Iro's One Movie a Day Thread

[Iroquois]

#305 - High Society
Charles Walters, 1956

http://www.thevintagecameo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/High-Society-9.jpg

A divorced socialite is planning to remarry a wealthy man, but things are complicated by the appearance of her ex-husband and a journalist tasked with covering the upcoming wedding.

If that plot sounds familiar, it may be because High Society is a Technicolor musical remake of 1940's widely-acclaimed screwball comedy The Philadelphia Story. Those who read my review will know that I had enough problems with it that I didn't exactly show it much love but I still thought it was an alright enough film at the end of the day. At the very least, it had the kind of premise and characters that couldn't exactly be hurt too much by the inclusion of musical numbers. As a result, High Society isn't a grossly inferior remake but there's nothing so great about the numbers of performances that really made me think it ever needed to exist. There is considerable talent on board, of course - Bing Crosby replaces Cary Grant as the interfering ex-husband who manages to bring a whimsical charm to a character who was originally very hard to like, which may or may not serve the film better as a result. Frank Sinatra also brings some charm to the journalist role originally played by James Stewart, while Grace Kelly doesn't exactly make for the best replacement for Katharine Hepburn as the wealthy woman at the centre of the plot.

The fact that this feels like an attempt to sanitise a rather caustic comedy of errors through the introduction of light-hearted musical numbers seems to work and not work in equal measure. The numbers feature not just Crosby and Sinatra but also a jazz band fronted by Louis Armstrong and are passable enough but none of them really stick out in my memory. There's also the fact that they downplay the ex-husband's character flaws in order to make him a character worth rooting for as he tries to win back the woman he loves, which does make the film's ending more tolerable as a result. It looks flashy enough as well, but at the end of the day it is a very disposable musical.

2.5

[Iroquois]

#306 - Pan's Labyrinth
Guillermo del Toro, 2006

https://lightsinthedarknessdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/panslab6.jpg

After moving to the remote home of her cruel military stepfather, a young girl discovers a fantastic underworld full of wonder and danger.

The main reason I felt like revisiting Pan's Labyrinth was to see how it beat out Children of Men for the Best Cinematography Oscar, but considering how good Pan's Labyrinth is, I didn't really need a reason to revisit it. It is an exercise in dark fantasy that doesn't shy away from depicting the horrific realities of a post-war fascist milieu that would make protagonist Ofelia retreat into fairytales. Such imagery combine with Ofelia's beloved fairytales to inform a vivid world of magic where a faun tasks her with completing a series of tasks in order to reclaim her rightful heritage as the heiress of a secret kingdom. Of course, she is countered at every turn by the restrictive nature of her home life, whether it is caring for her heavily pregnant mother or trying to avoid discipline from her incredibly strict and sadistic stepfather, Captain Vidal. Captain Vidal makes for one of the best villains in recent memory as his capacity for both violence and menace knows virtually no bounds. It's hard to know who provides the more horrifying antagonist, him or the fantasy world's "Pale Man".

I can definitely understand why this movie won Best Cinematography with its remarkable balancing of colours and fluid movements that tie in well with the extremely solid CGI work on display. The fantasy imagery is well-realised and combines with the real world in all the right ways to make the whole real-or-fake question especially difficult to answer. Performances are strong all throughout and the whole sub-plot involving a resistance movement planning their own subterfuge and uprising against the Captain is well-realised in a way that does not to detract from the fairytale plotline in the slightest. Pan's Labyrinth is definitely a film that holds up reasonably well, and while I may not love it the way a lot of people do, it is still excellent and recommended to anyone who like their fantasy to have just the right amount of edge.

4

[Swan]

One of my faves. :cool:

[seanc]

I really enjoyed Pan's, haven't seen it since it's release though. Need to go back to it sometime.

[Gatsby]

You know it's a a good film when all sorts of strange places and creatures look beautiful.

Guillermero should stop working on chap like The Hobbit and go back to some serious sh*t like Pan's Labyrinth.

[Iroquois]

#307 - Vertigo
Alfred Hitchcock, 1958

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Vertigo_1958_trailer_embrace.jpg

A retired detective with a severe fear of heights is employed by a businessman to carry out surveillance on his eccentric wife.

I really want to like Vertigo a lot more than I already do due to it being the weirdest of Hitchcock's most widely recognised masterpieces. It starts off simply enough with its protagonist, a nervy ex-detective played by James Stewart, trying to cope with his acrophobia right as he gets a new case that simply involves tailing a woman (Kim Novak). This woman has a bizarre obsession with a long-dead ancestor and has suicidal tendencies that are somewhat rooted in said ancestor's own history, which causes Stewart's character to become more than a little intrigued and involved than is professionally acceptable. Going into more detail than that would seem too reliant on spoilers, but it's interesting because the spoilers would come less from the revelation of plot details than from the film that develops around them. Vertigo differs from the other great Hitchcock films in how it seems virtually unconcerned with any actual development of its plot. Sure, it's got a very noir-like set-up that hits a lot of familiar beats - a damaged detective, his sarcastic secretary, a suspicious client, a supposed femme fatale, etc. - but its a credit to Hitchcock and his collaborators that all these clichés get subverted in service to the film's concern with something greater than delivering a rollicking mystery (which only really starts halfway through the film and then gets the truth revealed to the audience two-thirds of the way through the movie, but it's still up to us to watch Stewart figure it out for himself).

Aside from giving us the famous "vertigo" effects work, the film is also reasonably visually competent and reliant on powerful imagery to communicate its themes, such as Stewart's dream sequence in the second half of the film. He and Novak give good performances (especially the latter as she is made to play two very distinct characters over the course of the film, communicating icy disconnect and complicated ferocity). Hitchcock regular Bernard Herrmann also creates a solid score to go along with the visuals on display. What stops me really liking this one is that it's maybe a bit too long for its own good - it does space its most interesting scenes a bit too far apart and still builds itself off a rather basic detective narrative, plus it doesn't stick the ending as well as it could have. It's an interesting cinematic experiment and that does make it theoretically more compelling than Hitchcock's much more prosaic classic, but this particular experiment doesn't provide the best results.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#308 - Planet of the Apes
Franklin J. Schaffner, 1968

http://stuartfernie.org/pota4.jpg

A group of astronauts crash-land on an unfamiliar planet to discover a world where intelligent apes are the dominant species and treat humans as livestock.

Planet of the Apes managed to make it onto my first Top 100 but it didn't crack the list the second time around. Despite that, it's still a very solid piece of sci-fi that seems to benefit from being dated more so than be hindered by it. Of course, the twist ending has become such common knowledge to the point that not only do covers for the movie's DVDs feature the film's final image, but there have been not one but two modern-day prequels whose existence explicitly spoils said ending. The beauty of this particular film is that it is more than able to withstand its ultimate reveal. I don't even need to specify what it is in this particular review - no, this is more about the rest of the film. The plot is some pretty standard speculative fiction - what if humans weren't a dominant species on a planet? This results in a serious culture shock for the human protagonist (Charlton Heston) as circumstances conspire to make him no different to the mute, barely-sentient humans that are given next to no respect by the ape population or their quasi-medieval society save by certain budding scholars.

All the best sci-fi finds something interesting to say beyond telling a fascinating story, and that is part of why Planet of the Apes' dated nature actually makes it more of a classic rather than render it an embarrassing relic. There's an obvious anti-creationist tract at work here as various ape scholars dismiss the existence of intelligent humans on religious grounds, but it's interesting to see a civil rights allegory at work as the privileged sub-group unapologetically denigrates a supposedly inferior group (that is only inferior because of a long history of social manipulation - but of course, that is inferred by the ending). That also involves picking apart some of the more noticeable aspects of that metaphor such as the fact that the humans in this film are predominantly white, as well as the fact that Heston's character has no problem embarking on a relationship with a human woman that doesn't appear to have much in the way of sapience. In any case, the ape make-up is solid (in the wise words of Bernard Black, you really believe that monkeys can have meetings) and there are good performances underneath it all, especially from Kim Hunter and Roddy McDowall as the apes most sympathetic to Heston's plight and also Maurice Evans as memorably crusty antagonist Dr. Zaius (Dr. Zaius, Dr. Zaius...). The film keeps rolling along at just the right pace to fill out its running time, though it does run out of steam a bit during the last twenty minutes. Despite all those flaws, they are minor problems with a piece of sci-fi that definitely earns its iconic status, no matter how much it spoils itself in the process.

4

[Iroquois]

#309 - Beasts of the Southern Wild
Benh Zeitlin, 2012

http://prettycleverfilms.com/files/2013/02/beasts-of-the-southern-wild-005.jpg

As a storm approaches and devastates a remote Louisiana community, a young girl has to contend with her short-tempered father's dangerous behaviour and worsening illness.

Beats of the Southern Wild delivers pretty much what it sets out to deliver but one has to question whether or not it was really worth delivering. There are plenty of singular attributes that work in its favour - most memorably, the Oscar-nominated performance by 9-year-old Quvenzhané Wallis. Her protagonist is the one that we follow through all the events of the film, which are clearly influenced by the real-world effects of Hurricane Katrina as a massive flood strikes a small area of Louisiana colloquially known as "the Bathtub". She also has to contend with a father (Dwight Henry) that is physically abusive but also has his fair share of complications in regards to his mental and physical health, with the latter implied to be tied to the destructive weather conditions surrounding the Bathtub. Watching this so closely after re-watching Pan's Labyrinth only helps to emphasise the whole real-or-fantastic nature of this film, especially since Wallis's character seems to be under the impression that her father's well-being is connected to the adverse effects of the weather (and also the inevitable approach of some prehistoric creatures making their way towards the Bathtub).

Of course, this does make for a very loose and episodic narrative as Wallis's character navigates the area both before and after the flood, interacting with all sorts of distinctive Cajun characters and trying to patch together some semblance of their past lives amidst the destruction. One could draw comparisons to Malick, especially with Wallis's complicated voice-over sounding like it's been thought of by someone beyond her years, and of course the emphasis on imagery over plot. In that regard, it's decent enough, but there's barely anything in the way of personality. Wallis and Henry only go so far in providing solid material for this film, especially considering how both of them are defined by outwardly tempestuous attitudes that disguise some serious vulnerabilities. Of course, it doesn't make for an especially compelling film despite some interesting images scattered throughout the film and as such it just ends up being a rather average example of independent American cinema.

2.5

[Iroquois]

#310 - Torn Curtain
Alfred Hitchcock, 1966

http://cdn.highdefdigest.com/uploads/2012/11/10/torn6.png

An American scientist publicly defects to the Soviet Union during a trip to East Germany as part of a top-secret spy mission.

It seems like Psycho marked the point at which Hitchcock reached a high-water mark as far as the quality of his films went and everything he made afterwards (with the possible exception of The Birds) marked a massive downturn in quality from his classic works. Or maybe I just never liked his work that much in the first place. In any case, Torn Curtain is a pretty hard film to defend because it really is quite a slog by Hitchcock standards. The premise sounds interesting - an American scientist (Paul Newman) and his girlfriend (Julie Andrews) end up on the other side of the Iron Curtain because Newman is part of a mission to discover a formula that could turn the tide of the Cold War. Of course, Andrews is unaware of the implications and insists on following Newman every step of the way, which does get complicated as Newman himself gets drawn further into the espionage than he intends to.

The problem is that Torn Curtain just doesn't deliver much in the way of consistent thrills. Sure, there's a pair of pretty charisma machines in the form of Newman and Andrews, but they don't have much in the way of chemistry together and they don't really sell the kind of attraction to one another that might jeopardise such an important mission. There are some decent sequences, such as an East German agent tracking Newman to a remote farmhouse and getting into a prolonged fight to the death as a result, but they are spread too far apart over a lengthy running time and only serve to point out how the bulk of the film barely offers anything in the way of consistent suspense. As a result, Torn Curtain really does feel like the work of a director who is spinning his creative wheels and can only just back up the rest of the film with the occasional well-executed scene.

2

[Iroquois]

#311 - My Fair Lady
George Cukor, 1964

https://benefitsofaclassicaleducation.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/large_my_fair_lady_blu-ray_51.jpg

In turn-of-the-century England, a wealthy linguistics specialist decides to take an uncouth lower-class woman and teach her how to look, sound, and act like a proper lady.

In my experience, musicals are always a bit of a gamble, but I have a high enough tolerance for them that I almost never think of them as truly bad pieces of work. Unfortunately for them, that also means I have trouble thinking of them as genuinely enjoyable pieces of work beyond their obviously painstaking production values. My Fair Lady is another film that falls into the latter category as something I can only appreciate at a distance. Its roots in George Bernard Shaw's play Pygmalion guarantee a pretty serviceable plot around which to build a bunch of different musical numbers, but it's not like most of them are particularly memorable in and of themselves. They are carried by the dual lead performances of Audrey Hepburn and Rex Harrison as the titular lady and her cultured educator respectively. A variety of other characters populate the film to provide foils and conflicts, but it really is all about those two. Though Hepburn naturally makes quite an impression through both her rough Cockney accent and her eventual posh affectation, it is Harrison that comes across as the film's best performer as a character that does not evoke much sympathy from an audience but still makes for a fascinating character as his intentions to use Hepburn in order to prove a point are complicated by his genuine development of affection for her.

Otherwise, the production values are strong as the film creates a solid and striking depiction of Edwardian England against which the songs and characters can play out. Though most of the songs and characters don't leave much of an impression, it doesn't make much of a difference considering how Harrison and Hepburn carry the bulk of the film. It has an impressive if none-too-creative visual aesthetic that makes its lengthy running time pass by a little easier. As one of the musicals that became acclaimed enough to win Best Picture at the Oscars, it will either prove exceptionally appealing or exceptionally grating or exceptionally average, and I guess it's probably a good thing that my opinion of this ends up being somewhere between average and good.

3

[Friendly Mushroom!]

Yeah that's what I pretty much think of My Fair Lady as well. One of the weaker musicals, but not a wasted three hours.

Can I recommend you to watch Top Hat, Swing Time, Yankee Doodle Dandy and The Band Wagon as it seems like you are starting to watch musicals?

Also if you haven't seen Suspicion, Spellbound, The Man Who Knew Too Much 1956, and Frenzy, all Hitch films, I'll also like to recommend them as well, if it's okay with you.

[Iroquois]

I'll take those recommendations into consideration (with the exception of The Man Who Knew Too Much '56, which I've already seen and not liked all that much).

[Friendly Mushroom!]

Can you please explain why?

[Iroquois]

I think I had it as a 3 because it was a reasonably compelling little plot but the extraneous details didn't do all that much for me and stopped it being truly great to me.

[Mäx]

I'm with you there on The Man Who Knew Too Much and Torn Curtain, Iro. The first one was okay and the second one pretty boring.

[Iroquois]

#312 - The Immigrant
James Gray, 2013

https://flavorwire.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/the-immigrant.jpg

In 1921 New York, a Polish immigrant is forced to work for the impresario of a burlesque theatre when her sister is detained at Ellis Island.

I've watched quite a few films over the past few months that could fall under the heading of "melodrama", but I've found quarrel with a lot of them. The Immigrant arguably fits into that particular dramatic sub-genre, but there is plenty of talent on board and also a storyline that proves consistently compelling up until the closing credits. Marion Cotillard plays the titular immigrant, a Polish woman who encounters difficulty at the immigration checkpoint on Ellis Island when she is not only under threat of detainment but her sister is quarantined due to illness. It is at this point that she is saved from detainment by an impresario (Joaquin Phoenix) who manages a group of burlesque dancers and agrees to help out Cotillard if it means she will join his group. This of course leads to a series of escalating problems for Cotillard such as family disputes, sex work, and the appearance of Phoenix's charming yet troublesome magician cousin (Jeremy Renner).

Part of what elevates The Immigrant above typical melodramatic fare is the complexity of the characters. The French Cotillard may not be all that convincing as a Polish person, but she carries it well as she plays a person full of conflicting motivations and no small amount of consternation about her difficult situation. Phoenix is also a stand-out as a character who could easily have shrunk into a cynical or abusive stereotype but has much more depth than that, especially in his complicated relationship to Cotillard and the other women under his employ. He communicates his various contradictory emotions in manners great and small and easily comes across as the best performer here. Compared to these two, Renner comes across as a rather flat character who seems to exist only to drive the plot forward by creating a love triangle without having much definition in his own right, but he sells it as well as he can. Credit also has to go to the well-realised cinematography and production design that captures the 1920s setting with aplomb. It may not do anything especially amazing but it is a surprisingly compelling slice of melodrama that features talented performers playing sufficiently complicated characters amidst a well-realised milieu and is recommended to anyone who doesn't physically recoil at the prospect of watching anything that isn't classified as melodrama.

3.5

[mark f]

The Immigrant comes across as a modern-day silent movie. Except for the music, you could remove the soundtrack and add a few intertitles and see what a strong homage it is, in terms of both acting and visuals, to silent melodramas.

[cricket]

I love Born on the 4th of July, some of the best work that Stone and Cruise has ever done.

[Iroquois]

#313 - Winter Sleep
Nuri Bilge Ceylan, 2014

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/images/news/201406/n_67440_1.jpg

In a rural Turkish village, a hotel owner-operator and his acquaintances have to contend with a number of problems both internal and external.

As of writing, Winter Sleep is the most recent winner of the Palme d'Or - much like the film that won before it, it is a lengthy drama that involves little in the way of external action when it comes to generating interest. Though it does occasionally come a little too close to parodying itself as a super-serious dialogue-heavy foreign-language drama for its own good, Winter Sleep ultimately prevails despite this. It gives us complex characters that don't always inspire sympathy but at least prove interesting enough to generate opinions. The film centres on Aydin, a financially well-off business owner who contends with a variety of problems, often in ways that make him unsympathetic. His compatriots include his dissatisfied younger wife, his cantankerous sister, and his pragmatic lawyer. There are other characters but they mainly serve as catalysts for both external drama and introspection on the part of Aydin and the other main characters.

The film alternates quite frequently between mundane dialogue scenes, frequent long-running philosophical diatribes between Aydin and those who are close to him, plus the occasional instance of external action (such as the smashed car window that kicks off what could be considering the film's main plot). There isn't much in the way of style, but this isn't the kind of film that needs one as it is all about the characters interfacing with one another, often at great length. Aydin makes for a fascinating yet not particularly sympathetic protagonist and the various foils he comes into contact with are strong in his company or even on their own as they follow their own sub-plots (especially one that reaches an unsurprising but still shocking conclusion). I'm not sure if it really needed to be a full three hours long - parts of it are interesting, especially the discussions about the nature of good and evil and how one's individual behaviour and sense of self either reflects it or doesn't, but it can also be a bit of a slog depending on your tolerance for this type of talkative, actionless film.

3

[honeykid]

and the appearance of Phoenix's charming yet troublesome magician cousin (Jeremy Renner).
I'm not sure anyone has enough acting ability to make Jeremy Renner appear charming. Let alone Jeremy Renner.

[Iroquois]

I'm not sure anyone has enough acting ability to make Jeremy Renner appear charming. Let alone Jeremy Renner.

Should I have specified that it was in-universe?

[honeykid]

No, it's just what occurred to me as I read it.

[tramp]

Going through these reviews, Iroquois, you are one tough critic. I'm going to go find The Immigrant.

[Iroquois]

Going through these reviews, Iroquois, you are one tough critic.

Thank you.

[Iroquois]

#314 - Underworld
Len Wiseman, 2003

http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/5300000/Underworld-2003-kate-beckinsale-5346794-1934-1080.jpg

A war breaks out between vampires and werewolves as they fight for control of an ordinary human who may hold the key to an ancient prophecy.

I really shouldn't get my hopes up over vampire-themed action films - if I didn't like the much more acclaimed Blade, then what chance did this have? It had an interesting premise, sure - vampires versus werewolves in an appropriately dark and violent film, what could possibly go wrong? Unfortunately, a lot. I know that The Matrix was an awesome film that redefined the action genre with its slick leather-clad aesthetic and fancy slow-motion gun violence, but when the first action sequence of your film involves not only both those factors but an awfully familiar-looking grimy subway setting (except tinged with blue instead of green), then it doesn't get one's hopes up. Thus begins a fairly stolid excuse for a supernatural action thriller as our badass protagonist (Kate Beckinsale, who I was surprised to learn was actually English considering how I could have sworn her accent was slipping at times) gets caught up in the search for a human (Scott Speedman) that the "lycans" (read: werewolves) and the vampires both want to get a hold of for their own nefarious reasons.

Despite the somewhat twisty narrative and promise of cool action, Underworld ultimately fails to deliver on either count. Most of the acting - save for esteemed British thesps like Bill Nighy and Michael Sheen (who play the head vampire and head werewolf respectively) - is so incredibly wooden I can hardly believe it even made it into a movie. The effects work on the lycans hasn't aged well at all, but the moody Gothic atmosphere that the rest of the film generates still holds up alright. Much of the film skews far too much towards the implausible without being awesome enough to compensate and just ends up blowing past without leaving much of an impression. Underworld is most definitely a disappointment, but now that I've seen it, it's hard to imagine a better story coming out of such a premise - even if it did, it probably wouldn't have the thrilling excitement to back it up.

1.5

[Iroquois]

#315 - The Emperor's New Groove
Marc Dindal, 2000

http://www.dvdizzy.com/images/e/emperorsnewgroove-09.jpg

The self-absorbed emperor of the Incans is accidentally transformed into a llama by his vindictive chief adviser and must find a way to turn himself back.

The Emperor's New Groove feels like a breath of fresh air after the last couple of animated films I've watched, if only because it managed to make me laugh a lot. It runs off an admittedly conventional Disney plot by having incredibly selfish protagonist Emperor Kuzco (David Spade) turn into a llama as part of a failed assassination plot by his power-hungry adviser Yzma (Eartha Kitt) and her dim-witted but good-natured manservant Kronk (Patrick Warburton). He then spends the bulk of the film grudgingly co-operating with Pacha (John Goodman), a kind-hearted peasant who wants to stop Kuzco from building a giant swimming pool on the same hill where he lives with his family. Together, the two of them have to contend with South America's treacherous landscape and vicious wildlife, all while Yzma and Kronk try to finish the job they started.

What the movie lacks in an original plot (and you will be able to pick a lot of the beats that this movie uses - the major exception being the lack of a romantic sub-plot), it more than makes up for it by having a rather constant stream of funny jokes. I appreciated the banter and physical humour that erupts between characters - having the film bounce between two very similar pairs of characters means that there's twice the need for odd-couple humour, but the film's response is to deliver twice as much. The interplay between Kuzco and Pacha is frequently good, but it's not quite as good as that between Yzma and Kronk, the latter of whom practically steals the show with his charmingly dense baritone. There is also some nice metafictional humour such as Kuzco's frequently unreliable narration being played for laughs as well as the movie hand-waving plot holes in some amusingly ridiculous ways. I also appreciated the absence of musical numbers save for the opening theme, which was a nice touch considering how much other Disney films from the same era seemed to depend on having numbers. Of course, its short length and lightweight nature means that there's not a whole lot of emotional heft to it, but that just means it avoids getting completely bogged down in typical Disney sentimentality and instead ends up delivering a pretty rapid-fire comedy, so if that's all you're after then dive right in.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#316 - Suck Me Shakespeer
Bora Dagtekin, 2013

http://de.web.img2.acsta.net/c_640_360/videothumbnails/195/352/19535249_20131010164828663.jpg

When an ex-con learns that the vacant lot where his money was stashed is now covered up by an extension to a very dysfunctional high school, he pretends to be a teacher in order to gain access and search for his cash.

I have to give this German film credit for having one of the most awkward English-language titles I've ever seen (though I doubt they could have directly translated Fack ju Göhte into English), and the film definitely lives up to its coarse and deliberately misspelled title. Suck Me Shakespeer may use a familiar premise - when someone first explained it to me, my response was "Isn't that basically the plot of Blue Streak?" (the obvious difference there being that the building in question is a police station instead of a school), with my next frame of reference being School of Rock - but it does get a surprising amount of mileage out of this idea over the course of two hours. Most of that can be credited to the edginess of the humour, with the school in question being shown to be in a state of complete disrepair and anarchy, where the mericless pranking of the school's most delinquent-filled class is enough to drive teachers to attempted suicide. Naturally, events conspire so that the cocky ex-con protagonist is forced to teach the class and also contend with the belligerent romantic tension between him and the bookish, sweet-natured female teacher who he must co-operate with in order to stay in the school long enough to find his stash (and pay off an underworld figure, of course).

Unfortunately, edginess only gets you so far when the plot is as trite as this one and many of the gags end up covering the same ground, even if they do come across as too absurd to be plausible or tolerated in real life (such as the protagonist responding to a group of students cutting class by grabbing a paintball rifle). Even when the students inevitably start to warm up to both the ex-con and the actual teacher (and vice versa), that just means the gags peter out as a result of encroaching sentimentality and the characters ultimately aren't endearing enough for you to care all that much about whether they overcome their obstacles or achieve their goals. Throw in a soundtrack full of emotionally on-the-nose pop songs and you have a real crowd-pleaser on your hands - while I'm not totally immune to the charms of this film and am glad it rises ever-so-slightly above its extremely basic narrative, I am ultimately not all that enthused about it. I would not be surprised if this got an American remake.

2

[Iroquois]

#317 - The Gold Rush
Charlie Chaplin, 1925

https://themovierat.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/gold_rush_c.jpg

During the Klondike Gold Rush, a lone prospector has some misadventures involving a beautiful woman, a remote log cabin, a dreaded outlaw, and a fellow prospector.

This is the third Charlie Chaplin film I've seen and I'm still inclined not to think of any of them as more than just alright. This one was different in that I watched a restored version where Chaplin himself provided an all-new narration in place of the usual title cards, presumably as a means of updating it for an audience that was rapidly getting used to talking pictures. Admittedly, it does help the movie flow quite a bit, though it does make me wonder how the film would have played out if it'd been the proper silent version, though I suppose if I care that much then I can try watching the silent version on the film's Wikipedia page. Even in this shorter and louder version, The Gold Rush doesn't do all that much for me. Though it's obviously filled with gags, none of them really made me laugh (with the exception of the climatic cabin sequence, which involves some inventive use of editing and special effects that is somewhat undercut by the use of a very fake-looking miniature dummy).

Otherwise, it's pretty standard silent comedy with just enough of a dramatic edge as Chaplin's impoverished protagonist falls for a dance-hall beauty while also having to contend with the harsh climate and dangerous individuals that he comes across while trying to make a fortune. There are the occasional bizarre little flights of fancy to add to the regular comedy, such as Chaplin's friend growing hungry and imagining Chaplin as a giant chicken (which of course involves a chicken suit), but not even the more surreal imagery is enough to make much of a difference one way or the another. The Gold Rush definitely isn't bad enough to make me want to avoid any more Chaplin, but it definitely feels like I'm seeking out his films out of formality more so than out of enjoyment.

3

[honeykid]

I'm baffled by anyone who seeks out Chaplin films out of enjoyment. ;)

[MovieMeditation]

For all its great reputation I was disappointed with The Gold Rush, to be honest... There are plenty Chaplin films which are a whole lot better.

[Iroquois]

#318 - Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
Eric Radomski and Bruce Timm, 1993

https://viewerscommentary.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/batman-mask-of-the-phantasm-phantasm.jpg

A mysterious masked villain starts murdering crime bosses and people start to suspect that Batman is responsible, forcing him to put an end to things once and for all.

I don't think I've ever watched a single episode of Batman: The Animated Series, but apparently the feature-length Mask of the Phantasm is good enough to crack the MoFo Top 100 Animated Films List so I figured that, despite a fairly ambivalent attitude towards Batman and superheroes in general, I decided to give it a shot. The animation has a distinctive style but hasn't aged all that well in parts. The main story that I outlined in the logline above is also fairly basic, though it gets complicated by the introduction of an old love interest of Bruce Wayne's who has come back to town and the re-introduction of the Joker, who is brought into the fight against the Phantasm by one of the prospective victims. Unfortunately, much of the film tends to come across as build-up and is often told through fragmented flashbacks; while these flashbacks tend to end in an action scene to maintain the movie's cartoon pacing, it's not enough to make that much of a difference to how things are handled. Things only really pick up with the introduction of the Joker (played with appropriately theatrical lunacy by Mark Hamill - now I can understand why there are so many people who consider his voice work the definitive Joker), even if he does feel more than a little shoehorned into the main plot.

Mask of the Phantasm never really overcomes its TV origins, feeling like an an overextended episode that has just enough quality to stop it being written off as mindless kids' entertainment. It's got its fair share of plot holes, the animation is decent but not amazing, and virtually every performer pales in comparison to Hamill (though the interplay between Bruce and Alfred is always a highlight no matter what). The action is paced reasonably well, though again nothing truly impresses until it gets close to the end. It's an easy enough way to pass an hour-and-a-bit (and when life starts proving a bit too hard to keep up with a movie-a-day challenge, you get familiar with shorter features very quickly), but I guess I'm just not enough of a Batman fan (or Batman: The Animated Series fan, anyway) to appreciate it.

3

[Iroquois]

#319 - Lawless
John Hillcoat, 2012

http://www.themovieguys.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/lawless.jpg

Three brothers who run a moonshine operation in rural Virginia during the Prohibition era are forced into a conflict with a corrupt lawman.

In theory, John Hillcoat should be one of my favourite directors with his tendency towards directing grim yet striking dramas that cover a variety of eras and settings. However, with the slight exception of his 2005 outback Western The Proposition, he hasn't done much to truly amaze me. Grim prison drama Ghosts...of the Civil Dead was a striking calling card but didn't have much substance, while his 2009 adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's The Road came across as a rather bland post-apocalyptic film that never quite did justice to its source. Even in that company, Lawless stands out as an especially weak film not just in comparison to Hillcoat's earlier works but also on its own "merits".

Though Lawless may have been scripted by Proposition screenwriter Nick Cave and brings the same combination of graphic violence and harsh period drama, it ultimately feels rather neutered as a result. A lot of that has to do with the fact that the story feels awfully underweight. Making Shia LaBeouf the viewpoint character for much of the film does make some sense as he is the weakest and therefore most ostensibly relatable of the three leads, though neither his growing involvement with his brothers' business nor his budding relationship with Mia Wasikowska's local Amish lass do much to endear him as a character (the same goes for his haphazard narration). Tom Hardy does a fair bit of heavy lifting (figuratively and literally) as the tough brother who runs the operation and leads the fight against Guy Pearce's extremely bizarre villain (who ends up being the most memorable character thanks to his unusual appearance that reminded me of the Mystery Man from Lost Highway), all while having his own romantic sub-plot with Jessica Chastain's newly-arrived city slicker. Hardy and Chastain are at least solid enough to make up for the material they're given, while Pearce's ability as a grotesque antagonist is debatable beyond his uncanny look. Other characters tend towards the inconsequential - Gary Oldman may pop up as a notorious gangster, but he doesn't get to do much of note in the role.

The film does deliver somewhat when it comes to action, but only does so by sparingly throwing in a gangland hit here or a shoot-out there - besides, it never seems to have any real sense of consequence due to the unremarkable nature of the underlying drama. Cave and fellow Bad Seed Warren Ellis bring a lot of their usual country Gothic sensibilities to the soundtrack, though rootsy re-interpretations of anachronistic numbers such as the Velvet Underground's "White Light/White Heat" prove a distraction whenever I notice them. Lawless only adds to my perception that Hillcoat is a one-trick pony who may work with some fairly talented collaborators on both sides of the camera, but said collaborators are extremely hit-or-miss here as the normally-talented Cave fails to deliver a decent script here, shooting the whole film to hell as a result. Hopefully Hillcoat's next feature has a better source to work off.

2

[Iroquois]

#320 - John Dies at the End
Don Coscarelli, 2012

http://cdn.bloody-disgusting.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/John_Dies_At_The_End_Big4_7_31_12.jpg

A pair of slackers get drawn into a plot involving a brand-new drug whose effects threaten to destroy not just their minds but also the fabric of the universe.

What if David Cronenberg directed a buddy comedy? That would probably be the best way to describe John Dies at the End, an exceptionally bizarre little movie written by a Cracked.com columnist and directed by the maker of Bubba Ho-Tep. Given the blackly comic premise on offer, you'd think I would have enjoyed this a lot more, but sadly I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as I wanted to (but that's cult cinema for you). It's not like it doesn't try to provide a memorably weird experience with its tale of two friends who specialise in dealing with supernatural threats (as established by an early scene where they end up performing an exorcism in a basement). Of course, thanks to the extremely disjointed nature of the film (which is only exacerbated by the fact that protagonist Dave is narrating the events of the film to Paul Giamatti's intrigued journalist) it's hard to know how seriously to take said exorcism in the context of the rest of the film, which plays out more or less the same as if Dave and John had been complete strangers to the paranormal, but that's just one of many ways in which I can't quite accept John Dies at the End as the cult classic that it tries to be.

It's a shame, then, because John Dies at the End definitely introduces some interesting enough concepts amidst its horror-comedy nonsense. The concept of a drug that changes one's interpretation of reality is obviously very familiar, but here it's taken to an extreme as Dave is capable of talking to the dead through an ordinary hotdog and can process the enormity of the universe in less than a second while on this film's alien drug. The technical side of things bounces around a lot in terms of quality - while the practical effects courtesy of horror veteran Robert Kurtzman are solid as always, the film's attempts to go more advanced than that just make the cracks show and not always in a good way. It just showcases how much of a mishmash the resulting film is, which isn't all that amusing beyond the occasional spot of pseudo-intellectual gibberish (the most obvious example being the opening segment about the axe riddle). Of course, things eventually get bogged down hard as the revelations start piling up and the film seems to be throwing in surreal and bloody imagery in order to prop up its alienating weirdness and thus means that the film feels rather anticlimatic.

Though the bulk of the performances are fairly flat (though in defence of the two leads, they are supposed to be a couple of deadpan dopes), the inclusion of solid character actors such as Giamatti or Clancy Brown or Glynn Turman works when it comes to improving the acting on offer, though they don't always get that much to do. Trying to judge films that have already built their reputations (or sought to, anyway) on being weird or awesome or some combination of the two is always difficult because the film you build up in your mind is almost always going to be better than what you end up watching. John Dies at the End ultimately ends up being one such film, though it has enough promise that I don't exactly mind too much. It's goofy enough to be mildly entertaining and its frequent forays into existential dread work surprisingly well. I definitely hope that this ends up growing on me, but it's not hard to feel like it's wishful thinking on the part of a film that was always going to be more impressive in theory than in practice.

2.5

[cricket]

Lawless is a bit of a guilty pleasure for me. I don't consider it a very good film, but I thoroughly enjoyed it.

[Iroquois]

#321 - Victor/Victoria
Blake Edwards, 1982

http://s3.amazonaws.com/img.goldderby.com/images/1319230065_VictorVictoria.jpg

In 1930s Paris, an impoverished female soprano ends up diguising herself as a man and pretending to be a female impersonator in order to make ends meet.

Given the year, it's not hard to think of this as something of an unintentional companion piece to Tootsie, if only because of the fact that both films take a person cross-dressing out of financial necessity and mines it for a considerable amount of dramedy. Victor/Victoria also has its fair share of similarities to other well-known musicals, but it's a credit to this particular film that none of these similarities feel like a major obstacle to the film. Instead, the film makes the most of the interplay between Julie Andrews as the soprano protagonist and Robert Preston as the homosexual cabaret performer who takes her in and becomes her mentor in the ways of being a female impersonator, as well as the various romantic and comedic complications that arise as a result of the convoluted plot involving characters of multiple genders and sexualities. The film generally plays things for laughs; while one could argue that the few instances of homophobia are downplayed or disregarded and might serve to sanitise the period setting somewhat, here it doesn't come across as a significant problem because it simply wouldn't work. Saccharine? Perhaps. Intolerable? Not at all.

If anything, my main problem with Victor/Victoria is that it's not that funny. There are plenty of comedic moments but nothing that provides anything more than mild amusement. The film thrives on both physical jokes (as is to be expected from the director of the Pink Panther films) and a real comedy of errors thanks to the various characters' conflicting affections and Andrews' need to maintain her masquerade no matter what (even in the face of a romance involving James Garner's straight nightclub owner), but they almost never result in genuine laughter. The musical numbers are decent but not amazing - at least Andrews' voice is still strong and she carries the numbers reasonably well. The characters in the film are also solid - Preston steals the show as the theatrical old singer who provides an ample source of clever dialogue, while Lesley Ann Warren does surprisingly well in a role that initially seems to be a complete carbon copy of Jean Hagen's shrill-voiced, jealous blonde from Singin' in the Rain but gets more to do beyond mere imitation. Victor/Victoria is a decent enough film that is a little lighter on laughs and entertainment than it should be (and it's a little on the long side as well), but it doesn't feel like a waste of time and keeps things rolling along with its slick technical quality and amusing enough usage of a talented ensemble.

3

[Iroquois]

#322 - Meet Me in St. Louis
Vincente Minnelli, 1944

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4z4q64xj31rsmz6fo5_1280.jpg

Centres on a middle-class American family at the turn of the century.

Despite its status as a classic Hollywood musical, Meet Me in St. Louis is about as boring and forgettable as any such purported classic could possibly be. Sure, I took Seven Brides for Seven Brothers to task for its horribly outdated take on sexual politics but I was at least willing to admit that it had its entertaining moments here and there (often through some decently-choreographed dance numbers). No such luck with Meet Me in St. Louis, which does tend to be more about songs than dances and thus isn't all that visually compelling (or generally compelling) as a result. Its tale of the various sundry problems that are encountered by the members of a blandly middle-class family could be read as either a vapid celebration of the all-American family and their suburban lifestyles or a subtle critique of the same; I'm obviously inclined to lean towards the latter, if only because it makes sitting through this a bit more tolerable (and would certainly lend an extra edge to what is already a rather disturbing sequence that takes place on Halloween).

That being said, "Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas" is a decent little number and the only one I remember with any degree of favourability. I can take or leave Judy Garland's performing ability, but I struggle to care about any of this melodramatic claptrap whether it's being said or sung. It goes through a lot of the usual motions for a Golden Age musical without providing any remotely interesting variations, plunging through some boring romantic sub-plots and family strife between numbers. Not even the Technicolor flair behind the camera is enough to save this extremely forgettable movie.

1.5

[honeykid]

I like Meet Me In St. Louis. One of the few musicals I like. I'd also have "Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas" as one of the greats. Decent my arse.

I remember little about Victor/Victoria other than my mum really liked it, while I didn't care for it. Which makes sense as I've never liked Julie Andrews and I was about 10 or 11.

[mark f]

Don't take this too seriously if you think it's wrong-headed, but I think it's a "decent" suggestion. Just stop watching old movies already! You obviously don't understand them. You're talking about Meet Me in St. Louis as if it's a movie about fixing one's plumbing. The whole thing is visually compelling, it's a comedy about growing up with some sentimental yearning for the old-fashioned days, and the songs are terrific. You seem to be disturbed by a lot by things in 60 and 70 year old G-rated movies. I know I should just let it go, but here you pick on one of my wife's faves which we watch every Christmas.

[Iroquois]

#323 - Sunset Blvd.
Billy Wilder, 1950

http://cine-real.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Sunset-Boulevard-1950-Wallpapers-2.jpg

A struggling screenwriter on the run from debt collectors hides out in the decrepit mansion of a former star of silent films and becomes caught up in her eccentric lifestyle.

Sunset Blvd. takes a premise that mixes psychological drama and darkly comic satire and films the whole thing through a noir filter, making for one of the most striking films of the 1950s in the process. William Holden plays the writer protagonist with the level of cynicism and charm that would belong to a person struggling to keep a foothold in such a cutthroat business as the film industry. However, it is most definitely Gloria Swanson's film as she plays an ageing, reclusive starlet who has spent the past couple of decades inside her haunted-looking manse with only her stern butler (Erich von Stroheim) for company and is under the impression that she is due to return to her legions of adoring fans with a starring role in a Cecil B. deMille picture written by her. While Holden is initially forced to stay with Swanson in order to hide from debt collectors, but as things develop the situation becomes a lot more complicated, especially when Holden starts co-writing his own screenplay with a script reader (Nancy Olson).

Though Sunset Blvd. is most obviously a satire on not just the film industry but also the people it chews up and spits out (as well as the occasional jab at the audience, such as Holden's rumination that being a screenwriter doesn't matter because audiences tend to assume that movie characters make up everything as they go along), it becomes much more than that as it plumbs the complicated relationships between its main characters. Swanson is a tragic figure, even if she does end up functioning as the closest thing the film has to an antagonist as her obsession with both her comeback and Holden threatens to stifle him and only serves to cause second-hand embarrassment when she ventures into the outside world. Holden is a sufficiently complex and not entirely sympathetic protagonist who delivers appropriately world-weary narration with aplomb, while von Stroheim and Olson also get more development than you would think underneath their superficially basic characterisations. von Stroheim has a stern crustiness that does well to both obscure and lend weight to his character's true motivations, while Olson holds her own against Holden in what does come across as a banter-heavy relationship straight out of a screwball comedy. Deliberate parody or straightforward relationship-building? Probably the latter, but it's still well-written.

As far as the technical side of things goes, it's a good-looking film soaked in noir atmosphere with some strong (though not amazing) camerawork on display. The music does get a little histrionic at times (such as some stings that come out of nowhere over relatively insignificant events) and the characterisation outside of the main four characters tends to fall a little flat, with the possible exception of all the people that play themselves (most memorably Cecil B. deMille as himself). In any case, this is most definitely a film that emphasises its razor-sharp wit and scathing deconstruction of old Hollywood over any type of superficial flair (save for the occasional bizarre image such as Swanson's elaborate funeral for a recently deceased chimpanzee), and as such definitely holds up as one of the best films of the 1950s.

4.5

[Camo]

Great write up IRO :up: . Love Sunset.

[Iroquois]

I thought it would be funny to post that immediately after Mark's suggestion that I stop watching old movies.

[Guaporense]

Sunset is pretty good indeed. My favorite Wilder movie, however, is The Apartment.

[mark f]

Maybe I should have said "old musicals". :p

[Iroquois]

Maybe I should have said "old musicals". :p

It's not like I dislike all of them on principle - case in point (http://www.movieforums.com/reviews/1292868-on-the-town.html). If I didn't think there was something of worth to that particular sub-set of cinema then I wouldn't keep watching as many of them as I do.

[Iroquois]

#324 - Woman of the Year
George Stevens, 1942

http://theredlist.com/media/database/muses/couples/hollywood/katharine-hepburn-and-spencer-tracy/049-katharine-hepburn-and-spencer-tracy-theredlist.jpg

Focuses on the tumultuous relationship that develops between two journalists - one a sports writer, the other a foreign correspondent.

After having liked Adam's Rib and how it mined its high-concept premise for some solid humour and pathos, I was looking forward to the next collaboration between Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy that I had lined up. Unfortunately, Woman of the Year ended up being something of a let-down in comparison, though that much could be credited to the film not having that much of a strong premise to run off. It starts off with the promise of charmingly disagreeable interactions between Hepburn and Tracy as the former's suggestion to disallow professional sports in the name of helping the war effort prompts the latter to actually take her to a baseball game to show her why it should be allowed. From there they have a spark that builds into a proper romantic relationship that of course has its ups and downs as both characters' careers and personal decisions cause conflict between the two.

While it does have its fair share of moments that go a little deeper than its screwball premise might suggest (such as Hepburn's involvement in wartime politics extending to housing defectors and adopting orphans, which causes some conflict with Tracy) and is carried by the snippy yet fundamentally warm chemistry that develops between Hepburn and Tracy, it's ultimately a rather dry excuse for a comedy. I don't necessarily think it would have worked as a straight drama, but none of the jokes really landed for me. Still, it's a testament to the talent on board that it never actually grated on me due to its lack of laughs - it just feels like a rather underwhelming and overlong way to spend two hours.

2.5

[Iroquois]

#325 - Gunbuster
Hideaki Anno, 1988

http://www.japanator.com/elephant/ul/20072-620x-Gunbuster.png.jpg

In the not-too-distant future, a young Japanese schoolgirl joins an army consisting of giant robots in order to fight off an alien invasion.

Gunbuster was originally released as a series of six half-hour episodes that was later condensed into a single 90-minute feature, which might be part of the reason it was allowed to be nominated as a film instead of a series for the recent Sci-Fi HoF thread. All six episodes were available to watch on YouTube, but the 90-minute version was not, so I decided what the hell and watched all six - if it doesn't count as a film review when I submit it then so be it. While I can definitely see how this could have been trimmed a bit here and there (or should have had some things written out entirely), more often than not I found myself genuinely enjoying Gunbuster in spite of its seemingly ridiculous nature. While I can accept that Earth's response to an alien invasion would be to build giant robots, there's not really a lot of sense behind the notion that the two people chosen to pilot the extremely powerful experimental robot that gives the series its name would be a pair of Japanese schoolgirls (one of whom is a clumsy and awkward girl who just so happens to be the daughter of a heroic general, which probably has something to do with it). Of course, this show does focus on how these girls (especially the awkward one) eventually prove themselves to be formidable thorns in the sides of the enemy.

Leaving aside the inherent silliness in the mashup of giant robots and high school drama, Gunbuster does have the odd moment of poignancy and intelligence to supplant its more ludicrous tendencies. Seeing as much of the battle takes place in deep space, the introduction of time dilation makes for significant levels of drama as months spent in space translate into decades back on Earth. That's what really does it for me more so than any of the boring relationship-based drama that ensues involving the cast (especially involving the jerkass coach guy whose hidden depths don't make him significantly sympathetic or the protagonist's shallow love interest who appears in exactly one episode). The time dilation ties in with the threat of alien invasion to be the real source of dramatic tension here, especially as the climaxes of each installment raise the stakes significantly in terms of both action and drama. The animation is decent enough for the time period and the action is handled reasonably well (even if the triumphant awesomeness doesn't gel l with the more sombre emotional moments as well as it should), though I question how having part of the finale play out using stills actually works (even though the decision to make it black-and-white is rather inspired and is a really good way to let you know that sh*t is about to get real).

Much of Gunbuster is ultimately a little too goofy for its own good, but it has a surprising level of quality beneath its seemingly immature surface. Some decent robot-on-alien action and an interesting use of time dilation as a dramatic device (among other science-fiction dilemmas) are what really make this series work for me, while the rest of the character-based moments tend to vary quite wildly in terms of effectiveness. Though your tolerance for this will be rooted in how much you can tolerate animé and some of its more ridiculous stereotypes, if you feel like you can hack it then by all means go for it.

3

[Iroquois]

#326 - Kung Fury
David Sandberg, 2015

https://dr56wvhu2c8zo.cloudfront.net/kungfury/assets/2173642e-fecd-4226-ad2c-abe9bd4c99d4/kung-fury-time-travel.jpg

An '80s-style action parody concerning the titular police officer as he decides to go back in time to fight Adolf Hitler.

Kung Fury embodies basically everything I hate about a certain type of parody. To be fair, it is not as inherently awful as the extremely lazy reference-laden parody defined by Seltzer and Friedberg; instead, it's the kind of parody that does a straightforward emulation of what it's parodying but with jokes thrown in for good measure. While that particular sub-genre of parody does offer its own set of classics, it also means that the creators have to work extra hard in order to make sure that their parody not only nails the mockery but also ends up being entertaining in its own right. Kung Fury is definitely a failure in that regard - it is the latest in a long line of action-style parodies that rely on superficial irony and a preconceived notion of awesomeness in order to get away with making a fundamentally lacklustre film.

A major problem with Kung Fury is that its attempt to mimic the aesthetic of cheesy '80s entertainment (right down to having several instances of VHS tracking ruin the image) only makes the fact that the whole thing is shot on green-screen and riddled with CGI especially egregious. There's also the fact that its entire plot about a gruff-sounding martial artist police officer going back in time to kill off Adolf Hitler only serves to make me think of this as an unapologetic rip-off of Australian spy comedy Danger 5. The only funny gag in this whole movie involves a character answering a phone and being killed by another character firing a gun down their own phone, which was literally used in Danger 5 already. Of course, listing all the similarities to Danger 5 would take up a paragraph by itself, but I think that says a lot about how, despite promising a totally off-the-wall action experience. Kung Fury ends up being depressingly unoriginal and boring underneath its gaudy surface.

If there is one thing that stops Kung Fury from sliding completely into 0.5 territory (for now...), it's that star-writer-director-producer Sandberg does have some half-decent martial arts moves and gets to show them off against some masked Nazi troops (who are probably CGI anyway) in one relatively extended long take (that may or may not involve cuts disguised with whip-pans - let's be honest, it probably does). Even the one remotely awesome moment in this whole half-hour comes with caveats. That aside, it's just a mess of a half-hour that seems to think that trying to fill its running time with anything that comes across as sufficiently random and awesome will pass for entertainment. Dinosaurs, Vikings, kung-fu, robots, time travel, gore, synthesisers, computer hacking, a Knight Rider-style sports car with an onboard computer voiced by David Hasselhoff (who also sings the theme song)...this is the kind of entertainment made to appeal to audiences that are once jaded by the banality of mainstream entertainment yet are ironically susceptible to anything that plays into a very particular type of "awesome" spectacle. As long are there are audiences willing to indulge this irony-laden filmmaking trend, I know it isn't going to go away any time soon. Despite films like this supposedly trading on irony in order to succeed, the fact that they are successful in any way is probably the greatest irony of all.

1

[honeykid]

Kung Fury seems like a great idea, but I'm bored by the end of the trailer. Even 30 minutes sounds far too long.

[Guaporense]

Glad you enjoyed Gunbuster a little, even if its to give it the same score as that Batman cartoon. :) its regarded as one of the greatest OVAs ever made. A model of animation as a storytelling medium. :) 6/10 is heresy (though same can be said by my rating for About Elly).

[Iroquois]

Glad you enjoyed Gunbuster a little, even if its to give it the same score as that Batman cartoon. :) its regarded as one of the greatest OVAs ever made. A model of animation as a storytelling medium. :) 6/10 is heresy (though same can be said by my rating for About Elly).

You're right, if anything it's made me realise that I definitely overrated Mask of the Phantasm (the hell do I care about Batman?), though to be fair Gunbuster is at least twice as long (you know, because it isn't a movie) and it's extremely inconsistent in terms of good content. I didn't particularly care for either the Noriko-Smith or Kasumi-Ohta relationships and they did soak up a lot of screen-time just for the sake of giving both characters even more stuff to angst over when they had to go back into dangerous space battles. That kind of stuff was what dragged it down a lot for me, but not that much considering how well it delivered on the science-fiction front. In that case, 6/10 is definitely a fair rating.

[Wolfsbane]

I liked Kung Fury.... :(

[Iroquois]

#327 - The Face of Another
Hiroshi Teshigahara, 1966

https://theeyeoffaith.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/the-face-of-another.jpg

After his face is horribly disfigured by a workplace accident, a man seeks out a scientist with the intention of asking him for a new face.

Though it could loosely be considered science-fiction due to its reliance on the invention of artificial faces that are indistinguishable from the real thing (which is still a while away from existing even in 2015), The Face of Another sure doesn't feel like science-fiction. Instead, it's more of a rumination on how people live with their identities, especially when those identities may be changed by physical deformity or the concealment of said deformity through scientific endeavour. It is shot through with a sort of magical realism defined by its quasi-documentarian black-and-white camerawork and its weird score that alternates between atonal clangs and a leitmotif that uses a Bavarian-sounding waltz. As per its artistic sensibilities, it is a slow-moving piece that stretches out its high concept by taking at least a third of the two-hour running time to even get to the point where the protagonist receives his lifelike mask. As befitting such an artistically-minded film, it is often packed out with strikingly surreal images and verbose dialogues examining the nature of the experiment at the heart of the film.

The performances are appropriately understated for the most part, with the protagonist initially garnering some sympathy due to his situation but quickly squandering it as his disfigurement leads to him becoming more and more discourteous towards others in an effort to prove something. Hardly the most sensitive portrayal of physical disability, especially when it's combined with a disconnected sub-plot about a similarly disfigured young woman that comes across as largely irrelevant save for the occasional counter-point to the protagonist's storyline (which does add to the feeling that this film is a bit too long). Thanks to the arty nature of the film, it stays unpredictable up until its finishing minutes and proves an interesting enough piece of hyper-realistic sci-fi with some interesting little dialogues and viscerally unsettling scenes, but it doesn't quite manage to be a classic thanks to some rather outdated modes of thinking (such as another sub-plot involving the protagonist's interactions with a mentally challenged neighbour) and a relative lack of tightness.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#328 - Green Lantern
Martin Campbell, 2011

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/markhughes/files/2015/01/Green-Lantern-film-1-1940x934.jpg

A human fighter pilot is recruited into an intergalactic league of law enforcers around the same time that a villainous alien escapes from captivity.

It's hard not to think of the existence of a Green Lantern movie as a cynical exercise on the part of DC Comics to keep up with Marvel's plan to create its own superhero-filled cinematic universe. Such a motivation would certainly go some way towards explaining the general lack of quality to this particular film, but even if this is the result of DC's best intentions then it doesn't really show. A lot of that might have to do with the fact that the premise of Green Lantern involves it going beyond the stark realism of Christopher Nolan's Batman films and instead plunging headlong into garish sci-fi fantasy by introducing the Green Lantern Corps and their ability to harness the power of will (which looks like green energy) for the purpose of fighting evil across the galaxy. The focus on an extraterrestrial mythos guarantees that there is a lot of CGI packed into the movie, and while some of it does look fairly slick (read: some), it's probably the only worthwhile thing about this movie.

The story is a pretty standard superhero origin story that is sorely lacking in any kind of personality. Our hero is a cocky fighter pilot (Ryan Reynolds) whose supposedly fearless attitude masks some insecurity about his past, which of course complicates things. Aside from him, the characters do tend to be clichéd and poorly acted, whether it's Blake Lively as the slightly-more-capable-than-your-average-damsel love interest or Peter Sarsgaard as the nominal misunderstood villain whose talent is wasted underneath a heap of prosthetics and ear-piercing shrieks. Not even the CGI characters and their respective voice actors such as Geoffrey Rush or Clancy Brown can do anything of worth with the material. It's a shame because I was hoping that this would be better than the "hype" but, despite the clearly expensive levels of special effects on-screen, it still feels woefully underweight and doesn't even offer any memorably glaring flaws like, say, Daredevil. Kind of hoping the next time DC attempts to bring a superhero that isn't Superman or Batman to the big screen isn't such a mess, but obviously I'm not hoping too hard.

1

[cricket]

Nice to see you enjoyed The Face of Another; I'm probably going to watch it this week.

[Iroquois]

#329 - The Lost World: Jurassic Park
Steven Spielberg, 1997

http://www.thefilmleague.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/the-lost-world-jurassic-park-1997-00-630-75.jpeg

After the events of Jurassic Park, Dr. Ian Malcolm is brought back in to join an expedition to investigate a second island filled with genetically engineered dinosaurs.

The original Jurassic Park has always been a favourite of mine to some extent or another but this is actually the first time I've seen any of its cinematic continuations (and I'll probably end up catching the third film before Jurassic World comes out as well), but now that I've seen it I can't help but wonder if I should have kept it that way. The Lost World hits a lot of the narrative beats common to those most redundant of sequels - a convenient semi-recycling of the premise (there's a second island full of dinosaurs that wasn't previously mentioned?), an almost entirely new cast of characters (there are four characters returning from the first film, and only one of them is in the film for more than a minute or two), and most obviously an attempt to escalate the scale on every conceivable level that ironically does nothing to actually increase the excitement. There are more characters of varying degrees of sympathy but few are of any genuine interest with the possible exception of Pete Postlethwaite's game hunter, whose interest in the human antagonist's expedition is motivated more by the chance to hunt a T-rex rather than capture it for a rival dinosaur theme park.

One of the main flaws with the original Jurassic Park is that it did spend a lot of time on not just building up to the inevitable dinosaur rampage but also playing up the spectacle. The Lost World does try to compensate by jumping straight into the action thrills (after a lengthy sequence of scenes introducing the conflict and characters, of course). Unfortunately, it doesn't manage to sustain said thrills for long as the dinosaur effects don't hold up all that well under the pressure of action sequences. In addition to the repetition of the jungle island setting, the action often involves repeating setpieces from the last movie - the most memorable one involves an RV dangling over a cliff while being besieged by a T-rex (you know, instead of a jeep). Even the attempt to stage a finale involving a T-rex rampaging through an urban centre (and it's not like this is much of a spoiler considering how the trailer I saw years back played up the T-rex getting into a suburban backyard) just comes across as excessive in the film's greater context, but it does make for an eye-catching trailer. I'm not sure if it's an age thing or if it really is just a very lacklustre sequel, but I just felt extremely underwhelmed by The Lost World and its almost complete inability to recapture the charm of the original. There's enough going on that I don't hate the film, but there's not enough here that makes me think it really needed to exist either. Still going to watch Jurassic Park III when it airs on TV later this week, though.

1.5

[Iroquois]

#330 - Superman Returns
Bryan Singer, 2005

https://jeffreyklyles.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/superman-returns-poster-brandon-routh-as-superman.jpg

After leaving Earth five years previously to search for the remains of Krypton, Superman comes back to Earth and must stop Lex Luthor from pulling off another evil scheme.

The flaws inherent in trying to make a compelling narrative about Superman have been picked over time and time again and Superman Returns not only brings them crashing back, but it adds them into a bloated and alienating excuse for a superhero film. Superhero movies that nudge the 150-minute mark often have a bit of trouble staying compelling for a significant enough portion of that time, but this one doesn't have trouble staying compelling because it never gets started. Learning that the makers were trying to stay true to the first two films doesn't exactly excuse how closely the main conflict mirrors that of the original film, with Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey, here proving to be the best thing about the film, even if seeing him play a bald supervillain just reminded me of when he did a cameo as a Hollywood version of Dr. Evil in Goldmember) planning a scheme that makes even less sense than that of the original Superman film. Fortunately, Superman (Brandon Routh, doing a serviceable Christopher Reeve impression) comes back to Earth just in time to fail Luthor's plan while also reconnecting with Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth), who has since had a son and is now engaged.

Of course, several of the weaknesses common to Superman stories (chiefly his overpowered nature leading to incredibly contrived situations where he must rescue others and also the re-introduction of Kryptonite in order to make him momentarily weak) make unwelcome re-appearances in ways that don't often make sense. The actual action hasn't really held up even over ten years with a lot and the warmed-over romantic sub-plot between Superman and Lois is utterly forgettable even with the introduction of Lois' new fiancé (James Marsden) to shake things up. Unfortunately, it's not enough to stop Superman Returns from being an extremely tedious excuse for a massive blockbuster. The only reason I'm not rating this lower is because, for all its narrative flaws, it can never be as bad as Superman IV, but then again, what can be?

1.5

[Iroquois]

#331 - The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean
John Huston, 1972

http://api.ning.com/files/0K67hA5fBPhcPckGxtJIPbj4662I5JLKHtGrT8L4a50ARUAYqjHH59eCnnAi5-eQ/TheLifeandTimesofJudgeRoyBean.jpg

A drifter names himself a judge and proceeds to build and preside over a frontier town by using an especially bloody sense of justice.

John Huston had always been something of a maverick when it came to filmmaking and his attempt at making the kind of revisionist Western that was becoming popular in the late '60s and early '70s certainly plays to that reputation. What distinguishes The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean is its blackly comic energy that manages to sustain its otherwise bleak tale quite well. Paul Newman gets to play very much against type as the eponymous judge, who starts the film getting lynched by the surly inhabitants of a remote brothel before recovering and proceeding to massacre the lot of them in revenge. He then reinvents the building to be a courthouse that serves as the foundation of a small town, consolidating his power with a collection of outlaws-turned-lawmen and frequently getting into all sorts of mishaps that become the stuff of legend.

The film is rather episodic in nature and seems like a lot of vignettes that are loosely knitted together, with a serious plot only emerging with the introduction of a mayor (Roddy McDowall) who serves as a major antagonist to Newman during the back half of the film. As a result, it's hard to think of this as anything approaching a genuine classic but it's definitely got enough distinctive moments to stop it from getting boring. There's a collection of recognisable faces scattered throughout the film to back up Newman's wild-eyed protagonist and Huston definitely has the talent behind the camera to back up the somewhat weird story playing out on-screen. Of course, the novelty of this "comedy" (which is what I feel inclined to call this film despite its rather twisted nature) inevitably wears off over the course of two hours and its conclusion feels anticlimatic despite it being clearly not being intended as such, so it's caught between two modes a lot of the time and is thus only worth one watch.

3

[Iroquois]

#332 - Bronson
Nicolas Winding Refn, 2008

http://i.imgur.com/vH5aB.png

Based on the true story of "Charles Bronson", who is described as England's most famous prisoner.

Bronson is definitely one of those films that deserves to be lauded for its lead performance and little else. The only other Refn film I've seen is of course his "biggest" film Drive, which was pretty much the exact opposite in terms of what it demanded from its (admittedly rather talented) cast. While this film still showcases his capacity for capturing high-contrast images and mixing in some eclectic soundtrack choices, none of it would come together as well as it did if it wasn't for the presence of Tom Hardy as the eponymous prisoner and elevates this rather simplistic film to a greater height. As "Bronson" (real name: Michael Peterson), Hardy gets a chance to show considerable range inside a seemingly basic and restrictive role. Using an interesting framing device where Bronson takes the stage in a crowded theatre and tells his life story to a rapt audience (complete with several make-up changes to accentuate his tale as necessary), it starts from his normal upbringing (where the only violence comes from him apropos of nothing) and soon enough shows him going to jail over a small-time hold-up. What starts as a commutable sentence of a few years balloons into a decades-long career as Bronson decides to try to make a name for himself within the prison system, which leads to several transfers, a couple of institutionalisations, at least one full-scale riot, a brief window of time on the outside, and - last but not least - countless instances of violence perpetrated by and against Bronson throughout that time.

Bronson is a fairly thin and episodic affair that more or less has to be carried by both Hardy's performance and the technical flair of Refn and co. The colours alternate quite frequently between oversaturation and desaturation (though there's more or the former than the latter) while the depiction of various events tend to be composed of elaborate and artificial (but no less eye-grabbing) tableaux, often as a result of Bronson's deranged yet creative designs. Other performances are serviceable, with the only other character that remotely stands out being Matt King of Peep Show fame as a suave-talking fellow inmate that Bronson connects with on the outside. The soundtrack is rather inspired, whether it invoke period-appropriate synth-pop or dramatic classic compositions. While it's ultimately a bit too shallow to be considered a genuine modern classic, it's worth a look if you want to see a remarkable portrait of a man whose inconsistent nature and grandiose sense of self-importance makes for fascinating viewing.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#333 - Throne of Blood
Akira Kurosawa, 1957

http://s3.amazonaws.com/criterion-production/stills/132006-0c21d946d1cdb1176a9139e036c5a414/Film_190w_ThroneOfBlood_original.jpg

After a pair of high-ranking military commanders encounter a forest spirit who tells them their futures, one of them starts taking extreme measures to guarantee the safety of his future.

At its base, Throne of Blood is fundamentally a retelling of Macbeth set in feudal Japan, but Kurosawa and his collaborators adapt it to the setting reasonably well and make for a film that I think might just top The Tragedy of Macbeth as my favourite adaptation of the Scottish play. Seeing as Macbeth was one of the plays I studied in high school, I'm exceptionally familiar with it and was able to pick how this film streamlines the plot and keeps it nice and relatively short. Some of the changes are rooted in cultural and historical differences, with the dialogue (or at least the English subtitles) becoming much more prosaic by swapping out the various Scottish place names for numbered castles and a simplified ranking system involving lords and commanders. It still manages to invoke some flowery turns of phrase when the forest spirit (here standing in for the trio of witches) is involved. There are also some changes that influence the endgame considerably (putting them under spoilers because I figure they are worth mentioning):

The most significant change that Throne of Blood makes to its source is what appears to be the complete removal of Macduff's subplot. Though Wikipedia indicates that there is a Macduff equivalent, I missed the connection since he does not get the whole "no man of woman born" prophecy that defines Macduff's character arc. Instead, the film's Macbeth equivalent is shot full of arrows by his own men before his enemies can even breach his defences. An interesting variation and not in a bad way, especially since it makes for the film's most undeniably iconic moment.
Otherwise, Throne of Blood is a solid adaptation where the makers make enough of their own mark on the material to keep it interesting without doing any injustice to it in the process. A variety of performers, several of whom are dependable Kurosawa regulars like Toshiro Mifune and Takashi Shimura, deliver good performances that are appropriately theatrical without being overdone. The monochromatic look of the film is decent enough and, while there are few action scenes, many of the sequences are shot through with clarity and professionalism. It's not about to become my favourite Kurosawa in a hurry, but it might just push me to watch more of his work before too long.

4

[Iroquois]

#334 - Jerry Maguire
Cameron Crowe, 1996

http://www.thecargoagency.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/CargoBlogJerryMaguire.jpg

A wildly successful yet emotionally stunted sports agent has a crisis of conscience and is forced to restart his business from the ground up with the help of one of his assistants and the one client who hasn't abandoned him.

Almost twenty years after its most memorably schmaltzy and overdone lines of dialogue leaked into the cultural consciousness, I am finally getting around to watching Jerry Maguire and...well I guess it's not quite as bad as I'd expected, but the sentimentality and idealism on display only go so far to prop up an otherwise heavy-handed film. Despite earning an Oscar nomination for his role here, this is Tom Cruise running through all his usual acting tricks to bring the eponymous character to what I guess can be called life and thus there is nothing about his work here that stands out against either his other Oscar-nominated turns or any other halfway-serious role he's played. The supporting cast is debatable at best - though Cuba Gooding Jr. does deliver a decent enough performance that I suppose could be worthy of an Oscar, he doesn't seem to get much of an arc of his own beyond serving both Cruise's personal and professional journeys. At least Regina King makes the most of her relatively small role as Gooding Jr.'s wife and definitely comes across as one of the best performances in the film, which stands in stark contrast to Renée Zellweger's extremely underwhelming turn as the single mother who is inspired by Cruise's principled stand and joins him as he attempts to restart his business. Otherwise, the cast involves a bunch of unremarkable characters with varying levels of antagonism towards Cruise and his mission, whether it's Bonnie Hunt as Zellweger's distrustful but supportive sister through to Jay Mohr as Cruise's insufferable business rival.

I don't know whether or not I should commend or condemn Crowe's capacity for sentimentality and idealism, which is more that ably demonstrated through this film. This film does go through the effort of showing the difficulty of trying to deliver a personalised approach in an extremely impersonal and greedy field, as well as Cruise's struggle to stick with his newly discovered principles even after they get him fired, though these developments aren't often compelling enough to feel like they justify their continued presence. The behind-the-scenes sports drama generally doesn't feel too compelling, if only because it feels like it's being sidelined and underdeveloped in favour of the rather desperate-looking romance that gradually unfolds between Cruise and Zellweger. I guess there's just enough quality so that it doesn't feel completely awful, but it's still an awfully saccharine, obvious and overly long excuse for a dramedy that I definitely don't need to see more than once.

1.5

[seanc]

I wonder how I would feel about Jerry Maguire if I saw it today for the first time. As it is I have seen it about ten times before today and I find it infinitely re-watchable. I love Cruise and Gooding's characters. The scenes with them together really shine for me. Not the biggest Zellweger fan, but this is certainly the most I have liked her. Most of the movies I love have a comedic element to them that I really respond to. Maguire is no different. One of my faves.

[Iroquois]

#335 - The Endless Summer
Bruce Brown, 1966

http://prettycleverfilms.com/files/2014/06/tumblr_m4c5qjDeYA1qmt1tmo1_500.jpg

A documentary about a pair of American surfers, Mike Hynson and Robert August, who plan to continue their surfing season by traveling to other continents in the Southern Hemisphere.

I'm really not sure how to feel about The Endless Summer. I didn't really have much interest in surfing before watching it, but I heard it was a good documentary and I figured that if it was good enough then it would be able to make me interesting. Brown acknowledges that the film's audience may be looking to gain an insight into the surfing sub-culture of the time and is sure to pack out the start of the film with an introductory vignette depicting various techniques and methods of surfing before introducing Hynson and August, then proceeds to intercut other informative segments throughout the rest of the film. Of course, the bulk of the film does document the pair's whimsical attempt to chase summer across the Equator and several different continents. Of course, with this being a documentary from the 1960s, it does indulge in some fairly annoying little voice-overs and cut-aways courtesy of Brown. The score is no different in that regard - it's the kind of plinky instructional film music that does get more than a little annoying as the film progresses.

Otherwise, I can't really fault it as far as being a depiction of surfing goes. It doesn't offer a lot of in-depth insight on the subject; instead, it's content to just spend most of its running time following Hynson and August around the world as they have all sorts of encounters with the locals, many of whom tend to be enamoured with surfing either before or after the duo's arrival. Your interest in the film will definitely be dependent on how much you like to watch people surfing since it comprises the bulk of the film and may get a little repetitive depending on your interest in the topic or lack thereof. They may travel to several different countries and continents but since much of the footage tends to consist of beaches it's not like the film is all that visually interesting for a good chunk of the film's running time. It's got enough going on that it never gets too boring, but yes, it will be entirely up to how much interest you have in surfing - even then, you have to be fine with a fairly simplistic portrayal of the sport and the people who love it.

2.5

[mark f]

Iro, for someone who has some keen insight on films when he sets his mind to it, you don't seem to pay attention or even understand others you don't really care about. The Endless Summer is an anthropological tour of the world, basically a human comedy. That's why Brown's self-effacing narration is so central to the film. I have no idea why or how you're criticizing the Sandals' classic music or the narration, but you seem to get annoyed at the drop of a hat. I think the movie is a great way to spend an hour and a half and have a mini world-wide vacation, and I have no interest whatsoever in surfing. I guess I'm going overboard though since you rated it a lot higher than many others. :)

[Iroquois]

Yeah, I guess I just have to admit that I'm not all that interested in such films and the comedic overtones of those particular aspects didn't do anything to add to my positive impressions of the film.

[Iroquois]

#336 - Coogan's Bluff
Don Siegel, 1968

http://www.thekingbulletin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/coogans-bluff.jpg

An Arizona lawman is called to New York in order to extradite a criminal.

I wasn't particularly impressed with Coogan's Bluff when I first saw it and it's sad to say that a second viewing hasn't done it any favours. It's a none-too-creative fish-out-of-water tale starring Clint Eastwood as the eponymous Coogan, a gruff womaniser who carries out his own brand of rough (but not deadly) justice against the crooks on his turf, which naturally makes his superiors want to send him to New York almost as a means of getting rid of him. From there the film becomes a series of vignettes where Coogan, standing out in a ten-gallon cowboy hat and a bolo tie, navigates the mean streets of 1960s New York while butting heads with both the local fuzz and hoods alike. The film has a very thin plot that invokes a lot of cop movie clichés and it's padded out with Coogan making cool-headed advances on whatever women take his fancy and occasionally dealing with inner-city grifters and hippies.

As a result, Coogan's Bluff is a very lightweight film underneath its tough and somewhat conservative exterior. Granted, it has the occasional interesting or amusing moment such as Coogan making his way through a psychedelic nightclub (resulting in one of the best one-liners of Eastwood's career) or the finale where Coogan chases down the perp. Some of the film's more dated aspects do undercut one's enjoyment of the film, such as Coogan's off-putting treatment of his target's girlfriend during the later stages of the film even after taking into consideration how his actions are supposedly justified by his need to track down his man. His cavalier attitude towards other female characters he encounters does make him a difficult character to like, and not in the same complicated manner that defined a character like Harry Callahan. Considering the presence of both Siegel and Eastwood, it's easy to just write this off as a practice run for Dirty Harry with a lot of rough edges to both its plot and characterisation. It's not too boring or offensive to be truly awful, but it is just enough so that I have trouble saying I genuinely enjoyed it. Good if you really want more of Eastwood being something of a badass, but he's definitely done it far better in many other films.

2

[honeykid]

I think it might also be worth keeping in my that, when this was made, those shots of beaches and the like were so exotic to the vast majority of people, that simply sitting there and looking at them would've been worth the price of admission alone. A lot/most tv was black & white, so even if you saw the beaches or jungles or whatever, it still wouldn't have been so striking. The locations were a big part of the attraction in things such as the 60's Bond movies.

[Iroquois]

That is a good point.

[Iroquois]

#337 - Ride the High Country
Sam Peckinpah, 1962

http://criticsroundup.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ride-the-high-country-still.jpg

A pair of ageing gunslingers team up and take part in an expedition that involves transporting gold bullion from a mine to a bank.

Sam Peckinpah directing a movie about old cowboys? Colour me shocked. But seriously, it's interesting to see him working on what looks like a transitional film not just for him but for the Western genre at large. The '60s in general marked a pivotal shift for the genre as they took on more and more complex themes and narratives. As a result, Ride the High Country does offer considerable complexity with its tale of Joel McCrea and Randolph Scott taking on a gold transport and having a couple of young folks tag along on the way. Even for 1962, it seems to showcase the darker direction in which Westerns were going by showing the trials of Mariette Hartley as the abused daughter of a fundamentalist farmer whose engagement to a rough-housing miner and growing attraction to McCrea and Scott's young companion (Ron Starr) complicate what was originally going to be a simple retrieval.

It's interesting how Ride the High Country has the look and feel of a classic 1950s Western even when it's dealing with some rather serious subject matter as part of its narrative. The performances are well-done by veterans and newcomers alike, while Peckinpah manages to define his style and predilections even within the confines of an approved film. It's a lean film that's barely 90 minutes in length and never drags even while exploring its seemingly ancillary sub-plot involving Hartley's engagement and eventual marriage, which proves more unsettling than any actual gunfight. What action there is may not match up to Peckinpah's later efforts in terms of viscera and mastery but it's still some dependable old-school action. The transitional nature of the film means that there's something here for fans of old and new Westerns alike.

3

[Iroquois]

#338 - Margin Call
J.C. Chandor, 2011

https://mostlyfilm.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/margin-call.jpg

In the lead-up to the Global Financial Crisis, a laid-off employee of a Wall Street bank passes on an unfinished project to a co-worker and starts off a corporate crisis in the process.

It's hard to know which of the film's rather impressive stable of actors delivers the best performance: Kevin Spacey seems like the obvious choice as an especially conflicted executive who is one of the first to learn of the crisis and is caught between caring for subordinates and preserving his own position due to his somewhat trite but effective motivation of paying his pet dog's expensive medical bills. Zachary Quinto and Penn Badgely more than hold their own against more experienced performers as the young analysts who first discover the problem at the heart of the film, and their interplay with Paul Bettany's embittered superior makes for some good scenes (most memorably the one on the rooftop of their company's building). Jeremy Irons also gets in a good turn as the company's crusty-voiced CEO, whose speech at the end of the film also makes for a highlight of the film. Simon Baker and Demi Moore also show up as well, neither of which gets any particularly distinctive material but both put in decent turns.

Despite the considerably talented ensemble, Margin Call is a decent but not amazing film that involves a lot of its drama being built around exchanges of financial jargon and will of course demand a lot of attention to follow along with its dialogue-driven plot. The strong cast of veteran actors (with a couple of newcomers thrown in for good measure) do their best to deliver such complex dialogue without talking down to audiences or going too far over their heads. In addition to the strong actors, first-time director Chandor demonstrates considerable talent behind the camera, making the film not too stolid or erratic in its depiction of events.

3

[Iroquois]

#339 - The Hill
Sidney Lumet, 1965

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-WBHAMtBvdGM/UrzIUbZA-OI/AAAAAAAAEmA/6mLsBjZuk9o/s1600/The+Hill+Connery.png

During World War II, a handful of new inmates are sent to an especially brutal military stockade in North Africa.

The Hill is an impressively grim little film thanks to its combination of both prison and war tropes under the supervision of Lumet's characteristically unsentimental direction. Sean Connery headlines the film, but this is a far cry from almost any other role I've seen him play (with the possible exception of Zardoz, but at least this role is anchored to a realistic drama for a change). He plays a disgraced NCO whose refusal to follow suicidal orders lands him in military prison under the care of a sadistic overseer (Ian Hendry). The titular hill is a brutal disciplinary measure that Connery and his fellow inmates are made to run up and down repeatedly while carrying heavy objects. It makes a good couple of hours of extremely realistic drama that is shot by quasi-documentarian monochrome camerawork and with a complete absence of music.

There is a good cast at work here, but it's hard to ignore Connery's very against-type performance whose turn as a roguish soldier has more depth to it than you'd expect (especially in the film's final half-hour, which I can't believe comes from the same man who defined the world's most suave fictional character). Another actor of serious note is Ossie Davis as a West Indian inmate who not only has to deal with the standard rigours of the stockade but also with the relentless racism of guard and prisoner alike. The Hill deserves credit not just for its stark depiction of a World War II stockade and its inhabitants, but also because of a narrative that still seems to subvert a lot of typical prison/war tropes even in a film from 1965. It's not particularly graphic in its depiction of prison brutality but it's still not a particularly easy watch as it explores the cruelty of old prisons as filtered through the dangerous jingoism of old-school British imperialism. I also can't believe how it ended. Definitely recommended.

4

[Iroquois]

#340 - Godzilla
Roland Emmerich, 1998

http://b-i.forbesimg.com/scottmendelson/files/2013/05/tumblr_lo6q2iPnWZ1qc1i9xo1_500.jpg

The city of New York is threatened by a giant lizard-like creature.

The 1998 Hollywood version of Godzilla has earned a very unfavourable reputation since its release for some very understandable reasons and those very reasons are very plain to see when you actually watch it. I'm not particularly familiar with any of the original movies, but you don't need to be in order to find this movie just ridiculous, and not in a way that's particularly fun. The human characters are pretty flat - Matthew Broderick plays the hapless protagonist that also doubles as the ignored expert who figures out what's going on, while Maria Pitillo is his ex-girlfriend and also an aspiring journalist (so you just know their stories will inevitably interlock), and Kevin Dunn plays the inevitable military figurehead who disregards the expert's advice in order to kill the monster by any means necessary. The always dependable Jean Reno does what he can as a French secret agent (why are the French involved? Who cares?) and ultimately ends up being the best character in the film as a result, though that's not hard. The movie even throws in a pair of joke characters involving the mayor and his aide, who are obviously modelled on Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel respectively.

But enough about the human characters, let's talk about the real reasons we're watching a Godzilla movie. Sadly, even if I'm going to disregard the fact that the CGI doesn't hold up, that doesn't stop any of the actual action from being hard to enjoy because of how implausible it is even within the context of such a destruction-happy film. Godzilla is the kind of creature that can't walk (slowly, mind you) down the street without smashing something yet I'm supposed to believe he can silently get the drop on a group of helicopters that have been chasing him? His abilities fluctuate as the plot demands and thus makes it difficult to take him seriously as a threat in any way and also helps to bloat the film out in all sorts of irritating and illogical ways (especially in the finale). Throw in some baby Godzillas that come across as off-brand velociraptors and some egregious filmmaking clichés (such as in-universe camera footage that is clearly just actual footage from the film or characters being unable to notice Godzilla despite both loud noises and seismic shockwaves) and you have a film that only barely redeems itself off the back of its unintentional comedic value because its intentional comedic value is just so horribly executed. Know what you're getting into here.

1

[Iroquois]

#341 - Village of the Damned
Wolf Rilla, 1960

https://www.denverlibrary.org/files/village-of-the-damned-original.jpg

An entire English village suffers a blackout and awakens to find that all the women in the village are pregnant with mysterious blond-haired children.

John Carpenter may be one of my favourite directors but his 1995 remake of this film was definitely one of his weakest filmmaking efforts and just a weak film in general. Even so, I still wanted to see the original because it promised to be a decent little piece of paranoia-based sci-fi straight out of the Cold War era, milquetoast English setting be damned. Having George Sanders play the protagonist is definitely a point in the film's favour; his acidic high-culture drawl and focus on studying the children does give his seemingly heroic character just enough edge to be interesting. The other actors don't get much in the way of well-developed characters but still deliver serviceable (if not too remarkable) performances. The children themselves could have easily been irritating, but here their extremely English monotones actually do still have their intended effect of creepiness, as do the rather decent effects required to give them their freaky glowing eyes.

The film is aware of its B-movie nature and keeps itself short, running under 80 minutes in length and breezing through its story. It's lean to a fault, but it stays reasonably engaging throughout and, though its apparent lack of sentimentality may be a strike against it in general, it's still preferable to the abundance of it that worked against the remake. It's a little dry compared to other science-fiction films of the day that worked as allegories for communism and/or McCarthyism and it's not hard to see why it got parodied so deftly on an episode of The Simpsons, but it's still worth at least one viewing for posterity's sake. The quality of the filmmaking and storytelling be damned, the concept of creepy children (born of unwanted pregnancies, no less) being able to read your mind and control your body to the point of murdering you will never not be effective.

3

[Iroquois]

#342 - Godzilla
Gareth Edwards, 2014

http://www.godzilla-movies.com/media/godzilla-roaring-movie-still.jpg

Fifteen years after a nuclear power plant explodes in Tokyo, a former employee of the plant and his estranged son get caught up in a conflict involving multiple giant monsters that feed on nuclear radiation.

Well, at least it's an improvement on Hollywood's last attempt to make a Godzilla movie. Despite that, this version of Godzilla is still somewhat lacklustre in its attempt to bring giant monster shenanigans to the big-screen. This may have something to do with how it's filtered through the lens of a handful of characters who have a strong personal investment in the monsters' existence (beyond the fact that they are killing people and destroying things, of course). While I understand that having human characters function as something to care about in the midst of all the rampaging, it would be good if they were actually at least halfway interesting. In this regard, Bryan Cranston seems to be the initial protagonist as his actions during the nuclear meltdown at the start of the film launch him on a properly paranoid quest to discover the truth of what happened that fateful day, but the focal point soon swaps to his adult son (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) as he becomes embroiled in the international conflict involving the eponymous lizard. It's a shame, though, because even if I were to disregard the talent of both actors, it's definitely Cranston that is set up to have the more interesting character arc, whereas Taylor-Johnson gets a very standard set of motivations between trying to get back to his young family and also gain some closure regarding his own monster-related childhood trauma. There are other characters that fill out roles that make their necessity far too easily felt, such as David Strathairn as the stereotypical American general and Ken Watanabe as the Japanese scientist in charge of the investigation. At least they involve some talented actors doing the best with that they've got.

I also understand that a movie like this has to draw out its usage of its monsters in order to not wear out its spectacle so quickly, but the onscreen-to-offscreen ratio for the monsters feels a bit too unbalanced for its own good. Sure, you get quite a few scenes of widespread destruction, but there's little going on to distinguish them from other run-of-the-mill disaster films. Though the 1998 version's decision to show off Godzilla quite frequently throughout its running time was a major contribution to how much of a mess it ultimately was, at least it meant that you got a lot of Godzilla as a result of seeing a movie called Godzilla. I guess it's just as well that any time Godzilla actually appeared on-screen in this version it was bound to be at least somewhat impressive; if nothing else, the effects work looks reasonably good (when they're not being obscured by clouds of smog and smoke caused by the apocalyptic levels of wrecked scenery, of course). Other good moments, such as the skydiving sequence, are also too few in number to make much of a positive impression. Ultimately, though, I'm starting to feel like I'm not really cut out for watching movies like this. It's good if you want a nice harmless blockbuster that doesn't completely insult your intelligence and has some decent visuals, but it's a bit too lacking in substance and has way too much wasted potential when it comes to developing its human characters.

2

[Iroquois]

#343 - Jurassic Park III
Joe Johnston, 2001

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/rifftrax/images/5/5e/JP3.jpg
This film made me pull the exact same face.

Dr. Alan Grant is employed to go on an expedition to the same dinosaur-filled islands from the last two movies.

If The Lost World demonstrated that Spielberg himself wasn't able to recapture the magic of one of the most fun blockbusters in recent memory, then what hope did this extremely lean and very unnecessary threequel have? Bringing back Sam Neill as dinosaur expert Alan Grant does very little to endear one to the film as he is both traumatised by his experiences in the first film yet desperate enough to fund his archaeological digs that he decides to work for a couple (William H. Macy and Téa Leoni, the former of which is wasted here while the latter is especially excruciating to watch) employ him, his assistant, and a trio of mercenaries as part of a trip to the islands for what seems to be a mere honeymoon flight but which soon devolves into a disastrous situation as Grant and the others end up stranded on an island that is crawling with dinosaurs.

From there, Jurassic Park III becomes no better than a straight-to-video continuation of the series as it brings in a whole bunch of flat and frequently irritating characters to seemingly serve as meat for the monsters on display. The effects aren't especially awful - it doesn't go overboard on the CGI and actually features practical effects - but they're put to bad use as a result of some badly structured setpieces (even those that start off promisingly, such as the aviary sequence). Not even the fact that it's slightly darker and more graphic does anything to distract from how convoluted and contrived a lot of the developments tend to be even in a film as short as this one. All this would be fine if it had a sort of ludicrous charm to make up for its considerable shortcomings, but no, it squanders any goodwill left over from the first two films and as a result is only worthwhile as an object of scorn and derision.

1

[Iroquois]

#344 - The Sky Crawlers
Mamoru Oshii, 2008

http://cinefantastiqueonline.com/wp-content/uploads/skycrawlers_still_c022-reduced.jpg

In an alternate history where nations no longer exist and war exists mainly as a pastime for a bored population, a fighter pilot who is incapable of ageing must contend with the ramifications of ceaseless war.

I have to hand it to Mamoru Oshii - he knows how to craft an animé that makes me stop in my tracks. Out of his other films, I have only seen Ghost in the Shell, which took a superficially engaging subject like an outwardly female cyborg detective and used it as a springboard for examining a number of existential questions through its tale of various conflicting artificial intelligences and humans. The Sky Crawlers treads similar ground in its tale about the futility of war as framed by its none-too-fantastic alternate-reality setting. While I remember being somewhat disappointed by my first viewing of Ghost in the Shell due to its lack of action in favour of verbose navel-gazing exchanges between characters, here I find that it's the exact opposite problem that works against the film. As befitting a film about fighter pilots, there are more than a handful of plot-relevant dog-fights peppered throughout the film, but they tend to come across as unwelcome intrusions on the grounded narrative about the population in and around one of the airbases. I also wonder how I'm supposed to interpret the usage of CGI when it came to depicting the fighter planes. Skilled though it is, it doesn't gel with the hand-drawn nature of everything else in the film and just comes across as an unwelcome distraction that undoes the fighting sequences.

