Wednesday, October 29, 2025 |
|
|
I'm not just telling you this because Halloween is two days away: You really need to see Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein. The Mexican filmmaker spent his career dreaming of adapting Mary Shelley's iconic novel into a film, and the result is a masterpiece. Frankenstein hails from Netflix, however, so del Toro's vision received a limited theatrical release. So, you could wait until it hits Netflix on November 7, but you would do yourself a disservice, writes Anthony Breznican in a new column about the film. "If I sound breathless, that's because there is urgency," writes Breznican. "Frankenstein is a shooting star I'm afraid people might miss." You heard the man. Make like Frankenstein's monster and lumber over to the movie theater. – Brady Langmann, senior entertainment editor Plus: |
|
|
See it on the big screen. See it with your kid. See it right now. Just see it! |
Last year, when I visited del Toro on the set of Frankenstein, he invited me to his apartment on his day off to do a proper interview, away from the frenetic soundstages. Over coffee and Mexican pastries, he said he had begun to think of what moviemaking subtracts from a life—all the things you can't do or miss out on because you are guiding an epic film through its creation. It had better contribute something else meaningful. "I think that when you see your craft as a cathedral maker, you go, well, this is going to sap out me being in my kid's life, it's going to sap out me visiting my parents, it is going to sap out me existing in the social world... But it's worth it because it's a cathedral," he said. Not all films are like that. "I think that culturally in the conversation, movies are more like 7-Elevens in a way," he said with a laugh. "Not so cathedral-like." Frankenstein, however, feels like an actual sacred place. One that will endure the ages. Viewers can sense the weight of del Toro's whole life behind this story, particularly his philosophy about what one generation owes to another, and it will be the type of film that will still be watched many lifetimes from now. |
|
|
Historically, the after-dinner drink was meant to help with, you guessed it, digestion. (Just as its pre-dinner cousin, the aperitif, is intended to open you up for consumption.) Given its French origin, the word digestif may conjure images of Dr. Frasier Crane opening a bottle of sherry. But the options run far beyond fortified wine and today include an ever-broadening range of concoctions, from the espresso martini to the Paper Plane cocktail (which mixes bourbon with bitters and Aperol). When hosting, there's no better way to dazzle your guests and kick off the post-dinner portion of the evening than by serving a subtly complex digestif. Getting started is easy. All you really need in your bar cart is a few key bottles, including a brandy-type liquor, some high-quality cocktail bitters, and—most critical of all—an amaro or two. |
|
|
Tensions are heating up between Kathryn Bigelow and the Department of Defense. The director Point Break, The Hurt Locker, and Zero Dark Thirty has released a new thriller, A House of Dynamite. The film explores an utterly hypothetical scenario—in this case, a missile attack on United States soil—in hyperrealistic terms. But the movie's toughest critic thus far isn't on Rotten Tomatoes. It's the DOD. On October 25, Bloomberg obtained an internal October 16 memo from the Missile Defense Agency. The memo states the movie's depiction of United States missile defenses being only 61 percent effective is inaccurate. The MDA argues its interceptors have "a 100 percent accuracy rate" based on testing conducted over a decade. Bigelow and screenwriter Noah Oppenheim have, ahem, fired back at the DOD. In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter published on October 28, the filmmakers cited their consultation with experts ranging from senators to journalists to physicists, all of whom endorse what A House of Dynamite depicts is accurate. |
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment