. Meanwhile, visit a few of my curated music collection, and follow me for Unique Sounds Worth Checking Out Vol. 2!

Disclaimer: All videos embed and linked above are for promotional purposes only. Please support the artist legally!

Review: Doraemon: Stand By Me (2014)

Rating: 7.8 of 10

Doraemon was a long running children's manga and anime series (first published in 1969!) that had been accompanying the lives of children all over the world. Doraemon was everywhere, on every lazy Sunday morning, everyone loved him, and there's just no way to review this film without nostalgia glasses of a former 6 year-old. It's just physically impossible. That said, here it is.

The movie started at the very beginning, from the first time Doraemon popped out of that desk drawer and introduced himself to Nobita. It was just such a thrill to see the whole thing from Doraemon's perspective and it doesn't count as a spoiler because it literally happened in the first 5 minutes)! The rest, for the ones who are familiar with the weekly premise of a Doraemon show, is history. Nobita found himself in some kind of trouble, cried for Doraemon's help, Doraemon gave him some advanced 22nd century gadget, Nobita exceled for a while but ended up in another kind of trouble. It is also no secret that the film ends with Doraemon having to say goodbye to Nobita and yes, there were tearjerking moments. I was sad for a while.

I have however, some issues with the movie, with time being the main one. In summing four decades of show history into just 90 minutes, there'll always be some things missing. Of course, the basic story of Doraemon was always deceivingly short and simple, but we grew up with him week-in and week-out for years and it's hard to beat that kind of familiarity. We were friends with Doraemon for 45 years, but Nobita (in this film) had just met him so why did he care? The gadgets and characters were familiar but there were just not enough time to explore the full extent of their friendship, and not enough time to soak it in, that the whole thing just felt rushed. Doraemon never felt like part of friends or family (Nobita's parents' reaction when they found out Doraemon had to go was basically, "Oh? OK."), and that is not good. Secondly, I don't think the character development was clear enough. Of course I don't want Nobita to suddenly turn into Dekisugi, but in the end I'm not even sure if Nobita learned anything at all because a lot of things revert back to status-quo. And the last thing (possibly nitpicking), I found the whole make-Shizuka-likes-Nobita mission is just a liiiiiiitle bit creepy. Just a little bit. I swear.

TL;DR But all in all it was fun, full of familiar characters and gadgets, undeniably heartfelt, and rightfully tearjerking. It was a shame that it felt so rushed.

Afterthought 1: The new 3D animation is only weird for 45 seconds. You'll get used to it.

Afterthought 2: I just find it refreshing to have time-travelling story with absolutely no paradox. Having seen plenty of time-travel movies, most of them have some issue with paradox, but not in Doraemon world!

Afterthought 3: I really, really wish this movie would skip the introduction part and begin right at the end (Pacific Rim-style) when Nobita and Doraemon have been friends for years. I think that would solve most of the problems this movie had, but I'm not a movie director for a reason.

Afterthought 4: The only reason I didn't cry during this movie was because I tried hard not to.

Review: Doctor Strange (2016)

Rating: 8.5 out of 10

Benedict Cumberbatch is Stephen Strange, a hot-shot neurosurgeon turned master of sorcery, in this latest installment of Marvel Cinematic Universe.

While Thor was being coy about magic and claiming that science and magic are the same in his Thor movies, Doctor Strange (the movie, not the character) never argues about it. Yes, Stephen Strange is a doctor and a skeptic, first and foremost, but as he became a believer, so did we as the audience. From that moment onward, magic was never questioned. And boy, what a pretty magic they were.

Remember Inception? Remember the mind-trippingly iconic manipulation of cities and buildings in that movie? Crank those images you have in your mind to 11, and you'd get something resembling the pure beauty of magic in Doctor Strange. They're gorgeous, dynamic, and intensely mesmerizing. Even when Strange is not running from buildings rolling down the street, or running up in the ceiling, the visualization of magic in Doctor Strange is just breathtaking--and especially, unique.

The cast is also a huge part of why the movie works. Benedict Cumberbatch is subdued enough, but with enough levity and charisma to be an iconic Marvel superhero. (And the fact that he looks almost exactly like the comic book character doesn't hurt either). Chiwetel Ejiofor and Benedict Wong are the perfect sidekicks, and Rachel McAdams is the perfect grounding character. I’m not too pleased with how they leave her character, but McAdams is great. Mads Mikkelsen and his sinister kind of charisma makes a memorable villain, even if he doesn't talk much. Forgetting the controversy around the casting of The Ancient One, Tilda Swinton is reliably splendid as the mystical character.

But while it has pretty solid characterization and plot, enjoyment of Doctor Strange depends mostly on visually immersive experience. For me, the story itself almost felt like a TV pilot. It's basically 100% set up, with teasers of what he might be like as a full-fledged Marvel superhero in the future. Doctor Strange is not a bad standalone movie at all, it's just almost meaningless if you don't take into account that we'll be seeing him again in future installments. However, I don’t mind much because I really do think Doctor Strange is a new stepping stone in MCU, in terms of accepting magic. It has an excellent world-building that doesn’t detach itself from the rest of franchise, and the visual is worth every penny.

I suggest you to see it either in 3D (if you like 3D movies at all, although maybe beware with motion sickness if you’re sensitive) because I think it'll be gorgeous, or at least see it in a good middle seat in your trusty cinema to get the most immersive experience. I saw it in cinema with crappy sound, and I really, really wish I had a different experience.