Fortunately, the rest of the film is decent enough to compensate for some fairly average action sequences. The concept of "kildren" (young soldiers genetically engineered to be eternally young) is an interesting one and is explored in some interesting ways, especially when it comes to the prickly relationship between the earnest young protagonist and his coldly belligerent superior. Though there is a lot of downtime involving the pilot characters kicking around the base and its surrounding area while waiting for new battles to fight, it functions better as a slow-paced and existential film where the characters comment on their incredibly absurd situation and the sheer banality of it. It's not enough to totally redeem the film's sluggish moments but it's strong enough so that the ending (and the post-credits scene, which makes me glad I didn't do what I normally do with DVRed films and delete as soon as they the credits start rolling) were enough to get to me. Not exactly a classic, but it's got plenty of moments that make it stand out and might even make it worth a second viewing.

3

[honeykid]

I think the problem is that you keep watching films which simply aren't even attempting to give you what you're looking for, Iro.

[Iroquois]

I think the problem is that you keep watching films which simply aren't even attempting to give you what you're looking for, Iro.

What am I looking for?

[Iroquois]

#345 - Inland Empire
David Lynch, 2006

http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff362/TheScoreBlogger/Inland%20Empire/una-scena-di-inland-empire-45944.jpg

An actress is employed to star in a Hollywood remake of a Polish film that was never finished due to its supposedly cursed nature resulting in the deaths of its leads.

Though that logline might suggest some degree of coherence when it comes to telling a story, it quickly becomes one of many loose plot threads that is swallowed up by the nightmarish pit of cinematic quicksand that is Inland Empire. Running about three hours in length, it shows an incredible disregard for conventionally straightforward narratives even by Lynch's notoriously incomprehensible standards and packs out its running time with all manner of vignettes that barely share the slightest of connections. A lot of it is carried by the type of strong acting ensemble common to your typical Lynch film. Frequent Lynch collaborator Laura Dern proves to be a great protagonist that cycles through a variety of emotions and truly puts her all into a character that is constantly thrust into all sorts of bizarre situations that are tolerable at best and horrifying at worst. There are plenty of good actors scattered throughout the film, but of particular note are Jeremy Irons as a film director, Justin Theroux as Dern's co-star and the inimitable Harry Dean Stanton as a worn-out producer.

Given how much his other films invoke dreamlike states to inspire both wonder and fear, it's not surprisingly that eventually Lynch would just throw caution to the wind and create a film that maintained that same uncertain vibe for a full feature film. His use of incredibly shaky and choppy digital camerawork only adds to the disorienting nature of the film, while the sound design meant that seeing this in a theatre was a thoroughly unsettling and glorious experience. When the film's not looking like an amateur film writ large, it indulges in the sort of sensory abuse that will definitely not endear this film to the sensitive. Flashing lights, harsh drones on the soundtrack, jump scares...they are all used sparingly enough so that I kept expecting every scene to play out like the diner scene from Mulholland Drive. To maintain that level of tension throughout a three-hour film that occasionally veered into Lynch's trademark sense of off-beat humour (often involving some jabs at the filmmaking process) is an amazing feat.

Watching Inland Empire definitely felt like a gamble due to its intimidating reputation and relatively extreme running time, but fortunately it appealed to my sensibilities without necessarily patronising them either. It combines everything that makes Lynch such a distinctive director, and though I don't think it's going to become my favourite Lynch, it's still an extremely impressive experience thanks to its great cast (especially Dern, delivering what might be the best performance of her career) and powerful realisation of Lynch's most idiosyncratic filmmaking talents. Considering how Lynch hasn't directed a feature-length film since this one, one might wonder if he deliberately intended this to be his final proper film. At least that seems to be a more reassuring possibility than the idea that he is working on a film that manages to outdo this one. If I were to see such a film, my brain would probably melt and I might actually be okay with that.

4

[Iroquois]

#346 - The Incredible Hulk
Louis Leterrier, 2008

https://theexportedfilm.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/the-incredible-hulk-2008-trailer-1-the-incredible-hulk-1750155-1260-535.jpg

A reclusive scientist who fights to suppress a violent superhuman alter-ego is forced into a confrontation with the U.S. military, who want to experiment on him for a super soldier program.

Maybe the Hulk isn't that great a superhero in the first place. His Jekyll-and-Hyde nature should provide considerable depth while his destructive tendencies should at least flesh out a superhero movie's demands for thrilling action. Though Hulk was fundamentally a fiasco, I didn't ultimately mind Ang Lee's attempt to bring some degree of high-art gravitas to what should have been a fairly simple blockbuster full of destruction. In rebooting the green guy for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, The Incredible Hulk decides to take a much more prosaic turn that pulls the Evil Dead II trick of recapping its predecessor in the first few minutes before launching into the next adventure of Bruce Banner (now played by Edward Norton) as he attempts to keep himself away from high-stress situations and military attention while also trying to develop a cure for his condition. Naturally, this plan backfires in some rather contrived and hard-to-believe ways so as to get the plot going, which once again involves him being pursued by the military and also contending with an antagonist who is trying to steal Bruce's power for himself (this time it's an elite commando played by Tim Roth).

I understand that this is supposed to be sort of a reboot, but the fact that it recycles so many of the same details from the plot of Hulk seems to suggest a lack of imagination when it comes to telling stories about the Hulk. The military understandably want to contain and study him, while he has a complicated relationship with a colleague (Liv Tyler) who just so happens to be the daughter of the general (William Hurt) who is hell-bent on trapping him. Even the superficial differences concerning the power-hungry villain do little to distinguish him in any positive manner, though at least it guarantees the climax isn't nebulous and hard to follow. At least the introduction of a "cure" sub-plot involving an anonymous scientist makes for something different, though it's not explored in a lot of depth. The plot as a whole is rather utilitarian in terms of both external and internal developments; having some good actors like Norton or Hurt or Roth isn't enough to sell these characters most of the time. The action is okay and the effects work isn't especially terrible, but there's nothing I could say about it that wouldn't sound like damning with faint praise.

In the years since this film's release, Marvel have introduced more new heroes and not only given them standalone films but also standalone sequels, whereas the Hulk has only appeared as part of both Avengers films with no current plans to give him a spin-off film of his own. While that could be justified by how Bruce wants to spend as little time hulking out as possible, on a meta level it's also entirely possible that, after being in two films that run through such fundamentally similar stories to wildly different yet equally mediocre results, maybe the character just can't support a sufficiently engaging film on his own.

2

[Iroquois]

#347 - Now, Voyager
Irving Rapper, 1942

https://trueclassics.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/bette-davis-in-now-voyager-bette-davis-1954686-1280-960.jpg

A frumpy spinster gets a physical and mental makeover before embarking on a romance with a married man she meets aboard a cruise ship.

Now, Voyager is another one of those classic Hollywood melodramas that isn't bad by any measure but it's still hard to think of it as anything more than alright. It's reasonably well-made, even if it does invoke the tiresome trope involving a homely bespectacled woman becoming highly attractive once she drops the glasses and gets dolled up, which has gone beyond cliché by now (and I do wonder how fresh it was in 1942). Fortunately, Bette Davis is a good enough performer to sell such a transformation as she plays the black sheep of a well-to-do Boston family due to her unsightly physical appearance and various psychological problems. Her new psychiatrist (Claude Rains) decides to push her to extremes in order to bring her out of both her internal and external shells - before long, she's looking like Bette Davis and on a cruise ship where she meets a debonair gentleman (Paul Henreid), exploring the highs and lows of their tumultuous courtship.

The film does betray its assembly-line nature a bit with its cast of familiar actors, somewhat utilitarian romantic storyline, and appropriately emotional yet none-too-distinctive background score. Of course, when it comes to films like this I don't mind the more boilerplate aspects provided there's some good talent involved. I'm still yet to see a genuinely bad performance by Davis and she has some decent actors backing her up here. The melodramatic aspects are handled rather well as Davis is constantly at odds with various members of her family, especially her domineering mother (Gladys Cooper), as well as her relationship with Henreid's charming family man going in some rather unexpected (but not entirely disappointing) directions. Definitely recommended to those with a fondness for old-school Hollywood romance, though I can't see its appeal going further than that.

3

[Iroquois]

#348 - Camille
George Cukor, 1936

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Garbo_%26_Taylor_-_Camille_1936.jpg

In 19th-century France, a high-class socialite from extremely humble beginnings must juggle the comfortable social standing granted by her fiancé with her love of another man.

Between this and Ninotchka, it's good to see that Greta Garbo is living up to her reputation as a classic actress from the first era of Hollywood talkies. It is this talent that definitely carries a splendid-looking but rather hollow costume drama. Between her exquisitely sculpted features and distinctive accent, she proves to be a good core for the film to build around. Other characters don't leave too much of an impression in comparison, whether it's her wealthy and powerful fiancé or the dapper young man who wins her fancy. There is a stand-out scene late in the film that does involve the young man's father, but that's one remarkable scene among many unremarkable ones (though at least the film sticks its ending fairly well). There's some lavish production detail that goes into recreating the fashion and setting of the time and it's shot reasonably well.

Of course, the problem is that the story at the heart of the film is a very dry one. Class differences both open and secret, forbidden love, costume balls - so very French, is it not? Unfortunately, it didn't really leave much of an impression on me beyond the fact that it was technically competent. Watching it back-to-back with Now, Voyager probably didn't do it any favours; they are both very different takes on romantic drama, but Now, Voyager has enough character to make up for its somewhat simple premise, whereas Camille promises a captivating period piece with an evocative combination of actors and storytelling but still falls considerably short of classic.

2.5

[Iroquois]

I attended an exhibition on David Lynch and his artistic output on Monday afternoon, which featured several short films from all across his decades-long career (though I didn't get to see all of them - there was one screen that was looking Rabbits, but I didn't think I had time to watch it). Due to their brevity and relative lack of content, I decided to give them some bite-sized reviews here because...why not? Films are films, no matter the length.

#349 - Six Figures Getting Sick (Six Times) (1966)

An early animation by Lynch that involves some crude yet fascinating collage-based techniques to depict...just what the title indicates. Abrasive soundtrack strikes again. Interesting enough for a few loops. 2.5

#350 - Head with Hammer (2001)

It is literally ten to fifteen seconds of an elaborate clockwork machine winding up and hitting a man in the head with a hammer. It barely counts as a movie, but it is somewhat amusing to see this looping on a small screen again and again and again. 1

#351 - Pierre and Sonny Jim ()

Another animation, this time about a pair of puppets with inflated rubber gloves for heads as they flail around for three-and-a-half minutes. Also hard to see the point of this other than just Lynch being Lynch. 1

#352 - Premonitions Following an Evil Deed (1995)

Filmed using a Lumière camera to celebrate its 100th anniversary and tells a decent enough little story in the space of a minute with police officers, concerned citizens, and a bizarre experiment being conducted by grotesque figures. The use of an antiquated camera (that doesn't allow for editing, which made for some interesting scene transitions) in tandem with Lynch's more unsettling sensibilities makes for a rather evocative minute - enough so to make me wish it had been slightly longer. As far as the shorts I saw during the exhibit went, it was probably the best. 3

#353 - Intervalometer Experiments (2007)

A trio of experiments that Lynch did using time-lapse digital photography complete with droning soundtrack. The one involving the growing tree shadows and the one involving the time-lapse shot of the foliage outside a window are interesting enough to watch, but the one that involves a wide landscape as day turns to night is not nearly as interesting as it sounds. 2

#354 - The Alphabet (1968)

Another early short, this time about the anxieties of learning conveyed through both animation (the opening involving the reciting of the alphabet is the highlight) and live-action (depicting a girl who is made violently ill by learning the alphabet). Sounds ridiculous, but it plays out rather well. 3

#355 - The 3 Rs (2011)

Played back-to-back with The Alphabet because it covers similar thematic ground, except this time it's more concerned with, well, the three Rs (mainly arithmetic). Despite the passage of time and improvement of technology (this is shot on digital video rather than film, for instance), it doesn't necessarily make for a better short. 2

[Thursday Next]

Sorry you didn't like Camille :(

[Iroquois]

Sorry you didn't like Camille :(

For what it's worth, I didn't hate it.

[Iroquois]

#356 - Lost Highway
David Lynch, 1997

https://kubrickontheguillotine.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/lost-highway-david-lynch-12994282-1024-429.jpg

While serving a sentence on death row for the murder of his wife, a middle-aged saxophonist is suddenly replaced by a young mechanic.

Lost Highway is a film that I have some rather mixed feelings about (never mind the rating). Looking at Lynch's feature films before and after makes me think that it somehow manages to be a culmination of everything he'd done up until that point and yet still feels like a very rough draft for the sort of truly mind-bending work he'd do with Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire. I do take some issue with its especially lurid and pulpy subject matter, which no doubt as something to do with the fact that the film was co-written by Wild at Heart scribe Barry Gifford, which I incidentally cite as my least favourite Lynch feature (as of writing, the only one I haven't seen is Dune, so time will tell if that supposed fiasco manages to overtake Wild at Heart in that regard).

Lost Highway starts off promisingly by introducing us to a halfway-comprehensible narrative involving saxophonist Fred (Bill Pullman) and his wife Renee (Patricia Arquette) receiving a series of increasingly intrusive videotapes of their home, as well as Fred meeting a supernaturally disturbing mystery man (Robert Blake) at a house party. After some dark, ambiguous (and occasionally unsettling) scenes, it's revealed that Fred is guilty of murdering Renee and is put on death row. During his time on death row, freaky stuff happens and Fred is inexplicably replaced by Pete (Balthazar Getty), who then gets released under police surveillance and ends up falling in with local gangster Mr. Eddy (Robert Loggia) and his mistress Alice (Patricia Arquette). It is this extended middle section beginning with the introduction of Pete that the movie starts to drag a bit. I do have to wonder if the lacklustre acting on the parts of both Getty and Arquette is a deliberate choice on Lynch's part, as if the film is attempting to put out a parody of noir films with its very clichéd plot. Blandly handsome male lead, doe-eyed femme fatale, homicidal crime kingpin, half-assed attempt at both a big score and a getaway...it's peppered with some very Lynchian moments such as Mr. Eddy giving a foul-mouthed yet safety-conscious beatdown to an errant tailgater or the reappearance of the Mystery Man or the actual "big score" (complete with one of the most gruesomely bizarre death scenes ever made even by Lynch standards), but the whole relationship that develops between Pete and Alice is easily the worst thing about the film. Even taking into account the possibility of dark parody or any interpretations of the film's dream-state nature, it still feels like a chore to watch these two.

That being said, the rest of the film plays out reasonably well. Pullman, Blake, and Loggia make the most of their screen-time; though Loggia may be playing a character that's almost identical to Frank Booth in his mixture of down-to-earth charm and twisted menace, he more than makes it his own in every scene he's in. Blake, meanwhile, becomes one of the most memorable things about the film with his uncannily pale appearance and sinister affability making him a quintessential scene-stealer. There's the usual interplay of sound and vision that makes Lynch films quite the aesthetic treat despite their occasional lack of substance - in almost stereotypical fashion, he once again goes back to the "friendly small town with seedy criminal element" well but is sure to update his younger characters for Generation X. On that note, the musical soundtrack once again includes the usual combination of cool jazz, foreboding strings and straight up drones that we've come to expect from regular collaborator Angelo Badalamenti (as well as chilled-out lounge numbers from Barry Adamson), but the stuff that really makes an impression (for better or worse) is the collection of rock songs curated by none other than Trent Reznor. While some of the numbers serve to date the film horribly (Smashing Pumpkins and Marilyn Manson come to mind, both of which stand out for the wrong reasons), the Rammstein numbers are used to surprisingly good effect with the weird keys, thudding guitars and ominous German vocals (though they are still sort of goofy underneath it all, it serves the film well enough in context). It is worth noting that the rocking songs don't kick in until the Pete section of the film, which underscores both the best and worst parts of that section.

To me, Lost Highway is either David Lynch's best bad film or his worst good film (probably the latter). The first and third acts build up such a great atmosphere that it even keeps the sub-Twin Peaks antics of the second act (what is Pete if not a carbon copy of James Hurley, one of the cult show's most markedly useless characters?) from sinking the film completely, deliberately hokey and somewhat-sensible-in-context narrative be damned. Everything else about it - visuals, audio, performances - is so haphazard in terms of quality that I can't uniformly praise it all, yet it has this indescrible charm to it that elevates it far above the station of the similarly trashy Wild at Heart (though I am due for a re-watch of that, I can't imagine it's one of those films that improves with the passage of time - hell, even Lost Highway wasn't one of those films). I still like it, but I doubt I'll ever truly love it - honestly, given what this film is like, it makes sense that I wouldn't.

4

[Iroquois]

#357 - Seconds
John Frankenheimer, 1966

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zzQS3auR8_g/maxresdefault.jpg

A middle-aged banker follows through on a friend's suggestion to visit a secret company that specialises in faking a person's death before providing them with a new appearance and life.

Seeing this so soon after The Face of Another naturally makes me think of this as an unintentional companion piece to Teshigahara's film, which also came out in 1966 and was a black-and-white experimental film about a man receiving a new face and identity. While the protagonist of Teshigahara's film deliberately pursues a new face and identity out of a sense of embittered self-interest generated by severe physical disfigurement, the protagonist of Seconds (John Randolph) is a buttoned-down businessman who is pressured into the procedure by an old friend who promises him a new lease on life if he takes the offer. After a prolonged first act where he is introduced to the mysterious company, he undergoes the surgical procedure and becomes a handsome artist (Rock Hudson) who is then relocated to a whole new life.

Seconds functions well as an all-encompassing allegory for a number of different subjects that are both pertinent to the time period and also hold up reasonably well in 2015. The most obvious target of the film is the American Dream itself, with its protagonist being a rather wealthy family man who may have his suspicions about the clandestine nature of the company but still goes through with it because it sounds preferable to his bland existence (and that's before they blackmail him into staying on anyway). The fact that his new lifestyle consists of a swinging condo complete with a job as an artist offers more than a few jabs at bohemian counterculture and gentrification, especially when there are some amusing-in-hindsight moments such as Hudson being extremely reluctant to participate in a Bacchanalian festival teeming with naked women. Of course, the company rears its head soon enough to provide the film with a much-needed third act (and, if we're being honest, then the second act does flag a bit as Hudson has to get used to his new life). The creativity behind the camera definitely shows through some cinematography that is eye-catching and disorienting in all the right ways, grounding this rather fantastic tale in some serious realism. Despite being very much of its time, Seconds hasaged rather well and, though the middle of the film is a bit on the flabby side, is a decent slice of arty science-fiction and is definitely worth watching for that ending.

Addendum: I thought about rating it higher, but I'm not sure it deserves a higher rating than The Face of Another. They both complement each other so well and to pick one over the other would be too difficult.

3.5

[rauldc14]

You've seen 357'movies this year? Damn. I think that's extraordinarily impressive.

[Iroquois]

You've seen 357'movies this year? Damn. I think that's extraordinarily impressive.

I think Mark F recently claimed that he had seen over 1700 this year alone, so I reckon it could be more impressive. Honestly, I think the fact that I find time to watch at least one a day no matter what is the impressive part. I also count shorts, though they make up a very small percentage of the films on my list.

[Iroquois]

#358 - Ex Machina
Alex Garland, 2015

http://cdn.indiewire.com/dims4/INDIEWIRE/2df940b/2147483647/thumbnail/680x478/quality/75/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fd1oi7t5trwfj5d.cloudfront.net%2Fea%2Fff%2F80a58f3146f9abcf2bd54f12488e%2Fex-machina.jpeg

A computer programmer is invited to a remote research facility by his tech-genius boss in order to help him test the self-awareness of an artificially intelligent gynoid.

Novelist and screenwriter Alex Garland made his name by writing screenplays for science-fiction films like 28 Days Later..., Sunshine, and Dredd, so it makes sense that his directorial debut is working off another science-fiction story. While those other films have tended towards using their premises for entertainment and spectacle above all else, Ex Machina attempts to wring out something with a bit more depth by plumbing a subject that always proves to be an extremely reliable source of deep (or "deep") sci-fi - artificial intelligence. The premise, which revolves around a base cast of four characters all secluded in a bunker-like mansion in the middle of nowhere, is obviously going to provide some tension and does anticipate a savvy audience's predictions reasonably well. It's obvious from the second we see Oscar Isaac's chummy, alcoholic tech-genius interact with Domhnall Gleeson's gawky programmer that something is going to go very wrong before too long, even when Alicia Vikander's semi-realistic gynoid shows up and starts getting tested by Gleeson. Of course, the film manages to balance its not-especially-deep exploration of the implications of artificial intelligence with a persistently tense atmosphere that plays up the relationships between the three leads (as well as Sonoya Mizuno as Isaac's mute servant) as the true conflict.

The effects work is fairly basic and only really extends to rendering Vikander's transparent "skin" and shiny, fluorescent innards, but its relative lack of ambition means that it is accomplished reasonably well. A score co-written by Portishead's Geoff Barrow is appropriately low-key and minimalist, only veering into typically dreadful drones at the most appropriate moments. As for the performances...Isaac delivers another great one as the extremely affable designer who rolls with his character's obviously suspicious nature and provides someone a bit more complex than that as he waxes existential about the inevitability of artificial intelligence becoming a reality, while Vikander does a reasonably good job at playing an AI developing a consciousness considering how hard it is to perform such a role without overplaying or underplaying. Gleeson is something of a weak link but that's at least part of the story as his status as a neutral party is fundamental to the plot and he underplays appropriately. On that note, Ex Machina does a pretty good job of justifying its shortcomings within the context of its narrative (including the all-too-familiar problem with stories involving female robots, namely that they exist to serve as sexual/romantic interests for male humans). Indeed, Garland and co. even anticipate several of the audience's predictions and subvert them at the earliest sensible opportunity. While that's not quite as good (or difficult) as avoiding said shortcomings altogether, it really is the next best thing and makes for a good slice of sci-fi with the right mix of characterisation, thrills, navel-gazing, and technical achievement.

4

[Iroquois]

#359 - Bad Boys II
Michael Bay, 2003

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/APhw7rju-Co/maxresdefault.jpg
Will Smith pulling the same face I pulled throughout this film.

A pair of detectives are tasked with chasing down an international drug cartel.

Hoo, boy. I know Michael Bay doesn't have the most favourable reputation, but The Rock at least made me think that he could craft a decent blockbuster at least once. The original Bad Boys was far from the best movie but it still made for a half-decent movie that had its occasional fun moment here and there due to the fact that it padded out its fairly standard cop movie narrative with some sporadically funny odd-couple banter between its two leads and also the occasional chuckle due to its extremely illogical comedy of errors. As such, I did have some small degree of hope that Bad Boys II could at least live up to the admittedly middling (but not horrible) standards of its predecessor, but unfortunately it fails in just about every regard possible. It's too long, too boring, too unfunny, and too...well, bad.

Even in the first film, the relationship between Will Smith and Martin Lawrence never quite had the sort of charisma or chemistry to entertain me, let alone seriously convince me that these two were actually good friends who would die for one another if need be. Smith is a snarky ladies' man while Lawrence is an insecure married father, and their constant bickering during every possible moment (whether it's walking down the street or in the middle of a high-speed car chase) never actually gets funny enough to remotely justify its existence. In a variation on the "idiot plot" from the first film, there's a sub-plot when it turns out that an undercover agent (Gabrielle Union) that is working on the same case as they are is not only Lawrence's sister but also the current (and surprisingly steady) love interest of Smith. The only reason that sub-plot doesn't feel awkward and overdone is because, in the context of this particular film, everything feels awkward and overdone - and not in an entertaining way either. What little goodwill was engendered by the original's comedy is completely undone here as Smith and Lawrence play off each other's boring stereotypes in the least amusing way possible, especially when the former brusquely rejects the latter's attempts to psychoanalyse him or the pair of them have a heart-to-heart that is broadcast publicly throughout and implies that they are gay lovers. Including the scene where Lawrence gets high on ecstasy and also the constant racist barbs they exchange with a pair of Latino rival detectives (but it's okay because they totally help each other out in the end), the humour here is Bay at his worst (the worst that I've seen him - from all accounts, the Transformers sequels are even worse). The first film at least had the odd laugh here and there, but it's as dire as a funeral home here (speaking of which, there are several gags involving a funeral home and no, none of them are funny either).

This could at least be a tolerable but not insignificant flaw if the action (you know, the main focal point of any action movie) was any good, but unfortunately it's not. When the most memorable action sequence of your film ends up being one that rips off Jackie Chan's Police Story (a film that was almost twenty years old by the time this one came out), that shows a lack of imagination that no amount of big-budget destruction can overcome. Otherwise, it lapses into car chases and gunfights that are repeated to hell and back while deciding that gross implausibility is an adequate substitute for genuine suspension of disbelief. I think what pushes Bad Boys II into irredeemable half-a-popcorn-box territory isn't just that it's ludicrously implausible (I mean, I weathered Armageddon reasonably well and that was an atrocious excuse for a film). At least Armageddon had the benefit of being an unintentional punchline when its attempts to be serious just came across as ham-fisted and tone-deaf. Bad Boys II undermines its action elements with an especially painful comedic side to the point where a bullet list of everything wrong with this film would consist mainly of the bad jokes (such as the lead duo mocking an extra by comparing him to Ludacris while a Ludacris song plays on the soundtrack) more so than the terrible excuses for action. The film even ends on the rehashing of not one but two jokes that weren't even funny the first time around. Until I end up seeing one of the Transformers sequels, I think I'm ready to call this my least favourite Michael Bay movie, which definitely makes it one of my least favourite films ever. Good God.

0.5

[Iroquois]

#360 - xXx
Rob Cohen, 2002

http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/xxx-banner-1-30.jpg

A thrill-seeking criminal is forcibly recruited to spy on an Eastern European terrorist as he plans to execute a devastating plot.

When xXx first came out, I was about twelve years old and thus likely to be in the target audience for such a film. Unfortunately, I have only just gotten around to seeing this (and also a decade after seeing the 2005 sequel that replaced Vin Diesel with Ice Cube and ended up earning a spot on my "worst 100" list) and thus didn't meet my criteria for a genuinely entertaining action blockbuster. There are a lot of elements that date xXx severely right from the outset, such as the buttrock-heavy soundtrack and the fact that Diesel's protagonist is first depicted stealing the sports car of an elderly white senator who opposes videogames purely for the sake of a subversive Jackass-like stunt. The focus on extreme sports - namely, that Diesel's character loves to perform them and integrates his experience into his spy activities - also guarantees that this film is directed towards individuals of a very particular mindset, which I don't happen to be of. I don't deny that there is talent that goes into performing such stunts, but they shouldn't feel so boring and un-engaging for the most part.

Even though you're not watching a film like xXx for its story, when the action generally doesn't do much to engage you then you have to deal with the story. Diesel's ability as a leading man fluctuates so wildly that it can't be considered legitimately good, while Samuel L. Jackson just generates his usual level of cool as Diesel's detached handler/mentor. Not even Marton Csokas's heavily accented turn as the film's main villain or an extremely ancillary romantic sub-plot involving Diesel and Asia Argento does anything to add to the non-action part of things. xXx isn't egregiously awful, but it's extremely disposable and not even the memorable stunts do much to stand out amidst this half-baked attempt to provide some empty thrills.

1

[Wolfsbane]

Ex Machina is one of this year's best films.

Great idea for a thread Iro, even though there are what, two or three going at same time? I always check in on this one to see what you've been watching lately.

[Miss Vicky]

Why do you watch so many obviously sh!tty movies, Iro?

I mean, I can see watching some crap for the unintentionally funny aspect that comes with some of them, but most of these you're giving really low ratings to don't even look like they'd have that to offer.

[Iroquois]

Why do you watch so many obviously sh!tty movies, Iro?

I mean, I can see watching some crap for the unintentionally funny aspect that comes with some of them, but most of these you're giving really low ratings to don't even look like they'd have that to offer.

Because I don't love myself.

[Iroquois]

#361 - Soylent Green
Richard Fleischer, 1973

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-l7e08HUVxc4/VRbxhz6s7PI/AAAAAAAABO8/IipELWSEh4I/s1600/Soylent%2BGreen5.png

In the distant future of 2022, a detective tries to solve the murder of a wealthy businessman but ends up stumbling upon a conspiracy in the process.

Another day, another Charlton Heston movie that is famous mainly because of its climatic twist. While I'm not going to specify the twist in this case as I didn't with Planet of the Apes, I still feel the need to point out that Soylent Green differs from that film in that it doesn't exactly hold up even in the face of knowing its twist. Soylent Green is a dystopian conspiracy thriller that sees Heston's detective investigating a home invasion and suspecting that there was more to it than just a break-in gone wrong. His search leads him through the crumbling streets of New York as a largely destitute population fights over synthetic foodstuffs because real food is such a rarity that even Heston is willing to appropriate it from a murder victim's apartment.

Of course, the world-building that goes into the world of the film doesn't do all that much to distinguish it from your run-of-the-mill dystopia. Corrupt officials, pronounced class divide, futuristic items, and of course the secret conspiracy that provides the film's big twist - there's not nearly enough personality. The performers aren't much chop - Heston is his usual square-jawed heroic self, while the only other actor that comes across as memorable is Edward G. Robinson as Heston's elderly mentor. There's the occasional spot of action to pad out its lean running time and the occasional astute observation (the greenhouse effect is still a serious concern in 2022) but it's a fundamentally empty example of science-fiction that does provide some decent visuals and an interesting enough plot but little else beyond that.

2.5

[MovieMeditation]

I really must say that your hard work amazes me, Iro.

You're keeping a consistent rythm with reviews of a solid length, and I really respect how you can keep this going like this.

I've fallen off a little personally, so seeing you still going strong is quite impressive.

[Iroquois]

Well, if they don't take up multiple paragraphs then they don't count as reviews so I at least try to make them two sufficiently lengthy paragraphs long.

[MovieMeditation]

Well, if they don't take up multiple paragraphs then they don't count as reviews so I at least try to make them two sufficiently lengthy paragraphs long.
Yeah, I know, but you could just do "unofficial" ones. ;) Personally I just feel like when I actually do take my time with a review, I might as well do it proper. I bet you feel the same.

[Iroquois]

Yeah, I know, but you could just do "unofficial" ones. ;) Personally I just feel like when I actually do take my time with a review, I might as well do it proper. I bet you feel the same.

Yeah, I could, but where's the fun in that? I did make a post on the previous page where I listed a bunch of David Lynch shorts in one post, though.

[Iroquois]

#362 - An American in Paris
Vincente Minnelli, 1951

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Observer/Pix/pictures/2011/10/27/1319720751057/An-American-in-Paris-007.jpg

In post-WWII Paris, an American ex-GI competes with one of his friends for the attention of a French ballet dancer.

I think that the presence or absence of Gene Kelly is a major deciding factor in how much I'm likely to enjoy a musical from Hollywood's Golden Age, and I was looking forward to An American in Paris because not only did it feature Kelly but it was also apparently good enough to win Best Picture. True to form, there is that sort of quality that keeps the film reasonably entertaining throughout its running time, but it's still prone to a lot of the usual flaws that make Golden Age musicals in general a bit of a tough sell. Much like the other Kelly films I've seen, it uses its loose romantic plot as a launching pad for all sorts of song-and-dance numbers. The last Kelly film I saw was On the Town another similarly lightweight affair and it's not hard to see how Kelly and co. recycle certain concepts and methods of execution - the sequence introducing the dancer in question (Leslie Caron) does so with a documentary-like section full of vibrant-looking sets and ballet moves, which it also did with Vera-Ellen's character in On the Town, as well as Kelly's tendency towards using characters' dreams and imaginations in order to justify some fancy-looking sequences. Hey, if it ain't broke...

Unfortunately, despite the talent on display An American in Paris doesn't quite live up to its award-winning reputation or to the other Kelly films I've seen so far. The songs don't stand out on their own merits, which I guess I can tolerate given how Kelly's always been much more of a dancer than a singer and the dance routines are decent enough to compensate. The visuals are also a major point in the film's favour, especially with the eye-catching set designs and cinematography. The plot's focus on the convoluted romantic lives of its main characters is sporadically interesting but often feels like a means to an end. It's about par for the course as far as classic Hollywood musicals go and is definitely worth appreciating on that particular level, but it doesn't do enough to transcend its ultimately basic focus on spectacle (though it is good spectacle).

3

[Iroquois]

#363 - Rejected
Don Hertzfeldt, 2000

http://www.bitterfilms.com/rejectedbanana-300.jpg

A handful of animated shorts created by Don Hertzfeldt tied together by their being rejected by the clients who requested them.

Original review found here (http://www.movieforums.com/reviews/1303441-rejected.html).

4

[Gatsby]

Why do you watch so many obviously sh!tty movies, Iro?

I mean, I can see watching some crap for the unintentionally funny aspect that comes with some of them, but most of these you're giving really low ratings to don't even look like they'd have that to offer.
Obviously you don't know the fun of reviewing bad movies.

[Iroquois]

Obviously you don't know the fun of reviewing bad movies.

She does have a point, it's not really worth it. Those kinds of reviews get barely any rep.

[Iroquois]

#364 - Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars
D.A. Pennebaker, 1973

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/arts/doonan/2013/03/130308_DOONAN_BowieZiggy.jpg.CROP.original-original.jpg

A concert film featuring David Bowie and the Spiders from Mars.

Concert films are always something of a gamble even if you are a fan of the musicians in question. Bowie is something of a favourite of mine and I've been citing his 1972 rock opera The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars as one of my favourite albums for a while now, which is why I'm probably a little disappointed that the film doesn't just consist of songs from that album. It is a concept album and it tells a story, plus songs like "Five Years" and "Starman" definitely deserve to be heard alongside "Moonage Daydream" and "Suffragette City". Aside from the selections from that particular album, the setlist also incorporates songs from Aladdin Sane, Hunky Dory, The Man Who Sold the World, and Space Oddity. There are also a few covers thrown in for good measure referencing Bowie influences like the Velvet Underground, the Rolling Stones, and Jacques Brel. Counterculture documentarian D.A. Pennebaker films the whole thing as a straightforward concert film with the occasional cutaway to Bowie backstage between numbers.

Despite the pedigree of both its on-screen and off-screen talent plus the brief running time, Ziggy Stardust... didn't feel all that much fun to watch. As with any artist that I am sufficiently familiar with, I found myself picking apart what songs should have been on the setlist and what should have been left. Why keep the cover of "Let's Spend the Night Together" when you could have had "Lady Grinning Soul"? At least it keeps more good songs than bad ones, but even so the audio quality and the live tweaking don't do the songs any favours. Despite Bowie's tendency towards flashy glam-rock aesthetics, there's not a lot of visual flair to the film beyond the grainy film quality combining with Bowie and co.'s lurid appearances and behaviour. It's not a bad film by any means but I think I'll be fine if I never watch it again and only listen to his studio albums. These songs deserve polish no matter how rough they actually are.

2.5

[Iroquois]

#365 - Across the Wide Missouri
William A. Wellman, 1951

http://www.themoviescene.co.uk/reviews/_img/1858-2.jpg

In the mid-19th century, a fur trapper leads an expedition through Native American territory and must contend with a dangerous war chief.

Across the Wide Missouri is a fairly short and ultimately disposable Western rooted in historical accounts of the fur trade. There's no small amount of mythmaking involved as the tale is narrated by the protagonist's son (who also happens to be an infant who is present during these events), as well as playing into a typical "cowboys and Indians" kind of story. Maybe it has to do with the fact that my main experience with Westerns tends to be the modern revisionist type that either subvert or avoid that particular brand of conflict - even so, if a film is good enough it should be able to do well in spite of that. There are hints of depth here and there as Clark Gable's arrogant hunter leads a group through hostile territory despite the warnings of his subordinates, even finding time to buy and marry a Native woman (María Elena Marqués) as a means of insuring himself against attack by the local population. Of course, this just ends up drawing the unwanted attention of a war chief (Ricardo Montalban) anyway.

On the technical side, it's competent without being impressive. The performances are passable, with Gable showcasing his usual roguish charm without significant variation, while Montalban is rather wasted as an antagonist. Despite the short running time, there are long stretches where it's easy to get bored, though there's just enough of interest going on to stop me giving this a sufficiently unfavourable rating (that climax was really well-handled and a huge point in the film's favour). It's nothing special at the end of the day, even with its slightly-more-complicated-than-expected treatise on the relationship between white Americans and Native Americans.

2

[gbgoodies]

She does have a point, it's not really worth it. Those kinds of reviews get barely any rep.


That's because it's hard to give positive rep to a bad review of a movie I love. :shrug:

[Iroquois]

That's because it's hard to give positive rep to a bad review of a movie I love. :shrug:

Hard, but not impossible.

[gbgoodies]

That's because it's hard to give positive rep to a bad review of a movie I love. :shrug:

Hard, but not impossible.


It depends on the movie.

[linespalsy]

negative movie reviews are underrated.

[Iroquois]

It depends on the movie.

Fair point. Myself, I admit that my favourites are far from perfect and I don't mind hearing criticisms about them - provided they make sense, of course. I don't particularly like it when people go in for senseless hatred (even if I am one of those people from time to time).

negative movie reviews are underrated.

Yeah, if they're done right then they're just as good as positive reviews.

[Guaporense]

I think the problem is that you keep watching films which simply aren't even attempting to give you what you're looking for, Iro.

It's called discovering our own tastes. I have a very good notion of my tastes in music, I hardly listen to stuff I don't love. In movies and TV things are more complicated.

I like animation, fantasy/science fiction, cuteness and heavy drama but it's hard to find well executed stuff that combines all of that (Nausicaa, Kaiba, Haibane Renmei and PMMM do, which is the reason why they are in my top 10), when it does it instantly scores 5/5. But most of the time a masterpiece of a genre I usually dislike is better than mediocre example of a genre I like.

[Guaporense]

I really must say that your hard work amazes me, Iro.

You're keeping a consistent rythm with reviews of a solid length, and I really respect how you can keep this going like this.

I've fallen off a little personally, so seeing you still going strong is quite impressive.

I find impressive that he watched like 360 movies in 5 months and a couple weeks and managed to find the time to write a lot about each movie. I cannot write much when I write about art but I am concise though I wrote only 35 reviews in animation over a 60 day period though only half of the movies I watched in the past months have been animated.

[Guaporense]

#344 - The Sky Crawlers
Mamoru Oshii, 2008

http://cinefantastiqueonline.com/wp-content/uploads/skycrawlers_still_c022-reduced.jpg

In an alternate history where nations no longer exist and war exists mainly as a pastime for a bored population, a fighter pilot who is incapable of ageing must contend with the ramifications of ceaseless war.

I have to hand it to Mamoru Oshii - he knows how to craft an animé that makes me stop in my tracks. Out of his other films, I have only seen Ghost in the Shell, which took a superficially engaging subject like an outwardly female cyborg detective and used it as a springboard for examining a number of existential questions through its tale of various conflicting artificial intelligences and humans.

Though almost all the dialogue from Ghost in the Shell and it's sequel is taken directly from Shirow's manga. Though the movies are way more serious and maintain great emotional distance from the characters while the manga is more conventional.

The Sky Crawlers treads similar ground in its tale about the futility of war as framed by its none-too-fantastic alternate-reality setting. While I remember being somewhat disappointed by my first viewing of Ghost in the Shell due to its lack of action in favour of verbose navel-gazing exchanges between characters, here I find that it's the exact opposite problem that works against the film. As befitting a film about fighter pilots, there are more than a handful of plot-relevant dog-fights peppered throughout the film, but they tend to come across as unwelcome intrusions on the grounded narrative about the population in and around one of the airbases. I also wonder how I'm supposed to interpret the usage of CGI when it came to depicting the fighter planes. Skilled though it is, it doesn't gel with the hand-drawn nature of everything else in the film and just comes across as an unwelcome distraction that undoes the fighting sequences.

I also dislike the use of CGI in modern anime though this is from 2008, Aldonoah Zero (2014) manages to integrate CGI robots with hand drawn backgrounds and characters in a much more natural fashion.

Fortunately, the rest of the film is decent enough to compensate for some fairly average action sequences. The concept of "kildren" (young soldiers genetically engineered to be eternally young) is an interesting one and is explored in some interesting ways, especially when it comes to the prickly relationship between the earnest young protagonist and his coldly belligerent superior. Though there is a lot of downtime involving the pilot characters kicking around the base and its surrounding area while waiting for new battles to fight, it functions better as a slow-paced and existential film where the characters comment on their incredibly absurd situation and the sheer banality of it. It's not enough to totally redeem the film's sluggish moments but it's strong enough so that the ending (and the post-credits scene, which makes me glad I didn't do what I normally do with DVRed films and delete as soon as they the credits start rolling) were enough to get to me. Not exactly a classic, but it's got plenty of moments that make it stand out and might even make it worth a second viewing.

3

I would recommend Urusei Yatsura 2 (1984), it is regarded by Japanese animation critics his best film. Also it's more conventional and features a more well developed human side, Sky Crawlers is a very cold movie (and consciously so). As well as Patlabor (1989).

The movie is a critique of the anime fandom because the fans of anime are like eternal children who live in a fantasy world and the kildren symbolize the fans. Still it's among my top 5-6 favorite Oshii movies. He is one of the top 4 great anime directors, alongside Miyazaki, Takahata and HIdeaki Anno.

[Iroquois]

#366 - The Limits of Control
Jim Jarmusch, 2009

http://static.thecia.com.au/reviews/l/limits-of-control-5.jpg

A man travels to Spain in order to carry out a mysterious mission.

Depending on your point of view, The Limits of Control is either Jim Jarmusch's purest distillation of his personal filmmaking style or it is him indulging his worst tendencies and descending into self-parody...or it could be both. You never know with a guy like him. In any case, it's yet another instance of Jarmusch bringing his directorial idiosyncrasies to a well-established genre. At first, it's not exactly clear which genre he's aiming for - I'm inclined to say "spy" due to the constant usage of code-phrases and exchanging of information as a well-dressed man travels through a foreign location. However, there is a heavy implication that the stoic protagonist (Isaach de Bankolé) is nothing more than an assassin, which is enough to remind me of Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai and I was hoping that Jarmusch wasn't about to repeat himself too much. Repetition does seem to be the key word when it comes to describing The Limits of Control. Many lines of dialogue are repeated over and over (if I had a dollar every time someone asked de Bankolé's character if he didn't speak Spanish...) and there soon emerges a pattern as he moves from contact to contact, swapping mission-relevant matchboxes and ordered two espressos each time. It gets to the point where a sort of groove is established and your appreciation of the film will depend on how much you can tolerate being stuck in said groove.

To accentuate (or at least compensate for) the extremely slow and deliberate repetition at the heart of what could generously be called the narrative, Jarmusch packs out the film with recognisable actors like John Hurt, Tilda Swinton, and Bill Murray. Other characters barely share the screen with de Bankolé for more than one scene and they mainly exchange more cryptic dialogue with him, which is lent slightly more gravitas as a result. I also credit Jarmusch with once again being able to give the film a great soundtrack, with an eclectic mix of classical, flamenco guitar, and - easily my favourite part - droning guitar music courtesy of bands like Boris and Earth. Those latter bands in particular make for the ideal backing to many lengthy scenes involving de Bankolé in transit across the picturesque Spanish landscape. It's perhaps a bit too idiosyncratic to be a genuinely entertaining film, but once you get into the right headset then it becomes a fairly fascinating experience. I don't recommend it to anyone who isn't at least considerably familiar with the works of Jarmusch or any other directors who think of slowness and inaction as a conscious filmmaking choice more so than an unintentional flaw. If that sounds like your deal, then you'll probably get something out of this.

3

[Iroquois]

#367 - The Wolverine
James Mangold, 2013

http://www.filmmisery.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/The-Wolverine-4.jpg

Wolverine, who is living in seclusion following the events of X-Men: The Last Stand, is invited to go to Japan and say farewell to an old acquaintance.

Ever since I started the One Movie a Day Review Thread, I have gotten a sizeable number of posts asking me not just why I apparently dislike so many well-regarded films but also why I go out of my way to watch films that don't even look that good in the first place. I guess it's because, despite the raging cynicism that permeates this thread, I do occasionally have hope that there will be some fun to be found even in the unlikeliest of places. I have also been largely unreceptive to most comic-book/superhero movies, especially the last couple of X-Men movies that I've reviewed here. One of those films was X-Men Origins: Wolverine, an attempt to give Hugh Jackman's steel-clawed anti-hero a standalone feature of his own that somehow managed to be an even greater mess of a film than X-Men: The Last Stand. 2013's The Wolverine marks the second attempt at giving Wolverine a solo round, and while it's an improvement on those last two films that I mentioned, that doesn't say much.

The Wolverine takes place in Japan for much of its running time and only features a couple of mutants aside from its eponymous protagonist, which does suggest that the film is trying to distance itself from the rest of the franchise. This becomes readily apparent when the scenes that actually do acknowledge the continuity (often through Wolverine's visions where he is haunted by a deceased loved one) come across as clunky at best. Instead, the film is mostly content to just give Wolverine a spin-off adventure with a whole new cast of characters and a plot involving an elderly industrialist and an assassination plot against his granddaughter. From there, it turns into an escort mission for the reluctant hero as he fights against Yakuza here, ninjas there, and the occasional mutant adversary. There are some decent moments here and there - the fight that takes place on the roof of a bullet train is at least exciting enough to make up for its implausibility - but it's sadly a bit underweight without much dramatic heft. Aside from Wolverine getting besieged by guilt-tripping hallucinations and also getting hit with something that neuters his healing powers, there's also a somewhat interesting conflict driven by patriarchal villains and their attempts to solidify their empire by any means necessary. Of course, this is all buried under a film that isn't so much a superhero movie as it is a cat-and-mouse conspiracy thriller that just so happens to feature a hairy immortal with steel claws, but not quite as interesting as that sounds.

2

[Iroquois]

#368 - Cobra
George P. Cosmatos, 1986

http://www.i-mockery.com/minimocks/cobra/7.gif

A loose-cannon cop is charged with protecting a witness who can identify a gang of murderous bikers.

The header image tells you everything you need about this movie in the space of a couple of seconds. Sylvester Stallone looks like the living, breathing stereotype of a rogue 1980s cop in his leather jacket, mirrored sunglasses, and black gloves - and here he is sitting in his apartment using a pair of scissors to cut up a slice of frozen pizza. That perfectly sums up Cobra, a combination of Stallone at the peak of his status as an iconic action hero teaming up with the notorious dreck-meisters at Cannon Films. Coming off the success of reactionary anti-Commie action flicks like Rambo: First Blood Part II and Rocky IV, Stallone turns his capacity for righteous violence towards inner-city Los Angeles in this extremely half-baked Dirty Harry rip-off scripted by the Best Original Screenplay winner himself. What distinguishes it as a Dirty Harry ripoff more so than a generic "cowboy cop" kind of movie is that, in addition to the opening "monologue over close-up of a pistol" scene knocking off the same one from Magnum Force, there are even two Dirty Harry cast members in supporting roles. Even if you have no familiarity with that Eastwood film whatsoever, there's no mistaking just what kind of ride you're going on with this film.

In keeping with Cannon Films' modus operandi during the 1980s, Cobra is a cheap, bloody film that's not far removed from the typical Death Wish sequel in that it features its violent protagonist (here an officer of the law instead of a vigilante) going up against one-dimensional villains whose only goals are bloodshed and carnage (though at least here it's explained that they want to create a new world order based on survival of the fittest - yeah). The protagonist contends with authority figures whose attitudes towards his actions are either ones of vicious condemnation or world-weary enabling and nothing in between. Also, there's a token female character (Brigitte Nielsen) who also ends up being a love interest for the protagonist and whose continued presence in the film is justified by her being a survivor and witness of an attack by the villainous gang at the heart of the film (led by Brian Thompson, an actor of very debatable ability who bears more than a little resemblance to a certain Austrian bodybuilder-turned-actor). It's a flimsy enough justification for a series of violent action sequences full of driving, shooting, stabbing, exploding, burning, and running. Not even the sparse characterisation offered towards Cobra does much to endear him to an audience, to say nothing of the lack of depth to the rest of the cast. At least the extremely lurid Cannon style of action movie means that it's got enough schlocky charm to save it from being totally awful, but I still have trouble deciding if I've outgrown films like this or if this one is just really bad.

1.5

[honeykid]

This is exactly the kind of film I was talking about when I said you were watching films which aren't even trying to give you what you're looking for. Not that I mind, a good review of a bad film is usually far more entertaining than a good review of a good film, but there sometimes feels like there's a frustration or weariness to your reviews of these films which has me wondering why you bother.

Naturally I like Cobra. Quite a lot. I did a commentary for this with SC and during that he told me of an extended or extreme cut of the film. I'd love for that to be released.

[Iroquois]

This is exactly the kind of film I was talking about when I said you were watching films which aren't even trying to give you what you're looking for. Not that I mind, a good review of a bad film is usually far more entertaining than a good review of a good film, but there sometimes feels like there's a frustration or weariness to your reviews of these films which has me wondering why you bother.

Naturally I like Cobra. Quite a lot. I did a commentary for this with SC and during that he told me of an extended or extreme cut of the film. I'd love for that to be released.

The last time you brought that up, I asked (somewhat rhetorically) "What am I looking for?" I think I want to like these cult '80s movies for whatever reason but then I end up watching them and being underwhelmed as a result, hence why I suspect I'm just not that interested in them any more. I did note in my review for Harry Brown that I was getting bored with run-of-the-mill vigilante movies, which Harry Brown ended up being despite promising to have a bit more substance thanks to the pedigree of its actors, but it's really not much different to this underneath its modern-day grime.

That being said, what makes a good review of a bad film? Is it one that champions the film's few redeeming features (even if it is little more than unintentional comedy) or is it one that gleefully tears a movie to pieces over its shortcomings? Is it one that does both? Though I was sure to pick apart some of Cobra's more noticeable "qualities" (the weirdness of the header image, the shameless Dirty Harry references, the incredible lack of depth or charm, Brian Thompson), it was a fundamentally shallow film that relays the loose-cannon narrative in a way that's too dull and familiar to be engaging but not straight-faced enough to be sufficiently entertaining. Cobra's whole "lone wolf" thing doesn't really work - while it does result in a memorably weird moment with the pizza that I described as perfectly capturing the essence of the film (in both a good and bad way), it's something of an anomaly underneath an otherwise dry portrayal of a tiresome archetype. There wasn't much to talk about in the way of truly engaging or entertaining action either, hence why I skimmed over it with a laundry list of what kind of things you could expect. In hindsight, maybe the finale inside a steel mill was a high point, but it did ultimately feel like too little, too late.

Anyway, regarding why I bother - like I said in my review for The Wolverine, I still have some hope that whatever I watch will surprise me or at least play to my expectations in a sufficiently entertaining manner. Cobra didn't do either of those things, though it wasn't awful enough to warrant a lower rating (1.5 is kind of my "dull" rating, reserved for films that aren't especially awful but aren't good enough to deserve even a mediocre rating). I guess that's where the frustration comes from, then - because these films never actually do what I want them to, and not in a good way.

[honeykid]

Then maybe Guap was right. Maybe you don't know your tastes in the way that I thought you did. From the last couple of pages I'd have said xXx, Cobra, Across the Wide Missouri, Godzilla, JP3, The Incredible Hulk, Bad Boys II and maybe Soylent Green would've all been films I'd have confidently told you to skip. Obviously I didn't know, but I'd have been confident. Your last sentence seems to be very telling. That's exactly how I feel you're feeling in your reviews. My problem is that I don't/didn't understand why you expected anything else. For the most part, genre pictures are generic. It's what they do, it's why they exist and it's what's expected of them. It's why some people don't like them and it's why many of those who do don't like it when they do something different.

As for a good review of a bad film, it depends on what you like in a review. Though you didn't like Cobra, I liked the way you wrote the review. Like a few other films we've identified over the years, what you don't like about it is why I like it. Neither is wrong or right, it's just different tastes. BTW, I remember reading that Cobra was built from the bones of the Beverley Hills Cop film that Sly was supposed to star in before he bailed and Eddie Murphy got the gig and 'funnied' it up.

[Iroquois]

#369 - The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Stephen Norrington, 2003

https://isleofgeek.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen-cast.jpg

At the turn of the 20th century, a handful of adventurous characters taken from various works of Victorian literature are recruited in order to fight against a masked terrorist.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen has a lot going against it. Made in 2003 (not the best year for comic-book movies, as this thread will attest), it was reportedly so bad that not only did source author Alan Moore denounce it and all other subsequent cinematic adaptations of his work but the troubled production also made director Norrington and leading man Sean Connery retire from the film business completely. As with Watchmen and V For Vendetta (which I liked and disliked respectively), I had read the source material beforehand (or at least the first two volumes included in the Omnibus edition - still haven't finished the text in the back) and had enjoyed its premise where characters from various works of primarily speculative fiction crossed paths and got into all sorts of adventures, plus Moore was willing to indulge the same cynicism he showed towards superheroes in Watchmen by making the "heroes" of his piece incredibly flawed and sometimes despicable (most notoriously the Invisible Man being a serial rapist). The film version neuters its source considerably in order to chase a PG-13 rating and there is quite a lot wrong with it, but all things considered I actually sort of liked The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen despite its many shortcomings.

Trying to pack in the assembly of its team does take a bit of time, especially when there are two new characters thrown into the mix (along with Allan Quatermain, Mina Murray (née Harker), the Invisible Man, Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde, and Captain Nemo). While Dorian Gray makes for a reasonable enough choice, Tom Sawyer stands out like a sore thumb thanks to not only his status as a token American in a British adventure movie but also thanks to his forced "surrogate son" relationship with Quatermain and him being one of several male characters who have some romantic and/or sexual interest in Murray. The characterisation is a bit haphazard - Quatermain and Nemo are played reasonably well by Connery and Naseeruddin Shah respectively (and to a lesser extent Jason Flemyng does alright playing both Jekyll and Hyde given the rather goofy way in which the film frames the duo's struggle against one another), but the other actors don't leave much in the way of favourable impressions as their internal conflicts and relationships are glossed over in favour of steampunk spectacle. It's a shame because that was what really made the comics work so well (though it was no slouch when it came to action). But no, this is 2003, and all that year's available comic-book nuance got used up while making Hulk.

That wouldn't be such a problem if the film had some decent action, but it's not hard to see just how badly the effects have aged over the past decade or so. CGI-heavy sequences such as a city being levelled or every appearance of Nemo's submarine don't hold up, but the film's attempts to use practical effects aren't much better. The most notable example is the transformation of Jekyll into Hyde (and vice versa), which is accomplished through a series of prosthetics where cuts are disguised by flashes and a lot of moving around on both sides of the camera, resulting in some bad-looking work. While I'll give the film some credit for attempting to adapt as much of the comic into a two-hour film as possible through a brand-new story that mixes and matches elements of the two volumes I mentioned earlier, it sacrifices a lot of the source's most charming elements and fails to compensate for them adequately. In its own way, it's a good companion piece to Hulk in that it was something of a failure in its own right but definitely laid some groundwork for Marvel's much more popular and acclaimed works. While a lot of the film feels like a mess of problems that can't quite cohere in a way that makes sense, there are bits and pieces that hint at a good film and that is why I can't bring myself to truly hate it. I have a small measure of hope that it will get the reboot it deserves, but time will tell on that front.

1.5

[Mr.Sparkle]

This film had potential and I like Norrington's previous effort, Blade.

[Iroquois]

#370 - The Terminal
Steven Spielberg, 2004

http://i1.cdnds.net/11/51/618x402/movies_steven_spielberg_career_pictures_22.jpg

A government coup d'etat in a fictional European country results in a legal complication that effectively traps one of its citizens in an American airport.

Even for someone who currently has two separate Spielberg films in his top 10, it's hard for me to muster a lot of excitement about the bulk of his filmography. Going by reputation, The Terminal was always going to be a tough sell, though it did have an intriguing high concept in its tale of Tom Hanks' beleaguered protagonist being caught in an extremely unlikely situation where a coup in his country of origin means his passport is not only unrecognised by the U.S. government and forbidding him from setting foot on American soil but also keeping him from returning home, so naturally his only recourse is to set up shop inside the airport terminal he arrived in in the first place. Thus begins a two-hour dramedy about a heavily accented but fairly likeable fool bumbling his way through the adversity offered by bureaucratic antagonists, the circumstances involving trying to live in an airport, and also his stumbling romantic sub-plot involving a stewardess (Catherine Zeta-Jones).

Unfortunately, The Terminal wastes its rather solid premise on the kind of mawkish shenanigans that characterise Spielberg at his worst. Hanks plays a Gump-like character who is defined by his being a foreigner rather than having a low IQ, whose generally blithe demeanour in the face of his absurd situation isn't always played for laughs, which is probably just as well considering how lacklustre the jokes tend to be. There are a couple of pratfalls, as well as his attempts to fashion a new living situation out of the limited resources at his disposal and his obliviousness to how much the airport supervisor (Stanley Tucci, who gives what's probably the best performance in the film) wants to palm him off on anyone else. There's also the ragtag collection of characters that work at the airport and serve as understanding foils for Hanks' situation. While it's got some noticeable technical flair thanks to frequent Spielberg collaborator Janusz Kaminski providing some rather fluid camera movements, but that only draws attention to how much the film trades on lightweight humour and some rather bland sentiments (even when the reason for Hanks' visit to New York is revealed, it doesn't quite land as well as it should). That's without getting into the romantic sub-plot featuring Zeta-Jones, which is just as by-the-numbers as everything else in this movie. Despite that, I didn't hate it or anything, but it's still more or less every major flaw with Spielberg-as-storyteller distilled into an overly long dramedy that compromises a subtly unnerving premise for the sake of being the bad kind of crowd-pleaser.