TL;DR Full of magical visual, Doctor Strange is one more solid Marvel origin story.

TV Shoutout: Person of Interest

Person of Interest, the best underrated show on TV.

What it is about: A recluse billionaire (Michael Emerson) hires an ex-military (Jim Caviezel) to help people he knows are in danger, from a mysterious source.

Why you should watch it: The series is produced by Jonathan Nolan, brother of movie director Christopher Nolan (Batman's The Dark Knight Trilogy, Interstellar, etc). They do have the same flair and trademark realistic style of filmmaking, but Jonathan is much, much better at portraying character drama.

Basically, there are 2 distinct reasons why Person of Interest is such a great series. One, for it's characters. Person of Interest does an excellent job at developing the characters throughout the series, on a level that you have never seen on a typical procedural. It deals in the grey area of surveillance, organized crime and politics, and there were a lot of subverting tropes that makes it very fresh, and quite a lot genuinely funny moments in a seemingly serious show.

Two, for its portrayal of Artificial Intelligence (AI) (yes, there's an AI in this show). While the show started as a standard case-of-the-week procedural, later it digs more into the nature AI as an all-seeing eye. Very slowly but surely, it turned into a critical discussion on why, what, and how such AI would be like in our world. It portrays AI as a sympathetic but growing entity in a way that, I must again say, is rarely seen on popular entertainment. It might seem unlikely at the start, but Person of Interest has grown into one of the best sci-fi show on television right now, but I can honestly say non-scifi fan would also enjoy it from a pure action, conspiracy, and character perspective. If you don't believe me, just read this 

What else? Because of its top notch, Emmy-level acting (that nobody’s bothered to give awards to)? Because of its badassery? Because Amy Acker is enough to melt your hearts away? Because it has Taraji P. Henson (Cookie in Empire, a great show and actress in their own right)? Because of an adorable dog? Take your pick.

Where to start: Person of Interest is procedural, and I know most episodes in most procedural shows are entirely skippable, but I urge you against skipping anything in Person of Interest even though yes, there are filler episodes. Yes, some episodes contribute less than others to the bigger arc, but a lot of seemingly "case/number-of-the-week" episodes (especially the early ones) helps humanizing and characterizing each of the main characters: Finch, Reese, etc., and even The Machine (the previously mentioned AI). Those character-heavy episodes helped a lot to understand and love each of them.

If you so must insist to skip anything, there's a handy guide to episodes that deal mostly about the bigger arc, but only for first season and the beginning of the second. If you've watched those and liked them, then again I urge you to revisit the episodes you skipped and see if you like them too (I hope you do).

I do have to say though, while I liked Person of Interest from the beginning, it had a shaky start and did not feel particularly special until halfway of the first season (after, I believe, its mid-season break at 11th episode). By that time, they had newfound confidence in the concept of the show and had started to actually have fun with it, although it has always been a compelling show. And there were moments, even in the fourth season, where you might feel things slow down, but it was all for a reason and by the end of the season it will all be worth it. In short: it's not mandatory to watch all of the episodes, but it’s strongly advised if you can.

Where it is at: Fourth season had just ended, and it’s very likely that it’ll be renewed for season 5.

Review: Oldboy (2003)

Rating: 9.0 of 10

Oh Dae-Su (Choi Min-sik), a drunken and crass office-worker, was locked up in a mysterious hotel room for 15 years for no apparent reason. He was confused and desperate at first, and ended up just plain angry. When he eventually got out, with the help of one sushi-bar worker, he was determined to find out why he was held and the identity of his captor to take revenge.

Oldboy (actually based on a Japanese manga of the same name) is one of the most popular and acclaimed example of South Korean cinema in international stage, frequently listed as one of the best movies of all time and is firmly ingrained in the minds of modern cinephile. After earning cult status with Oldboy, Director Park Chan-wook eventually directed his first English-speaking movie, Stoker, in 2013 with Nicole Kidman and Mia Wasikowska, and Oldboy itself was remade by Hollywood with Spike Lee directing and Josh Brolin as lead (with less critical acclaim). I can’t tell you the merits of those two films, but I can tell you that Oldboy is very deserving of its cult favorite status.

Lacking normal social skills due to more than a decade being confused and alone, it was clear that Dae-su was a changed man, forever scarred by the absurd circumstance of his life. Dae-su was volatile and dangerous, a far cry from his previous buffoon self, and Choi Min-sik was equally believable as both. With range not unlike Robert de Niro in his best years, Choi Min-sik frequently changes from incredibly cold and menacing, to incredibly sad and pitiful without a blink of an eye.

With the absurdity of its premise, Oldboy had a perfect tone. Definitely not a typical grim-revenge story, it managed to keep a degree of surrealness—palpable from the moment we see Dae-su nagging in the police station but cemented the moment the octopus-eating scene arrived—only grounded by the sight of violence and blood. Inventive and highly stylish in its violence, the film is definitely not for the squeamish, but the actual horrors was largely visceral and psychological instead of purely gross visual. Oldboy is also partly a detective tale and partly a coming-of-age story (whatever age that is), providing much more layers to a simple vengeance story.

TL;DR With memorable images and moments throughout, Oldboy is a fascinating, heartbreaking, and stylish work about revenge.