1.5

[nebbit]

Ok note to self, :yup: must come more often as catching up can take a while when you watch a movie a day http://www.websmileys.com/sm/crazy/1087.gif

[Iroquois]

#371 - The Manchurian Candidate
John Frankenheimer, 1962

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HTZ5QO5ekqk/VOpIK6i-njI/AAAAAAAAA8s/iU4ysBj6nz8/s1600/the-manchurian-candidate.png

After a group of American soldiers return home from the Korean War, one of them starts to realise that another one of his number was actually brainwashed to be a sleeper agent.

While relatively conventional compared to Frankenheimer's later film Seconds, The Manchurian Candidate covers similar ground in being yet another example of a thriller that is primed to point out the insidious nature of both communism and McCarthyism with only the slightest elements of science-fiction thrown in to justify its storyline and expounding upon its themes. It displays Frankenheimer's capacity for creating somewhat disorienting yet captivating visuals early on with a sequence where the American platoon is being brainwashed by a cabal of communist leaders, which rapidly flits back and forth between the platoon's perception of what is happening and what is happening in reality. This much is realised by the film's nominal hero (Frank Sinatra), who keeps having horrid flashbacks to the procedure and remembering how the team's leader (Laurence Harvey) was effectively made into an unquestioning killing machine. Of course, by the time he realises that Harvey has already been commemorated as a war hero and is being primed for some sort of mission involving political intrigue.

The stark monochromatic photography does well to drain the film of any kind of warmth, even in situations where it seems like it would demand it such as the development of separate romantic relationships for both Sinatra and Harvey. The film is also pretty sparing when it comes to the use of music, letting the frankness of the imagery speak for itself - and speak for itself it does, as Harvey's actions do become more disturbing, especially when it is clear just how much his own mother (Angela Lansbury) is manipulating him even without the use of brainwashing. She definitely becomes a defining presence in an otherwise male-dominated film (even Janet Leigh's presence as Sinatra's companion seems rather inconsequential), though it's not like Sinatra and Harvey don't put in sufficiently wide-ranging performances of their own. Though some aspects date the film in all the wrong ways (Henry Silva playing a North Korean? Riiiiight), it's still a sufficiently compelling film that still proves striking and relevant even now.

3.5

[nebbit]

I really like this movie :yup: I own it :)

[honeykid]

I love that film. Angela Landsbury is superb and dominates every scene she's in. It may be a bit of a lazy description, but it really is a very Lady Macbeth like showing. She's the best thing in the film and that's saying something.

I liked The Terminal, but I had some of the same problems you did with it. Mostly the length and the romantic subplot, for want of a better phrase. I'd give it maybe a box more (certainly half a box more) than you, but I feel that probably is just a rating thing. From your review, I feel that I liked it more than you did but, by the time it ended, we were in a similar place.

[Iroquois]

Since I do first-time ratings out of four, it'd make sense to add a full box onto all the ratings I give.

[Iroquois]

#372 - The Big Heat
Fritz Lang, 1953

https://shadowsandsatin.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/ssnoirvember3b.jpg

A detective investigating a colleague's suicide is drawn into a dangerous situation involving a collection of unsavoury underworld figures.

The Big Heat is a lean little film noir that, though it is rather enjoyable, doesn't leave a consistent favourable impression as a film with its reputation should. It starts off with an intriguing enough mystery as Glenn Ford's detective sergeant investigates the suicide of another officer - though it would seem to be an open-and-shut case, his probing investigation starts to lead to the bodies piling up and damage being done (especially to himself), but he soldiers on regardless, earning the interest of the moll (Gloria Grahame) of one of the gangsters (Lee Marvin) that he's pursuing. While The Big Heat doesn't exactly do anything wrong, it might actually suffer from decades' worth of imitators that do neuter the impact of this one considerably. Ford plays a familiar character type as an honest cop who pursues his suspect despite the apathy and corruption of his fellow officers plus the sheer brutality of the criminals he goes up against. As things progressively get worse and more personal, he loses touch with his calm demeanour and starts to become Marvin plays his usual salty self, becoming notorious for his thuggish inflicting of pain and disfigurement on any woman who irks him; this extends to Grahame as his long-suffering girlfriend, whose involvement with Ford's investigation and treatment by Marvin prompts her to do an about-face and become a more interesting character than Ford's fairly by-the-book character (both in terms of professional ethics and character development).

With a veteran director like Lang at the helm, The Big Heat has some good visuals but is ultimately stymied by its genre trappings. The second half is some solid work, but you do have to wade through the fairly pedestrian police procedural that is the first half in order to get to the truly fascinating elements. It's got some decent visuals and the odd piece of good dialogue, but there's not enough here to make me think it's anything more than alright (on its own terms, at least). I'm probably due for a re-watch at some point, but right now I'm inclined to think of it as the barest of essential viewing.

3

[Iroquois]

#373 - Being There
Hal Ashby, 1979

https://filmfork-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com/content/beingthere_inline.jpg

A middle-aged gardener with a developmental disorder is forced to leave the estate he's lived on for his entire life and ends up in the home of an elderly businessman.

Credit where credit's due, Hal Ashby knows how to offer a decent iteration on some familiar tropes, whether it's the "manic pixie dream girl" in Harold and Maude or the "one night on the town" of The Last Detail. Being There plays on the whole "supposedly ingenious fool" trope, with Peter Sellers playing said fool with considerable aplomb. Sellers made a career of being able to inhabit all sorts of humourous characters even in films that were starkly serious, and while Being There does have a fundamentally comical premise, it doesn't go for broad laughs so much as a pointed melancholy even in its most obviously funny moments (such as Sellers' encounter with a street gang or the various reactions to his assertion that he "likes to watch" television). Of course, it's a credit to this film that, despite its apparent comedic nature and lack of spontaneous laughter, it still doesn't feel like a failure. In fact, it's far from it.

While Sellers definitely delivers a performance that more than compensates for the character's familiar developments (it's not hard to feel like he was robbed of an Oscar), credit has to go to the rest of the cast. Melvyn Douglas plays the elderly businessman who takes Sellers in following an accident and admires his tendency towards being straightforward and honest, seeing it as an opportunity to reflect on his own shortcomings and immediate goals, which do involve meeting the president (Jack Warden). Shirley MacLaine is stellar as always playing Douglas's wife who has a number of conflicting feelings about Douglas that are only exacerbated or challenged by Sellers' arrival into their lives. A few other character actors (most noticeably The Thing alumni David Clennon and Richard Dysart as an attorney and doctor respectively). Being There may not exactly deliver hearty laughs and it's disappointing how the film's final image has become iconic to the point that it'd practically spoiled, but it is the kind of warm yet bittersweet film that I've come to expect from Ashby.

4

[honeykid]

I really like Being There. It was one of the films I was putting out there for the 70's countdown.

[Iroquois]

I don't think I ever actually voted in the '70s countdown (think I was absent during the voting window). I definitely regret that.

[honeykid]

I don't think I had it on my 25. It would've been quite close though.

[Iroquois]

#374 - Once Upon a Time in the West
Sergio Leone, 1968

http://tuesdaynightcigarclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/train.jpg

A widow is drawn into a conflict over her recently deceased husband's extremely valuable tract of land.

It says a lot about how much of a sprawling Old West epic this film is that such a basic logline manages to accurately sum up what the film is about and also do virtually no service whatsoever to what makes the film great. Though it'd be easy to go in expecting Charles Bronson's harmonica-playing gunslinger to be the so-called hero of this little venture, he really is just a supporting player in a greater narrative about the aforementioned widow (Claudia Cardinale) expecting to come home to her family's new ranch only to find they've been murdered by a ruthless mercenary (Henry Fonda) working on the orders of a railroad tycoon (Gabriele Ferzetti). The attack is carried out in such a way as to frame a gang of bandits led by Jason Robards' gruff yet honourable outlaw. With all the necessary players introduced, the battle for the land and the realisation of its true purpose is ready to play out on a stark landscape peppered with dust and death.

Once Upon a Time in the West plays out like an opera without singing - if anything, the characters and their actions make for the ideal substitute for actual singing. It would at least go some way towards excusing the clunkiness of some of the English dub's dialogue (and how it will noticeably lose sync from time to time), but for the most part it translates the lyrical yet world-weary nature of the characters' exchanges just fine. The score is rightfully considered one of Leone's best with each of the main characters getting their own theme music - while the theme for Cardinale's character makes for a perfectly moving and sentimental piece on its own, people will most likely remember the twanging guitar and abrasive harmonica that define Bronson and Fonda's leitmotifs. The film is naturally a visual stunner with its astonshing wide shots and claustrophobic close-ups that capture unforgettable imagery (most notably the opening sequence, but also several deaths that resonate for one reason or another). Characters are well-developed - Bronson is good as an avenging angel, while Fonda gleefully plays against do-gooder type as a savage yet charismatic killer. Robards is the closest things get to a weak link as the outlaw with a heart of gold who begins an unlikely friendship with Cardinale, whose complicated past and trauma-ridden present make for a character who is very aware of her uncertain future.

Though I still consider Once Upon a Time in the West a major favourite not just as far as Westerns go but as far as films in general go, I won't deny that the operatic nature of the film can work against it a bit somewhat. The film may not deal in the same brand of awesome bloodshed that the Dollars trilogy did (which may be part of the reason why I still give The Good, the Bad and the Ugly the edge when it comes to ranking the Leone films) but it still makes for some of the finest cinematic grandiosity to ever exist. From its slow-burn opening that makes a bunch of guys waiting for a train into captivating cinema through to its extremely bittersweet conclusion, this is still a film that I will probably consider a masterpiece for a very long time, if not forever.

5

[Iroquois]

#375 - Forbidden Planet
Fred M. Wilcox, 1956

http://3guys1movie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Forbidden-Planet-1.jpeg

A human starship dedicated to exploration lands on a planet that is inhabited by a scientist, his daughter, their robot, and a dangerous creature.

Forbidden Planet is a solid example of 1950s sci-fi with its high concept taking a team of 23rd-century astronauts (led by none other than Leslie Nielsen, whose youthful and dark-haired appearance here is certainly a surprise to someone who grew up knowing him as the white-haired buffoon from just about every movie he made from 1980 onwards) to the titular planet. There, Nielsen and co. find a scientist (Walter Pidgeon), who is investigating the technology left behind by an ancient alien civilisation. His daughter (Anne Francis) is also on the planet and she is accompanied by a robot ("Robby the Robot as himself", according to the opening credits) that looks like the platonic ideal for a 1950s robot. What follows over the course of the rest of the adventure is a cursory exploration of Things Man Was Not Meant to Know with a standard romantic sub-plot thrown in between its male and female leads and an interesting choice for a monster whose true nature constitutes the heaviest of spoilers for the film.

Forbidden Planet has aged reasonably well as far as sci-fi films from the 1950s go, though it doesn't exactly pull off a lot of surprises. It does play out like an extended episode of Star Trek: The Original Series only without that show's crew, which does add some stakes since there's not much guarantee who will make it out of the venture alive. Aside from the shiny futurisitc designs on everything, there's also the effects work that looks like it was hand-drawn onto every frame but I don't consider that to be a slight against the film; if anything, it makes for an interesting aesthetic to witness, especially in Technicolor. The performances are serviceable. It's a fundamentally good film, but as far as science-fiction goes it's not overly entertaining or thought-provoking.

3

[nebbit]

I love this movie :yup:

[honeykid]

Forbidden Planet it OK. I think you liked it more than I did, as I'd give it a little less and that'd be out of 5.

[Iroquois]

Technically, all my ratings are out of five. The "first rating is out of four" thing is more of a guideline that I generally see no reason to overturn (as of writing, the only film that has made me waive it since I instituted it was It's Such A Beautiful Day).

[honeykid]

So that wasn't your first viewing of Forbidden Planet I take it?

[Iroquois]

So that wasn't your first viewing of Forbidden Planet I take it?

No, it was the first viewing. First-time viewings get blue titles while repeat viewings get red titles. It's not so much out of four as it is that four is a sort of "ceiling" I put on ratings to stop me overrating them. It's kind of the reverse of Nigel Tufnel putting an 11 on his amplifier's dials.

[honeykid]

I see. That makes sense. As someone who doesn't put films on their 100 unless I've seen them a number of times, I appreciate your restraint.

[Iroquois]

#376 - Body of Lies
Ridley Scott, 2008

http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/8600000/Body-of-Lies-leonardo-dicaprio-8610401-1914-789.jpg

An undercover CIA agent must contend with an extremely difficult supervisor while he tries to take down a terrorist cell that is responsible for several international bombings.

Body of Lies has a fair bit working against it. It reunites Leonardo CiCaprio with The Departed screenwriter William Monahan (a film that, despite the accolades, I personally have no great affection for) while also indulging a lot of Ridley Scott's usual 21st-century techniques, which is a shame because I don't exactly have the greatest affection for Scott's 21st-century output. There's the usual shakiness to the tension that tends to be more irritating than exciting and only makes me think that Scott doesn't have that much faith in the excitement generated by the story. Despite that, I found myself liking Body of Lies enough not to hate it. It sets up an interesting enough conflict between DiCaprio's undercover agent and his handler (Russell Crowe), the latter of whom often seems to be sabotaging the former's operations out of either uninformed incompetence or callous indifference (most likely both). That's in addition to the somewhat complex plot that develops as DiCaprio works to infiltrate a terrorist organisation by any means necessary, including his befriending of a Jordanian chief of intelligence (Mark Strong), who may or may not be the real brains behind the attacks.

The story itself is an interesting enough examination of U.S. intelligence's intervention in foreign affairs as framed through the eyes of one operative struggling to deal with both the men who want him dead and the men who won't care about his death as long as it brings them results. The concept of characters who are seemingly on the same side frequently deceiving one another makes for a decent enough thread for the story to build around. However, the convolutions naturally get a little tiresome after a while, getting to the point where a romantic sub-plot that develops between a wounded DiCaprio and a local nurse (Golshifteh Farahani) does not come across as a wholly objectionable intrusion. Acting-wise, DiCaprio is decent enough when he's not in Oscar mode, while Crowe's acting feels just as flabby and useless as his character is intended to be (I wonder if that's by choice). Strong makes for a peculiar choice to play a Jordanian agent but carries it off well enough, while I'm disappointed that the considerably talented Oscar Isaac didn't get more to do during his screen-time. Body of Lies is a perfectly middle-of-the-road War on Terror thriller that has an interesting enough premise with its tale of conflicting loyalties where the supposed "good guys" are just as dangerous to one another as their enemies are (possibly even more so), but it's still an ultimately disposable, if not necessarily awful, film.

2.5

[Miss Vicky]

I liked Body of Lies well enough when I saw it in the theater, but have had no real desire to watch it again (even though I own it on DVD). Definitely not a stand out film for anyone involved, no matter how much I love other work by the screenwriter, director, and cast.

[Iroquois]

#377 - The Americanization of Emily
Arthur Hiller, 1964

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3040/3073650198_c3af0b76e8.jpg

In the lead-up to the D-Day invasion, an American Navy officer and self-professed coward becomes involved with a propaganda mission while also romancing an English driver.

The Americanization of Emily (it feels weird to deliberately type the "z", but what can you do?) is a fine piece of work that accomplishes the rather difficult act of trying to balance wartime satire with romantic drama. James Garner makes for the ideal mix of handsome features and complicated charisma as a naval officer who is informally known as a "dog-robber", who serves mainly as a man who can sufficiently supply his commanding officer (a doddering admiral played by Melvyn Douglas) with whatever (or whoever) will satiate said officer's wants and desires. Garner eventually ends up being roped into an apparent conflict between the Army and the Navy as Douglas insists that the Navy needs to prove its worth by not only having the first soldier to storm the beaches at Normandy be a sailor, but also by having the first soldier to die on the beaches be a sailor. It's the sort of believably absurd situation one would find in a well-written satire, with Garner naturally able to see through the lunacy of such a plan but unable to back out of it, especially with his more excitable counterpart (James Coburn) behind him all the way. In between dealing with this dangerous situation, Garner ends up courting the eponymous Emily (Julie Andrews), an English driver for military personnel. She serves as a good foil for Garner; while he has a cushy position yet still maintains an attitude of cynical pragmatism towards the war, she has an unfettered sense of idealism that causes her to clash with him over his callowness.

Though it might be a little on the long side and the characters are as prone to on-the-nose speechifying about the story's message as you'd expect from a Paddy Chayefsky screenplay, that hardly matters as it's by-and-large a cracking script brought to life by some very fine actors that does have some genuine surprises here and there. The filmmaking itself is appropriately understated even when it actually comes to scenes of wartime action (also, you're telling me Billy Wilder didn't direct this? This is definitely his kind of movie, after all). Though the publicity stunt involving Garner being the unlucky sap being made to die for the sake of naval pride understandably takes precedence over the course of the film, the entire relationship between Garner and Andrews does not feel remotely underdeveloped and in fact complements the A-plot nicely thanks in no small part due to the chemistry between two talented people. Effective use of character actors like Coburn and Douglas rounds things out nicely and make for a film that does seem to be more obscure than it should be.

4

[Iroquois]

#378 - Yojimbo
Akira Kurosawa, 1961

http://951465021.r.lightningbase-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/post/yojimbo-a-timeless-classic/yojim1.jpg

In feudal Japan, a wandering samurai arrives in a small town being torn apart by a gang war.

Yojimbo is an interesting film in that, despite lacking the scale or depth of Kurosawa's other classics, it still managed to build a considerable reputation that has led to it being hailed as one of Kurosawa's best films. I guess it's because it proves that a master capable of crafting lengthy epics filled with stunning characters and imagery can still put that talent to good use in a fairly straightforward action film with a single location and somewhat limited cast. To that end, Yojimbo does offer a fairly simplistic plot in having Kurosawa regular Toshiro Mifune play a samurai who happens upon a village that is caught in the vice-grip of a pair of gangs. After Mifune learns of the situation from an embittered innkeeper, he sets about trying to play both sides, ostensibly for money (the title is the Japanese word for "bodyguard", which Mifune offers to be for the bosses on either side) but soon reveals a greater motivation for his actions that mere greed.

One of the great things about Kurosawa as a director is his sheer dependability, which is on full display and elevates its rather basic narrative through the addition of some interesting idiosyncrasies. The film's most notable villain does change things up by having his own revolver (which did inspire an unexpected homage in 1979 gang flick The Warriors), the gangs' one attempt at open warfare results in a comical stalemate being watched by an amused Mifune, the gangs actually turn out to be stunningly incompetent in some areas (such as one woman advising her gang leader husband to murder Mifune after their rival gang has been eliminated while Mifune is in earshot), and so on. What few action sequences there are hold up well, with just the right blend of flourish and realism. The monochrome camerawork and jaunty soundtrack contribute to Kurosawa's trademark style and definitely make for one of his best films, none-too-complex subject matter notwithstanding.

4

[honeykid]

I really don't care for Yojimbo at all. Didn't like any remake/reworking of it I've seen either. I always find myself veering between being annoyed and bored for the majority of the story.

[Iroquois]

#379 - Spawn
Mark A.Z. Dippé, 1997

http://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/t_article_image/v2wcnf1tlmlfqcz2zcro.jpg

When a mercenary is double-crossed and murdered by his boss, he goes to Hell and is given the chance to become a superpowered servant of the Devil.

In the same year that Joel Schumacher almost sounded a death-knell for superhero cinema with the garishly campy Batman and Robin, there was the release of a little film about another comic-book anti-hero with a penchant for black costumes, brooding, and justice. Spawn is based on the titular anti-hero, who starts off as a family-man mercenary (Michael Jai White) whose much more villainous boss (Martin Sheen) kills him off as part of a plan to become an arms dealer. From there, White is paired with a demonic clown (an almost unrecognisable John Leguizamo) who is supposed to mentor him in the ways of villainy as he agrees to become a general in Hell's army, but he also attracts a good mentor in the form of a centuries-old soldier (Nicol Williamson, another example of a classy British thespian slumming it in a bad American film) to help him rebel against his new masters. While Spawn promises an engaging adventure soaked in the dark superhero vibe that wouldn't really catch on until well into the following decade (and, to be fair, it does deliver on the vibes), it's a shame that the film underneath is incredibly wanting.

It's one thing for a film to just be bad, but Spawn is the kind of cinematic disaster that is enjoyable to a certain extent. The story mixes a standard superhero origin story with themes of vengeance and morality as White's desperation to return to his alive family leads him to make some regrettable alliances with some extremely unpleasant incarnations of pure evil. While White does his best to sell a stoic but tormented character underneath a layer of burn makeup (and also a computer-generated mask), he doesn't make for an especially compelling presence not because of his own shortcomings but because everyone around him overshadows him in the worst possible ways. Respectable actors like Sheen and Williamson ham it up or sleepwalk through their respective roles, while Leguizamo chews the scenery as a grotesque-looking clown with a raspy voice who will make dick and fart jokes (complete with visible farts) while eating pizza covered in live maggots and being disgusted by the anchovies. One can't help but wonder if the audience is supposed to find this repulsive character funny or disturbing or both, but it doesn't end up doing either (especially when making Apocalypse Now references around Sheen's character). Every other character in the film is virtually a nonentity, not even the family who serves as little more than a motivational tool for White.

In terms of aesthetics, Spawn is pure '90s hell. Whether it's the soundtrack loaded with edgy alt-rock or the incredibly rough CGI, you really do need to brace yourself for things like visions of Hell that play out like scenes from ReBoot or the dulcet tones of Marilyn Manson. The CGI alone is almost worth the price of admission (and I say that as someone who watched this on free-to-air TV) as its gross artifice is a marvel in itself. The roughness of Spawn's red cape being digitally inserted into scenes featuring a live-action Spawn is especially noteworthy, as are the scratchy 3-D credits or the incredibly rough green-screen sequences that take place in Hell itself (complete with primitively-rendered minions). It helps to compensate for the fact that the action sequences are otherwise dull and uninteresting. I used to give out a second rating to films that I believed had some value as a result of their providing unintentional amusement, but I've abandoned that in these reviews because a single rating should be able to cover a film in total. Spawn is saved from a lower rating because, in spite of the considerable dullness and bad humour underneath its eye-watering surface, the visuals alone make for an unforgettable experience. I figure that that is what elevates Spawn ever-so-slightly over other movies of its ilk - it's dated and hideous, but at least it's in a fun sort of way.

1

[Iroquois]

#380 - Don't Hug Me I'm Scared (Joseph Pelling and Becky Sloan, 2011)

I decided to watch all four of the currently-released Don't Hug Me I'm Scared shorts, which play out like a seemingly ordinary kids' show featuring a trio of colourful characters learning a valuable lesson about creativity through a singing sketchbook, but of course it gets twisted, gory, and nightmarishly existential. I get what it's going for, but that's not enough to really impress me. 2

#381 - Don't Hug Me I'm Scared 2: TIME (Joseph Pelling and Becky Sloan, 2014)

Same basic plot as the first sketch, only this time it's about...time. More of the same "kids' show gets uncomfortable and weird" stuff. 2

#382 - Don't Hug Me I'm Scared 3 (Joseph Pelling and Becky Sloan, 2014)

This one is about love, complete with more graphic imagery that is a little unsettling, but is still dulled by the repetitive nature of the shorts' shared premise. 2

#383 - Don't Hug Me I'm Scared 4 (Joseph Pelling and Becky Sloan, 2015)

Possibly my favourite, though that's not saying much as the same three characters are now subjected to learning about computers and the digital world, which at least changes up the visual style a bit. I also like the ending. 2.5

[Optimus]

I actually like Spawn.

[Iroquois]

I like it for all the wrong reasons.

[nebbit]

I agree with your review of Spawn :p

[cricket]

Did you watch movies at this pace before this year, or is this something new?

[Iroquois]

Did you watch movies at this pace before this year, or is this something new?

No, this is a new thing because I've been meaning to try the whole "one movie a day" thing for a while and figured that this would be the year.

Good luck with it, Iro. Any chance of you updating it every day?

Yeah, there's a chance.

[honeykid]

I've never seen Spawn because.... Well, I'm HK and it's Spawn.

[Iroquois]

I would be hard-pressed to say whether or not you would get anything out of it.

[Iroquois]

#384 - Stargate
Roland Emmerich, 1994

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-88ESUHycL8A/UQ7GbaE9rFI/AAAAAAAABZo/GpBttQnynCI/s1600/star.jpg

When an ancient Egyptian artifact is revealed to be a portal to another world, an academic must join the military expedition to join the other side.

I get the impression that this is supposed to be Roland Emmerich's "best" film in the same way that The Rock is Michael Bay's "best" film in that the respective filmmakers work with engaging premises while also dialing down the technical excesses that turned their careers into laughing stocks. Stargate's premise proved fertile enough to spawn an entire multi-media franchise, even though the actual plot of Emmerich's film doesn't exactly offer up much in the way of surprises with its extremely familiar plot and characters. James Spader plays one of the film's protagonists, a linguist whose left-field theories about ancient Egypt initially make him a laughing stock in his field but which also attract the attention of an old woman whose archaeologist father unearthed a mysterious circular artifact decades before. It is soon revealed that this artifact is a portal to another world that bears a considerable resemblance to ancient Egypt. Enter Kurt Russell as a bereaved Army colonel tasked with heading up a mission through the eponymous portal, bringing Spader along as a translator to help communicate with the other world's native population and, once they're trapped on the other side due to circumstances, figure out a way home - and that's before they have to face off against some genuine adversaries.

In all fairness, Stargate doesn't quite plumb the same depths that Emmerich and creative partner Dean Devlin did with Godzilla (it's been too long since I've seen Independence Day for my opinion on it to have much relevance, and I've managed to avoid everything else he's directed for all the reasons that you can imagine). Unfortunately, that doesn't make it an especially great film in and of itself. Spader and Russell are serviceable leads that do coast on their natural charisma and talent rather than any serious development of their characters beyond their basic definitions as socially inept genius and tough guy with a sensitive side respectively. Most of the other characters don't get much definition beyond some extremely basic roles - even Jaye Davidson as the film's nominal villain stands out mainly because of an excessively deep voice and some bad effects work that's supposed to give his character glowing eyes. Though it's not as focused on disaster imagery as the rest of its director's oeuvre would suggest, that does mean that there's not a whole lot of engaging material for much of the film - the effects haven't aged as badly as you would think, but the action still doesn't do enough to prop up the mostly unsurprising plot. Even so, I was at least somewhat pleased with the result and as such will not give it a wholly negative rating, but its "ancient aliens" premise only goes so far in aiding a somewhat run-of-the-mill science-versus-military-versus-aliens kind of sci-fi blockbuster that hits all sorts of familiar beats. At least it's better (and shorter) than Godzilla.

2

[honeykid]

I've not seen this for the same reason I've not seen Spawn. :D

[Iroquois]

Coincidentally, they were playing back-to-back on free-to-air TV (the mixed-up order is due to the fact that I DVRed them and watched them separately). Quite the peculiar double bill.

[Iroquois]

#385 - Roman Holiday
William Wyler, 1953

http://romerevealed.typepad.com/.a/6a013483a13a94970c015432349725970c-pi

While doing an international tour that finishes in Rome, a European princess ends up in the company of an American journalist.

It's not hard to be cynical and look at a decades-old film through a critical lens as if to challenge its reputation and see if it can truly overcome personal skepticism and prove naysayers wrong. Roman Holiday is coming up on six decades of existence and its premise does come across as very familiar - early on in the film I thought to myself, "Hey, this sounds an awful lot like It Happened One Night." Granted, that film does feature a superficially similar plot with its wealthy heiress escaping her stifling upper-class existence and ending up going on a journey of self-discovery with the help of a middle-class journalist who initially intends to take advantage of the situation in order to boost his fledgling career and make some money. However, it's a testament to all involved that Roman Holiday just comes across as noticeably similar instead of shamelessly derivative.

A lot of what makes Roman Holiday work has to do with the considerable talent of both its leads. Audrey Hepburn makes for the ideal choice to play the female lead with her combination of outward sophistication and inner rebelliousness helping to fill out her heiress character nicely, while Gregory Peck's earthy American charm and honest appearance certainly give his seemingly seedy character a bit more depth than you'd expect. The rest of the cast is serviceable enough with its combination of stuffy royalists and bohemian Italians, but it makes sense since it really is all about the two leads as they jet-set around Rome dealing with both their growing connection built on falsehoods and their internal conflicts regarding the maintenance of said falsehoods. It's compelling enough and the location shooting in Rome is done reasonably well by veteran director Wyler and it builds up to a great and not-entirely-predictable conclusion. I can definitely respect its status as a classic romance, and so should you.

4

[Iroquois]

#386 - Sabrina
Billy Wilder, 1954

https://writerlovesmovies.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/sabrina-1954-06-g.jpg

A love triangle develops between two brothers from a wealthy family and the daughter of their family's chauffeur.

More Audrey Hepburn, this time appearing under the direction of master satirist Billy Wilder and accompanied by the caddish yet charismatic pairing of Humphrey Bogart and William Holden. Sabrina is a decent enough example of a romantic drama with shades of black comedy typical of a Wilder vehicle, but at the end of the day it's still merely alright more so than a genuine classic. Hepburn proves to be a lot more versatile than her memetically classy exterior would suggest with a working-class performance that predates her turn as Eliza Doolittle, while Bogart and Holden go through their greatest hits as they play a pair of unsurprisingly different brothers. Bogart is the responsible brother who runs the family business and is thus an unlikely candidate for Hepburn's affections, unlike Holden as the surprisingly light-haired gadfly who attracts Hepburn much more easily.

All three leads have demonstrated considerable talent over the courses of their respective career, as has the director, yet it seems like a somewhat lesser film compared to the prior (and occasionally subsequent) work of all four principals. That alone guarantees that the film isn't a total waste of time with its raher cynical take on class relations in a romantic context. Of course, star power only goes so far with this film and its rather flimsy take on its more satirical subjects. Though it's not handled so poorly that the romantic elements at the core of the film suffer for it, it makes liking the film a bit difficult. It's a testament to talent of those involved that it's a very watchable affair, though of course it doesn't quite feel like a classic as a result.

3

[Iroquois]

#387 - A Town Called Panic
Vincent Patar and Stéphane Aubier, 2009

http://static.bips.channel4.com/bse/orig/a-town-called-panic/efb7f5e4-9636-44fa-bbc9-1f3b0ad4819d_625x352.jpg

A trio of friends - Cowboy, Indian, and Horse - run into all sorts of trouble when Cowboy and Indian try to give Horse a birthday present.

Apparently based off a French-Belgian animated series that I haven't heard of until I got recommended this film through this particular website, I had no idea what to expect from A Town Called Panic beyond the fact that it was animated and had some small degree of similarity to Toy Story. The similarity extends to the fact that both films are based around the actions of walking, talking action figures. However, beyond that things get a little weird as A Town Called Panic launches into a relatively short animated free-for-all that does not feel beholden to the same sense of sentimentality that defines Pixar's most memorable efforts. Instead, this film feels beholden to sheer entertainment above all else, and my goodness, does it deliver. Unconcerned with visual prowess, the film involves incredibly crude stop-motion animation (there's virtually none of the smoothness that defines a contemporary in the medium such as Coraline - the idea that both films came out in the same year is a little mind-boggling) that only adds to the film's humourous capacity. Humour is the main thing that A Town Called Panic has going for it and it mines the absurdity of its childish premise and setting for all the gold that it can - and let me tell you, there is a lot of gold.

The difficult part of reviewing any comedy is knowing that you can love or hate a comedy all you want and you can try to describe your attitude as best you can but it's probably not going to translate all that well in review form. You can find this film on YouTube and it's barely over an hour in length, but man, what an hour. It starts off with a very simple premise - two fools want to give their straight-man housemate a birthday present - and from there launches an increasingly ludicrous series of adventures that take our heroes on a journey to the centre of the Earth and through frozen tundra and underwater communities, upsetting many other minor characters in the process. There are sub-plots threaded throughout the film, whether it's the trio's neighbour (voiced by Benoit Poelvoorde of Man Bites Dog fame, if you can believe that) being wrongfully arrested because of their shenanigans or Horse's awkward romantic sub-plot with a music teacher of the equine persuasion, but they don't drag down the film at all and instead make for some of the best gags (the hardest I laughed at the film was a gag involving a mobile phone being destroyed, and that's all I'm going to say about that). The brief running time means it doesn't overstay its welcome, while the jokes are witty and clever enough to get people of all ages laughing, language barrier be damned (hell, the French voice artistry is too good to deny - Indian's voice is worth at least half a popcorn box on its own). Consider this highly recommended regardless of your pre-existing attitudes towards slapstick, family films, or animation.

4

[Miss Vicky]

Well would you look at that, Iro actually watched a good movie and gave it a positive rating. Is this a sign of the apocalypse? :eek:

[Iroquois]

Well would you look at that, Iro actually watched a good movie and gave it a positive rating. Is this a sign of the apocalypse? :eek:

I do that a lot, you just don't like the movies.

[cricket]

Glad to see your review and rating for A Town Called Panic. I felt the same way.

[Iroquois]

#388 - Two for the Road
Stanley Donen, 1967

http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/5300000/Audrey-in-Two-for-the-Road-audrey-hepburn-5307448-720-304.jpg

An anachronic story about a couple and the various travels they take across Europe during the course of their relationship.

Two for the Road is a supposedly romantic story, but it's very much a romantic story in the same way that, say, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind or Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? are "romantic" stories. Sure, it's about a couple - Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn as an architect and his wife - but you'd be hard pressed to think of them as a genuinely lovable couple. While they do share the occasional tender moment over the course of a decade together, much of the film is dedicated to their squabbling with one another, which is only exacerbated when they are paired with Finney's friends, who happen to be married and have a child whose extremely annoying dialogue and behaviour may be intentional but it's still an intent that can be held against the film anyway. It's easy to think of Two for the Road as an inherently annoying film as you have to spend two hours dealing with some rather unlikeable characters, but it's a testament to the talent of those involved that they manage to make these characters at least somewhat compelling over the course of those two hours. Hepburn is nice and capable as always, while Finney manages to take a character who could have been truly horrible in the wrong hands and imbue him with a certain British charm that adequately compensates for the character's far less likeable qualities.

What really makes Two for the Road noteworthy beyond its surprisingly good leads is the ambition behind its main gimmick, which is the aforementioned anachronic order in which events are depicted. This is accomplished reasonably well thanks to clever editing decisions, though the script is a bit too reliant on situational irony as part of its humour; a good example of this is one scene shows a hitch-hiking Finney say he'll always stop for hitch-hikers before cutting to the next scene where he speeds past hitch-hikers without a second thought (another strike against the film is how often there are a lot of these types of gags - I get that it's showing how people change over the years and all, but it gets tiring after a while). It's a decent enough gimmick that is probably hindered by the fact that it's not always that easy to tell at what point in the film's chronology is supposed to take place. The film demands that you pay attention to characters' outfits and hairstyles in order to be able to determine which trip is which; this is why Kate Winslet's character in Eternal Sunshine... changed hair colours all the time. Some decent photography and a period-appropriate score by Henry Mancini sell it more as a 1960s travelogue kind of film. In spite of all the reasons I should hate it - fundamentally irritating characters and the debatable execution of its main gimmick - it's still got some clever enough writing and good actors to sell them (plus a genuine sense of tension as to how it will end, even though the entire third act feels like a bridge too far as Hepburn's character starts an affair with another man during her separation from Finney). It's innovative, but it still feels like a bit too much of a chore at times.

3

[cricket]

Couldn't agree more with your Two for the Road review. It's too bad, I thought it had a chance to be special.

[Iroquois]

#389 - A Fistful of Dollars
Sergio Leone, 1964

http://blog.fxdurkin.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2013/05/a-fistful-of-dollars-rojo-house.jpg

A drifter finds his way into a Mexican border town where a conflict between two gangs of outlaws is brewing and he decides to play both sides against one another.

How the mighty have fallen. Back in 2005, I put A Fistful of Dollars at #19 on my original Top 100 list - it was understandably outranked by Once Upon a Time in the West, yet ranked far higher than For a Few Dollars More (The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly did not chart at all for reasons I'm sure wouldn't make any sense to me if I remembered them). Ten years on, I'm liable to consider this my least favourite Leone film (though I still have to see A Fistful of Dynamite, so there's no telling if that'll "overtake" this one in that regard). Still, Leone is a sufficiently talented filmmaker so that this film, which borrows the bulk of its plotting and characterisation from Kurosawa's Yojimbo, manages to distinguish itself well enough from its unofficial source of inspiration and be entertaining enough even though it does not plumb the same depths or scale the same heights that defined Leone's other films.

Much of the film's quality can easily be attributed to having Clint Eastwood as the nameless protagonist with his iconic outfit and laconic, squinting demeanour. Few others do much to distinguish themselves with the exception of Gian Maria Volonté as the principal antagonist, who is gleefully sadistic and is as good a match for Eastwood's acting ability as the film has to offer (underneath all the dubbing, of course). Watching this so closely after watching Yojimbo means it's easy to pick apart how closely Leone follows Kurosawa, but with a film this simple it's good that it sticks pretty closely to the original with only the occasional concession to the difference in settings (such as dropping the sub-plot about a village inspector and inserting a gambit involving dead soldiers in a cemetery) to keep things interesting. That's without mentioning how well many of the action sequences adapt from swords to guns just fine, especially as the film draws towards it climax. It may not be that much of a classic anymore but it's a nice and straightforward Western that will most likely remain a minor favourite no matter what.

4

[Iroquois]

#390 - if...
Lindsay Anderson, 1968

http://ourgoldenage.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/GAC_if.jpg

Chronicles the lives of a group of students at an English boarding school, especially that of one especially rebellious student.

When it comes time to write up loglines to summarise the plot, it's sometimes a little too easy to summarise when it comes to films that are a bit more artistically minded. if... is one such film that manages to fill out a feature-length film with a segmented depiction of life inside a then-contemporary British all-male boarding school. Initially, it does tend to be a rather slice-of-life affair that showcases none of the highs and all of the lows that come with being a private school student - especially considering how the juniors are mercilessly bullied by the seniors, the seniors are bullied by other seniors, while teachers and other authority figures either encourage or do nothing about such sadistic behaviour. A plot soon emerges with the appearance of a recently returned student (Malcolm McDowell) whose head is full of rebellious ideas as a result of his time abroad and away from the stifling atmosphere of academia.

The rest of the film tracks a somewhat standard rebellion narrative as McDowell's character and his friends start to take greater and greater stands against the various types of authorities that seek to keep them down. It's carried by some of the more disturbing aspects of private school life, especially considering how much violence against students is tolerating by the ruling body (which does happen to have a serious co-existence with the military). McDowell is easily the most recognisable actor here and his tendency to wax philosophical in his distinctive nasal voice about various nihilistic subjects will either endear or alienate a viewer. The episodic nature and tendency to emphasise individual character moments over any sort of consistent plot may also prove to be a bit of a hurdle. In addition, there's the tendency to swap between colour and black-and-white for reasons that apparently have more to do with real-life limitations that deliberate artistic vision. In any case, if... is an intermittently harrowing and frequently captivating watch where one's appreciation will depend on their tolerance for deliberate depictions of English banality and ability to wait for things to get sufficiently explosive, but if that's something you can handle, then by all means give this a shot.

3.5

[rauldc14]

I really believe Sabrina is an underrated film, then again I'm a huge fan of Wilder's work!

[gbgoodies]

I really believe Sabrina is an underrated film, then again I'm a huge fan of Wilder's work!


I like Billy Wilder's Sabrina, but this is one of the rare occasions that I like the remake better.

[honeykid]

If... is a film I really like. I've not seen it for absolutely ages. Probably near on 20 years probably. I think the only thing that gets me about the film is that McDowell is obviously so much older than he's supposed to be. I seem to remember having the same problem with another role he played. I wonder what that could be? ;)

[Steve Freeling]

I like Billy Wilder's Sabrina, but this is one of the rare occasions that I like the remake better.
One of the few times I've found myself interested in a remake. I'm a fan of Harrison Ford, so that's probably why.

[Iroquois]

#391 - The Silence of the Lambs
Jonathan Demme, 1991

https://fogsmoviereviews.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/large20silence20of20the20lambs4.jpg

An agent-in-training for the FBI is brought in to interview an incarcerated serial killer in order to try to catch a different serial killer who is still at large.

Reviewing a renowned classic is more than a little difficult - while there's no doubt that everyone has their own individual opinion about a film, how does one express it in any unique manner? In any case, after having watched both Hannibal and Red Dragon earlier this year and found them both wanting, I had been meaning to revisit this for the first time in I-don't-know-how-many years (it has to have been a few years because the last time I saw it I don't remember recognising "Hip Priest" by The Fall playing during the climatic confrontation - man, what a weird choice of music to crop up in a Best Picture winner of all films). It's also not hard to see how much it changed the game for thrillers since its release, which ironically just makes it feel like a slightly above-average thriller in the process. As it stands, I'm ready to consider it the definitive '90s thriller, but that doesn't automatically mean I consider it an especially personal favourite.

The film does have a lot going for it - Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins understandably won Oscars for their roles as a rookie FBI agent and the cannibalistic psychiatrist she needs to interrogate in order to catch a loose murderer (Ted Levine) who skins his female victims. In a film that's scattered with outwardly suspenseful scenes of external action, it is their interactions with one another that stand out the most and are accentuated by cinematography that relies on close-ups and frequent stares into the camera to really leave a mark on audiences. The mind games that Hopkins plays with the other characters are what give this otherwise rote procedural plot some much-needed personality. As such, The Silence of the Lambs is definitely a good movie, but I'm not inclined to think of it as anything than just an all-around great film where the somewhat simple plot is lifted by a great ensemble cast and the addition of an interesting dynamic with a murderous consultant.

4

[honeykid]

I think I'd have Se7en held up as the definitive 90's thriller. I think that's the thriller version of Blade Runner. Apart from the fact that I actually like it, of course.

[Iroquois]

I think I'd have Se7en held up as the definitive 90's thriller. I think that's the thriller version of Blade Runner. Apart from the fact that I actually like it, of course.

Granted, it's kind of a toss-up between the two (you can definitely see a lot of Se7en's style in a movie like, say, The Bone Collector), but Silence... came first and also came with an added dynamic (read: Lecter) to distinguish it somewhat from other investigative thrillers, while Se7en is by and large a rather generic detective movie underneath its memorably dark and gory exterior (and I say that as someone who still prefers Se7en to Silence... for some reason). The Bone Collector probably isn't the best example, because in that case the "consultant" was a quadriplegic former detective assisting a young rookie...eh, you get what I mean. They're both definitive in their own ways and picking one over the other is difficult.

[Iroquois]

#392 - Guardians of the Galaxy
James Gunn, 2014

http://www.deckchaircinema.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Guardians-of-the-Galaxy-1.jpg

A mismatched group of space-faring criminals are drawn into the search for an extremely valuable and powerful object.

Now that the hype has worn off, it's not hard to think that, underneath its colourful and humourous exterior, Guardians of the Galaxy is way too fundamentally hollow a film to be genuinely appreciable even on the level of sheer cinematic fun that it apparently aspires to achieve. In a way, its greatest strength - introducing an almost completely different side to the Marvel Cinematic Universe with its all-new space-opera setting - pretty much demands the necessity of its greatest weakness - an extremely basic plot. Like several of the Marvel films that predated it, Guardians... is centred around a magical MacGuffin and the various characters ranging from lovable rogues to amoral materialists to genocidal villains trying to get their hands on it by any means necessary for many different reasons ranging from personal profit to world-conquering. Of course, seeing as this was a film that was banking on the comically outsized vibrancy of its characters and setting more so than a sufficiently original plot, you can sort of forgive it for its extremely basic narrative...

...that is, until said characters and setting fall significantly flat. Guardians... never purports to be a dark film even by the standards of other Marvel films, even though it gives its anti-heroes sufficiently tragic back-stories; the very first scene involves the protagonist's younger self refusing to confront his mother's death from cancer, which causes emotional whiplash when the next scene tries to set the intended tone of the film with his adult self (Chris Pratt, who is decent enough but not nearly worth the hype) dancing to disco music while on a scavenging mission. Unfortunately, what little depth is afforded to its protagonists just showcases just how little effort goes into developing the antagonists, whether they're the blandly evil blue ones behind the main plot (played by Lee Pace and Karen Gillan) or the amoral opportunists (Michael Rooker and Benicio del Toro). At least the latter have a bit more personality, which is better than none. Zoe Saldana's green-skinned assassin is a shining example of wasted potential that she gives, while Bradley Cooper's turn as the diminutive raccoon-like bounty hunter is sort of charming but probably shouldn't make me think that the voice should have been provided by Jason Alexander in full George mode. Dave Bautista and Vin Diesel round out the main cast as a pair of deep-voiced brutes that at least have enough personality to compensate for their superficial differences - one's a comically serious man out for revenge while the other is a giant and generally good-hearted tree only capable of saying a few words - and they do tend to provide a couple of the moments that hold up on a second viewing.

Unfortunately, even in its attempt to present itself as a bit of goofy light-hearted fun that's not meant to be taken seriously, Guardians... doesn't even manage to deliver all that well on that front. Just because you're trying to be funny and awesome doesn't mean that the sheer impracticality of so much of the universe can be totally ignored; whether it's Rooker's signature weapon or Pratt being able to survive in space without adequate coverage of his extremities (flimsy justification for the latter be damned because it just feels like a cop-out no matter how true it might be) - and then there's the longevity of the Walkman...It may look extremely colourful and aesthetically appealing, but unfortunately it's not enough to compensate for the weaknesses in the plot and characterisation and, pretty though it may be, it's not the best way to keep me entertained for two whole hours, especially when the story does nothing new and just tends to descend into a lot of the same action-movie beats that characterise Marvel films. Here is a chase scene, here is a shoot-out, here are our male and female leads having belligerent yet comedic banter, here are the rest of our heroes getting into shenanigans, here is an epic finale involving a cast of thousands...despite the inherent weirdness, it's all too familiar to make any kind of genuine impact on its own (though the finishing move from the end is a genuinely impressive moment for...some reason). Guardians... does come across as the kind of movie that attempts to dictate its own terms and audiences and critics alike have definitely responded well to its treatise, but even approaching it on its own terms it just leaves me cold. Far from the worst movie ever, but beyond the visuals and the odd moment of pure entertainment it still feels too empty to genuinely enjoy, and seeing as genuine enjoyment is the film's ostensible aim I can't help but think of this as a failure.

2.5

[Iroquois]

#393 - Red Beard
Akira Kurosawa, 1965

http://www.bfi.org.uk/distribution/sites/bfi.org.uk.distribution/files/images/red_beard_02.jpg

In feudal Japan, a young doctor is unknowingly assigned to work at a medical clinic in a rural village under the tutelage of a notoriously strict senior doctor.

Red Beard is a bit of a tough sell because it manages to be of similarly epic length to Seven Samurai and Ran yet its fundamentally down-to-earth narrative deprives it of the action beats and arresting visuals that made those films so great. Even the scene in the header image I have provided, which showcases Toshiro Mifune's veteran physician singlehandedly taking down a group of dissenting citizens with his bare hands, is more or less the only remotely action-oriented scene in the whole film. Instead much of the film involves a novice doctor (Yuzo Kayama) being sent to Mifune's village under false pretences, which naturally leads to instant antagonism between the two. Eventually, Kayama adapts to life in the village and having to tend to the needs of some of its more afflicted patients and thus he learns to see Mifune as a mentor, and thus a series of vignettes occur over the course of the film's three-hour running time.

Considering how I liked Ikiru, another Kurosawa film where he also avoided his usual flair for action-oriented visuals in favour of telling a tale grounded very much in non-violent but dangerous reality, it makes sense that I wouldn't completely hate Red Beard. The performers are in fine form (and just as well, considering how this would turn out to be Mifune's final collaboration with Kurosawa) and their performances are captured with noticeably lengthy takes, though they are seriously hampered by haphazard development of the various plots. This means that Red Beard ultimately comes across as a largely fragmented film where the only consistent plot is the relationship that develops between Mifune and Kayama, which starts off hostile but gradually develops into hard-earned respect. Kurosawa exercises his usual balancing of restraint and passion when it comes to depicting the stories within the script, but it's not quite enough to truly sell what had the potential to be consistently compelling drama. It's good enough as far as straight period dramas go, but if I have to spend at least three hours on a Kurosawa film I've seen already, the odds of it being this one are rather slim.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#394 - Through a Glass Darkly
Ingmar Bergman, 1961

http://iv1.lisimg.com/image/2469819/600full-through-a-glass-darkly-screenshot.jpg

Four people - a father, his son, his daughter, and his son-in-law - are holidaying on the same island when various personal issues start cropping up and causing problems.

Trying to cram for the upcoming MoFo Top 100 of the Sixties list by frantically trying to watch as many Bergman films as possible probably isn't the best idea since these aren't the kind of films that can be easily consumed and processed. Through a Glass Darkly is an especially prominent example even by Bergman standards in that it centres on a handful of related characters trying to enjoy a holiday but who find their relationships with each other undermined by not just their undiscussed issues with one another but also the personal issues that eat away at themselves even after supposedly achieving catharsis through openly confessional monologues and soliloquies. The film is amply carried by its small ensemble (which features Bergman regulars Gunnar Björnstrand and Max von Sydow as the literary-minded patriarch and his son-in-law respectively). It is also considered part of Bergman's unofficially thematic trilogy about God's silence, which is probably due to how the mental issues affecting Björnstrand's daughter (Harriet Andersson) manifest themselves as hallucinations regarding God's potential existence on a plane understandable to human beings and naturally leads to uncomfortable discussions with the other three characters.

Stylistically, it's Bergman by numbers. Monochromatic cinematography, an almost complete absence of diegetic and non-diegetic music alike, verbose musings on difficult subjects that are delivered by one character in crisis to another character who either refuses to understand or is capable of understanding, the occasional piece of external action that serves as a very real metaphor for the characters' own conflicts (case in point - the storm that hits the island during the last third or so)...it's all here, and it's all accomplished reasonably well. I guess it's not an easy film to give an instantaneous rating to (especially when you utilise a rating system as idiosyncratic as my own is), but I definitely found it to be an interesting film that I would not be opposed to re-watching, but its greater themes and the characters' extremely vocal ruminations on said themes are alternately effective and alienating. In other words, it's like every other Bergman film I've seen, but that naturally doesn't distinguish it as the best, even though Bergman is not the easiest filmmaker to rank.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#395 - Kony 2012
Jason Russell, 2012

http://rack.0.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEzLzAzLzA1L2M3L2pvc2VwaGtvbnkuZTQ3YjIuanBnCnAJdGh1bWIJOTUweDUzNCMKZQlqcGc/e1f04ac6/3d8/joseph-kony.jpg

A film dedicated to raising awareness of Joseph Kony, an African warlord responsible for commandeering armies filled with child soldiers.

Even before checking MoFo's review database to see if they would permit a proper review of Kony 2012 (but I guess if they allowed my review of Kung Fury, then one half-hour YouTube video starting with the letter K is as good as another), I had never actually seen the notorious half-hour documentary that went extremely viral back in 2012 and convinced the world that this Kony should be stopped, preferably in 2012. Fast-forward through multiple ignored implorements to watch and share said video (in addition to director Russell's public breakdown soon after the release of this film that became notorious in its own right) and I am only now getting around to watching it even though, as far as my own cursory research indicates, Kony himself was never actually "stopped" per the goals and desires of the people behind this film (though the activity of both him and his army has been drastically undermined and restricted, so hooray for compromise).

From a film-critic perspective, Kony 2012 is an extremely difficult and irritating watch regardless of its good intentions. Russell may introduce a young Ugandan refugee as the face of victimhood in the face of Kony's regime, but he seems much more concerned with showcasing his own five-year-old son in order to manipulate audiences in a manner that condescends not only to a five-year-old but also to the audiences themselves. Graphic footage of those affected by Kony and his army is included, sure, but the way in which it's presented is enough to make one's intelligence feel insulted. The same goes for Russell's narration, which sounds sincere but the film itself and its focus on home-front activism (most notably the kind that involves the purchasing of material merchandise) makes one doubt its makers' sincerity. Regardless of Kony 2012's status as a piece of politically justified propaganda, it is still an extremely poor piece of filmmaking where even the fundamentally good intentions of its creators are almost completely obscured under all sorts of tactics that seem too concerned with grabbing the attention of the masses even for a film that is primarily dedicated to spreading awareness of a serious issue. Even trying to fill out an appropriately lengthy review of the film feels like a bit of a waste of time, and if that's how your work dedicated to making one care about global injustice makes one feel about an issue they hitherto had no knowledge of, then you've kind of failed at what you were doing.

0.5

[Iroquois]

#396 - Harakiri
Masaki Kobayashi, 1962

https://brusreviews.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/hara-kiri-1962.jpg

An old ronin arrives at the gates of a castle with the intention of committing "harakiri", the traditional Japanese act of ritual suicide, in the castle's courtyard.

If you were ever looking for a film that perfectly embodied the concept of dramatic irony, then it'd be hard to look much further than Harakiri, a film so fundamentally rooted in fatalism and honour (in both the positive and negative facets of the word) that it practically demands to be watched. Starring Tatsuya Nakadai (an actor who has appeared in quite a few of the last few Japanese films I've watched and has thus started to become an actor of note for me) as the main character, it juggles its framing story (arguably its A-plot) with various episodic recollections that initially seem disconnected but soon go on to form a disturbingly coherent plot that explains Nakadai's motivations for wishing to present himself before a respectable house and commit harakiri despite the polite yet restrictive requirements laid down by the house's ruling body.

If I had to pick out a flaw that threatens to unravel the otherwise masterful handling of Harakiri, it's that its fatalistic nature in regards to its themes means that the narrative is, for much of the film's runnning time, actually somewhat predictable despite its considerable number of twists. However, Harakiri is one of those rare cases of a story where being able to accurately predict how a given narrative plays out doesn't actually ruin one's enjoyment of a film but actually enhances it. The film's second act, which entails Nakadai's character relaying his own tale of tragedy to a rather indifferent group of individuals, is predictable mainly because it's not hard to fill in the dots that led to the developments depicted in the film's surprisingly graphic first act. As a result, the second act ends up being the weakest of the three as it exists mainly to fill in the gaps, though its tale of familial tragedy brought on by dramatic irony (I told you that's what defines this film) isn't any less heart-rending as a result. As a result, by the time the second act concludes one might very well wonder as I did where the story could possibly go from there.

Well, suffice to say that the third act definitely does not deserve to be described to those who have not seen the movie (and I try to write reviews for those who have not seen said movies). While Harakiri's second act may threaten to drag the film to a halt, it manages not to and instead sets up one of the most compelling third acts I've seen in quite some time. Nakadai may have been about thirty around the time of this film's production but he perfectly embodies a very worn-out and embittered protagonist whose awareness of his own narrative does little to deter him, and when the film does deliver on the promises of violence that its title and narrative makes, it is not titillating or awe-inspiring. It is merely the inception and conclusion of a narrative that has been very well mapped-out before it has been carried out, but that does not matter in the slightest. What matters is that people on both sides of the camera give their all to an emotionally draining story that may possibly bore some people but is compelling through its introspective moments and its intense action-oriented moments. It's a credit to this film that it doesn't play the absurdity of the situation for any kind of basic satirical points, but instead demands one's full commitment to understanding how such an absurd situation can be completely serious depending on your perspective. If you haven't already seen Harakiri, do consider it highly recommended.

4

[Cole416]

I agree, they definitely could have made the Kony 2012 video much better.

[Miss Vicky]

Wow. It happened again! I watched Harakiri for the 7th HOF. I went into it not expecting much, but found the story really intriguing and the choreography of the fight scenes (which used real swords) was very impressive. I believe I gave it the same rating as you. Excellent film. :up:

[Iroquois]

#397 - Elysium
Neill Blomkamp, 2013

https://amonymousblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/elysium_2013-2-1200x797_scroller.jpg

In a future where Earth is ruined and left to the poor while the elite class live on the eponymous space station, a terminally ill working-class man tries to reach the station in order to cure his condition.

I liked Neill Blomkamp's mainstream debut District 9 because of its ability to combine somewhat rudimentary socio-political satire (unsurprisingly aimed at apartheid thanks to its lower-class South African setting) with a fun plot about an alien ghetto filled with explosive superweapons and the hapless schmuck who finds himself stuck in a Kafkaesque situation due to alien interference. Letting his last couple of cinematic features slide in and out of theatres without me paying attention was probably not the greatest sign of faith in his talent, but I have only recently decided to rectify that with the free-to-air playing of his follow-up to District 9, District 9 2: Dist Harder - sorry, I mean Elysium.

While District 9 at least managed to distinguish its own take of class warfare with its use of crustacean-like aliens and a body-horror plot for its bureaucratic human protoganist, Elysium somehow manages to take some of the most distinctive aspects of that particular film (South African setting, technology-centric effects, class-divide theme) and either disregard them completely or run them so far into the ground they might as well bury out of the other side of the planet. In the year that gave us the exceedingly generic Oblivion and (technically) the masterful yet no less fundamentally nonsensical Snowpiercer, Elysium fails to distinguish itself in either a positive or negative manner (though you'd think that failure to be positive would automatically designate it as negative, but it fails to be even be that much of a failure). It's the sort of have-versus-have-nots that is characterised by a protagonist (Matt Damon) that is generic to the point of coming across as parody. Of course, the blandness of Damon and many of the other characters is counter-balanced by the two villains whose hammy performances may offer the film some personality but at the expense of general quality. As the film's corrupt executive villain, Jodie Foster delivers a bizarre performance with an inconsistent European accent (which might be justified by Elysium's multi-cultural population, but still sounds pretty ridiculous). District 9 lead Sharlto Copley plays her monstrous South African henchman, who is extremely one-note underneath his thickly but consistently accented performance.

While Elysium does promise an interesting dystopian narrative with its protagonist doing what he can to escape the ruined slums of Earth and reach the titular station (which includes having an implausible-looking exoskeleton grafted onto his body to supposedly give him super-strength or something) while helping his friends along the way, it spends perhaps too much time on Earth and thus feels far too much like a retread of District 9 for its own good, especially when it comes to its protagonist alternating between hiding and fighting. Not even the scenes that actually do take place on Elysium make much of a difference as they just run through trope after trope without having any impact. Even the plot holes aren't of sufficient enough interest in this slick yet soulless dystopia-by-numbers. You're much better off watching Snowpiercer, which does cover the same rich-versus-poor dynamic but with a lot more grit and personality. (Addendum: I like how there was one scene that featured "Loner" by Burial. Truly a song that deserves to survive into the 22nd century).

1.5

[Miss Vicky]

Just saw the Through A Glass Darkly review. Not sure how I missed it before.
I felt it was one of the strongest of the Bergmans I've seen, but I agree they're a little hard to rank, beyond Persona anyway, which I think is an obvious standout.

[Iroquois]

#398 - Taken
Pierre Morel, 2008

http://www.film.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/liamneeson_27.jpg

A former commando goes after a group of human traffickers after they kidnap his daughter.

Liam Neeson is a great actor and I am sort of glad that he's getting regular work thanks to his renaissance (or is that re-Neeson-ce? No, it's renaissance) as an action star, but it's a shame that the film that started the whole thing off, 2008's Taken, is actually the kind of action thriller that I generally don't have much patience for, and not even Neeson's gravelly Irish brogue (which still seeps through into what is presumably an American accent - hey, if Connery and Schwarzenegger don't bother to hide their accents, why should he?) and handsome mug are quite enough to sell what more or less amounts to Death Wish for a new generation.

For starters, the whole first act almost plays out like self-parody as it gives us Neeson as the overly cautious and paranoid ex-commando who resorts to bodyguard jobs while trying his best to maintain ties with his teenage daughter (Maggie Grace) even after his ex-wife (Famke Janssen) has remarried someone far wealthier. Neeson is portrayed as out-of-touch and well-meaning through his overprotective attitude that you obviously know is going to be vindicated by the end of the first act. Once Grace and her friend fall prey to a trap almost immediately after landing in Paris. Neeson jumps at the call to use as many connections and personal skills as possible in order to track her down and make the culprits pay for what they've done. What follows is a fairly rote series of events. Neeson tracks down a lead. Violence and chases ensue. There is the occasional (and I do mean occasional) quiet scene that's intended to be a breather, several of which involve his French contact (Olivier Rabourdin). Repeat until conclusion.

The problem with trying to make it somewhat realistic in terms of Neeson's fighting abilities is that things do get far too repetitive within the confines of an extremely rote and episodic plot. Things don't get much better when it shows that Neeson is willing to go to increasingly violent ends in order to find his daughter, whether it's straight up torturing someone to death for information or giving innocent people flesh wounds as a coercive measure. Not even attempts to balance things out such as having him rescue a drug-addicted sex slave manage to compensate for his more extreme actions, especially since he does so mainly as another way of gathering information. Even Death Wish at least tried to show how Charles Bronson's actions were still fundamentally unjustifiable no matter how much the film may have drifted into garish titillation (to say nothing of the sequels, of course). I'll grant that Taken shows a somewhat appropriate approach to its human-trafficking plot, though it just ends up being sidelined for the sake of giving Neeson an excuse for beat up a large number of villains. The fact that it managed to develop two sequels may imply that they examine the ramifications of Neeson's actions (though there's no telling if I'll watch those ones since they don't sound as good as this one anyway), but since that is all but skipped over completely in this film it's not even a decent examination of vengeful vigilantism underneath its rather generic action.

1.5

[honeykid]

From what I can tell with the Taken sequels, the second is the first with the wife instead of the daughter and the third they just don't bother with anyone being taken.

[cricket]

Red Beard and Through a Glass Darkly are both very good films, but neither is quite in the upper echelon for me from their directors.

I'm another Harakiri fan-great flick!

[Iroquois]

#399 - The Virgin Spring
Ingmar Bergman, 1960

https://ranylt.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/virgin-spring.png

In medieval Sweden, the only daughter of a well-off Christian family is sent to run an errand to a nearby church.

Wow, this is like a really boring and artsy version of The Last House on the Left. One out of five.

But seriously, the fact that my main point of reference for The Virgin Spring is Wes Craven's 1972 film, it's a credit to Bergman and his collaborators that The Virgin Spring ends up being not quite up to Bergman's usual standards due to its confrontational choice of subject matter but at least manages to avoid resorting to the same sort of gratuitously graphic tackiness that defined Craven's film. Fundamentally, though, both films follow the same plot, which I'm hesitant to discuss in detail because I'm not sure if this is the kind of movie that can afford to be spoiled (though I already knew what was going to happen before I started it, so I'm not totally sure). Actually, it deserves to be somewhat spoiled because of its potentially triggering nature, so I'll put that part under spoilers:

The crux of the film's plot rests on the fact that the family's daughter, while running an errand involving candles for a mass, encounters a trio of shepherds who proceed to rape and murder her.
Even by the standards of early-1960s European cinema, that is a somewhat difficult scene to watch unfold - fortunately, Bergman is at least able to depict such an act without resorting to cheap sensationalism (but then again when does he ever?) In any case, as with many a Bergman film it is awfully preoccupied with faith and religion (Christianity in particular), and the faith or lack thereof belonging to the members of the family (especially Max von Sydow as the family patriarch who has no faith compared to his much more devout wife, daughter, and servant), though the acknowledgment of the guilt it lays on human nature becomes challenged when human nature begins to rear its ugly head. Knowing what happens gives the film a serious sense of fatalism that does translate to a lot of the performances and to Bergman's trademark visual vibe. Its extremely straightforward narrative and disconcerting events does make me think of it as my least favourite Bergman film as of writing, but that doesn't automatically make it a bad one.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#400 - Mad Max: Fury Road
George Miller, 2015

http://thisisinfamous.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/mad-max-fury-road.jpg

In the aftermath of a nuclear war, the titular survivor is dragged into the middle of a situation involving an evil cult leader and a group of escaped sex slaves.

Original review found here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=40954).

4

[cricket]

I don't necessarily think The Virgin Spring is one of the best from Bergman, but it is one of my favorites. It just suits my taste very well. Not coincidentally, The Last House on the Left is a big favorite of mine.

[Miss Vicky]

You're on a roll lately, Iro.

My feelings on The Virgin Spring mirror your own (my least favorite Bergman, but still good), though I loved Mad Max: Fury Road a little more than you did.

[Iroquois]

Yeah, Fury Road may yet go up a notch. Time will tell.

[Iroquois]

#401 - The Terminator
James Cameron, 1984

https://onceuponatimeininfinitespace.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/image3.jpg

A cyborg travels back in time from a future where humans and artificially intelligent machines are locked in constant war in order to murder the woman whose unborn son will become the leader of the human resistance.

With Terminator Genisys coming out later this week, I made a plan to re-watch all four Terminator films in the lead-up to its release (even the last couple, but you'll hear about that when I get to those). Obviously, this means starting off with the low-budget B-movie that started it all, 1984's The Terminator. It has been a favourite of mine since 2003, cracked both my Top 100 lists, and has stood the test of time as well as almost any other major favourite of mine. A lot of that has to do with the fact that, despite the quality of its most immediate sequel, it at least maintains some degree of logical consistency that handles well on its own yet only gets tampered with further with each new sequel. That doesn't make this single film immune to nit-picking, especially considering how the sort-of-slasher vibe generated by the eponymous antagonist leaves it open to all sorts of contrivances in order to extend its running time and keep the heroes alive. The effects work may also alienate people with its uncanny animatronics and later tendencies to lapse into stop-motion, as well as the fact that the acting is little more than serviceable on the part of the human actors.

Even so, there's still plenty of things that I like about this film. The unapologetically dated 1980s production informs a present filled with neon, New Wave music, and feathered hairdos while the future is full of lasers and robots, providing a consistently great aesthetic. This also extends to the effects work, which might prove uncanny to modern audiences but the late great Stan Winston and his team show some serious skill nonetheless. Arnold Schwarzenegger's work as the Terminator is deservedly iconic, whether he's delivering his few lines in his accented monotone or robotically stalking his prey (no matter how many instances there are of his character dropping the ball for the sake of the narrative - when your target is trapped in an overturned truck within walking distance, why would you instead hijack another truck and try to ram them?). As I stated, the human characters are solid enough (especially considering how much of the focus is on the Terminator) and though they're not amazing enough performers in their own right, it's hard to imagine anyone else doing these characters justice. Linda Hamilton and Michael Biehn are believable as Sarah Connor and Kyle Reese respectively and sell their somewhat implausible relationship well enough, while Paul Winfield and Lance Henriksen make for good support as a pair of bickering detectives. They deliver exposition at a good pace and weave in some memorable dialogue in the process.

The original score is arguably the most dated part of a film that felt incredibly dated when I first saw it well over a decade ago, but its clanging percussion-driven score and sinister synths actually define the film in a positive manner. It's just part of The Terminator's charm that extends beyond virtually every possible technical and narrative weakness and has made me decide to give out what is now an extremely rare rating on my part - the full five out of five. Occasional spot of goofiness aside, it's still an effective slice of sci-fi that is slightly more intelligent than its killer robot high-concept might suggest and has the people to back it up. While there's really no telling whether or not a film can ever truly be considered an all-time favourite, after twelve years I'd say that this one comes pretty close.

5

[Iroquois]

#402 - Red Heat
Walter Hill, 1988

http://33.media.tumblr.com/e29814621fd047f52cc65fd3b7bec37d/tumblr_nd2fwyXs781twl1c9o1_500.gif
"...COCAINUM."

A Russian detective is forced to head to Chicago and team up with a local cop in order to track down the drug dealer who murdered his partner.

I know I shouldn't expect too much from any Schwarzenegger-starring film that doesn't also involve the name "James Cameron", but Red Heat at least had the director of The Warriors (one of my favourite cult action movies) and it has a rather promising premise that uses the Cold War climate to inform its mixture of buddy-cop action and fish-out-of-water comedy. My initial reference point was Rush Hour (which swapped a Soviet one for a Hong Kong one - nothing new under the sun, huh?). The opening sequence, which takes place in Russia and features Schwarzenegger's character infiltrating a unisex bath-house surrounded by snow and fighting a bunch of virtually naked guys while wearing what barely counts as a loincloth, does set quite the precedent for an action film that will be hard to forget. Unfortunately, things get bogged-down once Schwarzenegger is forced to head to America in pursuit of his perp, which results in him being teamed with Jim Belushi's wise-cracking blue-collar detective.

I can see how having a sarcastic foil to a straight-faced, business-minded Soviet agent would make for comedy gold (hey, it worked for Ninotchka, didn't it?), but as far as potential candidates for such a role go, Belushi is less than desirable. He basically comes across as a cut-rate Bill Murray with his deadpan snarking at Schwarzenegger's expense and, though he does generate the occasional laugh through his brash yet slovenly American character, it's clear that most of the humour is generated by Schwarzenegger's comically serious delivery in, well, just about every scene he's in (I mean, just look at that header image). He definitely carries Belushi for the most part and adds all the most worthwhile moments to an otherwise pedestrian cop movie. Notable actors like Laurence Fishburne or Peter Boyle do their best with the material they're given, but they're not given much. While Red Heat is intermittently awesome and not totally awful, it doesn't have nearly enough redeeming features to make it a quality film, but not even Belushi's comedic shortcomings are enough to totally sink it either. It's a shame, since Hill is capable of directing some decent action scenes here and there but ultimately has to risk it all on the chemistry of Schwarzenegger and Belushi. Fortunately, the risk doesn't turn out to be that great.

2.5

[honeykid]

I agree with you about Red Heat. It's a film I'd like to like a lot more than I do but just can't. For me it's not Belushi, though. I didn't care for the talented one in the family, let alone the name-tagged brother, but he doesn't really bother me in this. I think it probably is to do with the chemistry between Arnie and James, but the film doesn't seem confident about what it is. Sometimes too dark, others too light.

[Iroquois]

I agree with you about Red Heat. It's a film I'd like to like a lot more than I do but just can't. For me it's not Belushi, though. I didn't care for the talented one in the family, let alone the name-tagged brother, but he doesn't really bother me in this. I think it probably is to do with the chemistry between Arnie and James, but the film doesn't seem confident about what it is. Sometimes too dark, others too light.

Belushi doesn't bother me either - at least his buddy-cop relationship with Schwarzenegger is reasonably tolerable compared to, say, the one from Bad Boys II in that it's just sporadically funny rather than painfully unfunny. You're definitely right about the tonal inconsistency - that's a major flaw, alright.

[Iroquois]

#403 - Terminator 2: Judgment Day
James Cameron, 1991

http://fusionfightgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/t2.jpg

A cyborg is sent back in time from a future where humans and artificially intelligent machines are locked in constant war in order to murder the leader of the human resistance while he is still a young boy.

The Terminator run-the-series continues with Terminator 2, which is often considered the best film in the series and one of the best blockbusters ever made. It's not without reason as its ability to balance ground-breaking special effects and exciting action with a competently written science-fiction storyline that more than justifies a sequel's existence (though, like any Terminator continuation, its existence threatens to compromise the logic of the universe established by the original film, but whatever). The radically increased scale takes the franchise from its humble yet ambitious B-movie origins into the stratosphere and becomes one of the definitive blockbusters to the point where many lesser imitators (and even its successors within the franchise) do their best to duplicate its rather deft combination of plot and spectacle. Of course, even now after having been wowed by it at first (hey, I was thirteen, what did you expect?), I never quite considered it to be superior to its predecessor, flawed that it may be.

If Terminator 2 can be said to have inspired a whole generation of blockbusters, then it's not hard to see the flaws that would definitely get magnified by many other films that failed to capture the same magic. For starters, it's a bit on the long side no matter what edition you watch (I think the bulk of my viewings have involved the special edition, which adds roughly fifteen minutes of scenes). At least even in the extended version the extra scenes add to the film more so than they detract, but even so the execution of the exposition tends to be bloated and less engaging than its predecessor (especially when a lot of it involves Edward Furlong as the young version of John Connor, who was decent enough on initial viewings but now a lot of the scenes that involve him in a greater capacity do tend to drag, with the occasional exception involving his humourous attempts to bond with Arnold Schwarzenegger's emotionless killing machine). The characterisation is solid enough now that there are two cyborgs on the scene - Schwarzenegger's reputation for becoming a charismatic fountain of one-liners isn't remotely tempered by his character's mechanical stoicism, while Robert Patrick as the antagonistic T-1000 also comes as a surprise not just because of his shape-shifting qualities but also because of his far more human mannerisms that serve to distinguish him further. Linda Hamilton returns as Sarah Connor, whose determination to prepare both herself and John for Judgment Day has made her into a fearsome warrior at the cost of at least some of her sanity (she does spend the first act of the film in a mental institution, after all), while character actor Joe Morton plays Miles Dyson, the tech genius whose groundbreaking work is what leads to the creation of the system of robot overlords known as Skynet. He gets in a solid sub-plot as a well-intentioned scientist who is forced to confront the reality of what he's created.

Action-wise, the film is rightly considered a classic, though it's not hard to pinpoint several instances of short-sightedness or incompetence on the part of hero and villain alike that extend and complicate the plot (for a ruthless killing machine who provides the bulk of the film's body count, the T-1000 sure as hell can't hit his primary target). Gunfights, fistfights, chases involving running and several different types of motorised vehicle, explosions, a relative lack of human casualties, and one awfully contrived yet visually stunning finale abound. The effort put into the CGI still shows up many films that followed in its wake, while Stan Winston once again provides magnificient-looking practical effects to temper the computerised work. While it generally has a reputation for being a superior film to The Terminator, I find that its slightly excessive running time and less-than-stellar use of its quieter scenes are points that work against it just a little too much for its own good. It'd be interesting to see if it could get whittled down to about 100 minutes or so, though I definitely think there's enough here that cutting it down that much would definitely be a mistake.

4.5

[honeykid]

Like most normal people, I prefer the first one to the sequel, too. As you say, it's too long and I've always thought so. It's a good film, though.

[Iroquois]

#404 - Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
Jonathan Mostow, 2003

http://images.amcnetworks.com/ifc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Terminator3_MF.jpg

A cyborg is sent back in time from a future where humans and artificially intelligent machines are locked in constant war in order to murder the leader of the human resistance, who is currently a homeless drifter.

I first saw the previous Terminator films in the lead-up to the cinematic release of Terminator 3, and as you can clearly see earlier in this thread I had enjoyed them enough to seriously look forward to this one. Even so, I was still cautious that the absence of creative driving force James Cameron and the passage of twelve whole years since the previous installment would naturally lead to a lesser variation on the same "time-traveling robotic assassins" formula that had brought the older films success and acclaim. In a rather unsurprisingly turn of events, Terminator 3 ultimately ends up being a far cry from its predecessors no matter how much it tries to increase the carnage and bring a sense of closure to the film series in the process. As the sub-title would suggest, the film chronicles the events that lead up to Judgment Day (which had not been stopped but merely postponed by the events of the previous film). The focus is on John Connor (Nick Stahl) once again being targeted by a Terminator; this time, it's a highly advanced model (Kristanna Loken) that is armed with built-in weapons and hacking abilities, which make it a threat not only to humans but also to other machines and Terminators - then guess who else shows up...

Put bluntly, Terminator 3 is a misfire. It has a decent enough concept (if a little fatalistic) amidst the usual killer-robot shenanigans of the franchise that doesn't drag things out like its predecessor did, plus it does raise the scale of the action thanks to its significantly larger budget. Of course, being able to create greater amounts of destruction and introduce more ambitious effects work isn't necessarily the best substitute for a good story, and I have very mixed feelings about how the creators develop Connor's arc. It starts off promisingly with Connor drifting aimlessly through life with no sense of purpose now that Judgment Day is supposedly cancelled; looking back now, it's not hard to think of this as Stahl doing one long audition reel for his role as an equally reluctant prophesied hero in HBO's Carnivàle. Though the film is ultimately supposed to showcase his maturation from listless loner to committed soldier, Stahl isn't the actor to pull off such a transformation convincingly. Weaved in with Connor's arc is his chance encounter with a veterinarian (Claire Danes) who also has her own part to play in not just this adventure but the film's future; while she fills the role of audience surrogate well enough, the film's attempts to forge a romantic sub-plot between her and Stahl in addition to developing her into a capable fighter don't come off well at all. As for the robot leads, this version of the Terminator may still be played by Schwarzenegger but he lacks a lot of his usual charm due to the film's extremely compressed timeframe not allowing for much development even by the character's fundamentally limited standards. Instead, the decision to play up his comically serious delivery ends up being overdone to the point of considerable irritation, most notably through him learning how to tell people to "talk to the hand". There's not much to remark upon about Loken's turn as the T-X beyond the physicality involved with the role, as she doesn't even have the same small level of personality that Robert Patrick's T-1000 did.

As for the film proper, well, at best it's derivative of Terminator 2 with its many call-backs and references (which are of extremely debatable quality and are more likely to invoke exasperation than fondness), and at worst it's a sloppily written piece of work that's chock-full of coincidences, contrivances, and conveniences in order to keep the film length. Despite the brief running time (it is the second-shortest film in the franchise by about two minutes), it still manages to feel bloated with sub-par characterisation and action scenes that are full of chaos and explosions but don't leave memorable enough impressions in the same way that, say, a police station shoot-out or a three-vehicle chase through an empty canal would. The action isn't totally awful, though - the extremely ambitious car chase that closes the film's first act might just be the high point of the film, even if it is a little on the long side - but they are far too frequently provoked by frustrating circumstances and ignorance of previously established facts that you can't believe said scenes are happening even as they happen. The CGI that was once used so sparingly but effectively in the previous film is far more pronounced here with barely a shred of the same impact. Even though there is the odd good moment here and there (the ending might be a bit divisive for people, but I personally thought it was another highlight), Terminator 3 is most definitely the weakest film in the "main" series. Not only does it fall prey to the same flaws that appeared in prior films (the key one being how the over-powered villains conveniently don't use their full power to kill the heroes at the most opportune moments, but instead end up doing unnecessary convoluted or pointless moves), but its attempts to pay homage to its predecessors frequently come across as patronising and disappointing while its attempts to break new ground fall apart under the weight of over-reaching visual spectacle.

2

[Yoda]

Gotta disagree. Not with the specific appraisals (there are lots of goofy moments), but with the weight placed on them relatively to the things it does well. The fact that it manages to simultaneously subvert and compliment the previous film(s) is terribly impressive, and for me, that covers a multitude of (relatively) small signs about a cramped running time or throwaway explanations (the goofiest being "My father's plane, I trained on it!" just as they're running towards a plane and need to explain why she can fly it).

Good action set pieces, too. The film's mandatory Chase Scene In A Vehicle Not Suited To It is really well executed, as expected.

But yeah, overall I'm just impressed that it managed to twist the mythology in a way that actually fed a new understanding into all that had come before. That's really cool, and for that achievement I can forgive the rest.

[Miss Vicky]

I've not seen either of the original two Terminator movies in a long time, but I recall liking T2 better than the first one.

[Iroquois]

Gotta disagree. Not with the specific appraisals (there are lots of goofy moments), but with the weight placed on them relatively to the things it does well. The fact that it manages to simultaneously subvert and compliment the previous film(s) is terribly impressive, and for me, that covers a multitude of (relatively) small signs about a cramped running time or throwaway explanations (the goofiest being "My father's plane, I trained on it!" just as they're running towards a plane and need to explain why she can fly it).

Good action set pieces, too. The film's mandatory Chase Scene In A Vehicle Not Suited To It is really well executed, as expected.

But yeah, overall I'm just impressed that it managed to twist the mythology in a way that actually fed a new understanding into all that had come before. That's really cool, and for that achievement I can forgive the rest.

Sure, it subverts and compliments the previous films, but my question is "does it do either of those things well"? If this extends to the fact that the heroes aren't able to stop Judgment Day after all and instead accept their fates instead of trying to fight them, then yeah, it makes for a poignant enough ending (and a good conclusion to John's character arc), but it's still buried under some bad writing that doesn't go all that well when it comes to developing John or Kate or their interactions together, thus mitigating any payoff's potential impact. Are all the narrative conveniences supposed to be a deliberate statement about inevitability as well? Also, is it really that good that the T-101 went from "loyal dad" to "mean step-dad" between films? It seems like an unfortunate compromise between the attitudes of the first two T-101.

[Yoda]

Well, yeah, I think the inevitability does inform the plot. And the fact that they were fighting something inevitable actually makes the previous films more interesting to rewatch with that in mind.

It's just a question of emphasis, I suppose. I can't think of many (any?) sequels made by different people that manage to pull off that kind of narrative jujitsu, so the bulk of my grade comes from that single, impressive fact. If you prefer execution over narrative high-wire acts or general plot coherence, then naturally you'd find it a lot less enjoyable. But for me, the actual plot line was always the biggest thing (which is the case with most sci-fi films, and certainly with most films involving time travel), so nailing that outweighs everything else.

It probably also helps that, on net, I found the execution more mediocre than actually bad.

[Iroquois]

How does it make the other films more interesting in retrospect? There's never really any indication given that they've actually stopped Judgment Day in either of those films (which is obvious in the first one, but the second one ends up on an ambiguously hopeful note, which a lot of people seem to have interpreted as a "happy" ending). Besides, there's the whole "stable time loop" thing that would break without the existence of Skynet and John Connor. This series doesn't exactly seem to play by Back to the Future rules here.

As for "narrative jujitsu", the only other film I can think of off the top of my head that pulls a similar stunt is Alien 3, which I'll concede is somewhat underrated but it's debatable as to how well that pulls off its left-field twist to a serialised narrative. While I can sort of appreciate what they were going for, just the fact that it exists in the first place doesn't guarantee that it was the best possible idea for a continuation of the storyline. I sort of get that feeling with T3.

Besides, my "mediocre" is most people's "bad". That's what 2s and 2.5s are for.

[Cole416]

Good read on T2. I haven't seen that in years, maybe it's time to go back to it.

[Yoda]

How does it make the other films more interesting in retrospect? There's never really any indication given that they've actually stopped Judgment Day in either of those films (which is obvious in the first one, but the second one ends up on an ambiguously hopeful note, which a lot of people seem to have interpreted as a "happy" ending)
You sort of answered your own question: the second film clearly implies that they've changed history (describing the future as "unknown"). Which means, after watching the third film, all their struggles in the second are futile.

In fact, it creates a symmetry that brings the whole series full circle:

The Terminator: the person sent back to save his mother becomes his father. Fate appears inevitable.

Terminator 2: they fight back against the seeming inevitability of their destinies, and appear to succeed. "No fate but what we make."

Terminator 3: fate course-corrects and they finally realize it's inescapable. Fittingly, this is preceded by Sarah's (she of the carving quoted above) death. She dies thinking she succeeded.

Besides, there's the whole "stable time loop" thing that would break without the existence of Skynet and John Connor. This series doesn't exactly seem to play by Back to the Future rules here.
Ah, but that's part of the point: we don't know what rules it plays by, and when taken together, the films oscillate between different conceptions of time travel, before finally settling on one. There's not just drama about whether or not they'll succeed in a specific action, but also drama about what kind of story they're in, and whether or not their actions matter at all.

And this is true both for the audience and the characters. The characters have some reason to believe fate is inevitable, but heck, the machines are bothering to try, so clearly they don't think history is unchangeable.

As for "narrative jujitsu", the only other film I can think of off the top of my head that pulls a similar stunt is Alien 3, which I'll concede is somewhat underrated but it's debatable as to how well that pulls off its left-field twist to a serialised narrative. While I can sort of appreciate what they were going for, just the fact that it exists in the first place doesn't guarantee that it was the best possible idea for a continuation of the storyline. I sort of get that feeling with T3.
I wonder if it's not a coincidence that both films are sequels made by different people than the original, both dark/violent sci-fi, both follow-ups to James Cameron works, and both generally tepidly received.

Besides, my "mediocre" is most people's "bad". That's what 2s and 2.5s are for.
Fair enough.

[Used Future]

fate course-corrects and they finally realize it's inescapable...

To me, this is self-evidently cool...

Does that mean you think the Final Destination movies are cool?;)

[Yoda]

They were at first. :laugh:

[honeykid]

Final Destination was great.

[Iroquois]

#405 - Showdown in Little Tokyo
Mark L. Lester, 1991

http://hboasiaweb.s3.amazonaws.com/showdown-in-little-tokyo-1015598-t.jpg

A pair of Los Angeles detectives are paired together in order to wipe out a drug operation being carried out by the Yakuza.

As far as campy action movies go, Showdown in Little Tokyo actually does alright at doing what it sets out to do. It actually establishes a decent buddy-cop dynamic (which is pretty difficult, as several other films reviewed in this thread sadly demonstrate) with its very mismatched pair of cops who nonetheless develop a decent dynamic. Dolph Lundgren stars as a white Tokyo-raised detective who is well-versed in Japanese culture and has a vendetta against the Yakuza after one clan member murdered his parents in front of him while he was a boy. Brandon Lee makes for his counterpart, a biracial American who is nowhere near in touch with his Japanese heritage, making him an amusing counterpart to Lundgren's for reasons beyond him being a wise-cracking foil to Lundgren's serious-minded warrior. Thrown into the mix is Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa as the main villain who relies on his raw charisma to make an otherwise one-note character work, while Tia Carrere pops up as a nightclub singer who gets drawn into Little Tokyo's seedy underbelly.

A good reason why Showdown in Little Tokyo works so well (within reason, that is) is that it knows its limitations and plays to them. The film is 79 minutes long - to give that some perspective, Bad Boys II is 147 minutes long (that's nearly twice as long) despite having the exact same plot about two mismatched detectives taking on a drug operation. It's almost refreshing just how lean the plot is, even when it results in the occasional spot of underdevelopment such as the romantic sub-plot that occurs between Lundgren and Carrere. In any case, Lundgren and Lee have good chemistry together and they are both competent action heroes that provide plenty of good fight scenes. Being directed by the same person responsible for Commando means that, despite its early-'90s release date, it is still heavily rooted in the '80s with its guitar-and-synth score and straightforward action plotting. There's lots of martial arts and swordfighting plus the occasional gunfight and it's all captured with sufficient competence. I'm giving this a relatively favourable rating because it got more than a few chuckles out of me and doesn't waste time getting bogged down in unnecessary sentiment or poor attempts at humour (like a certain other film...) I don't think I can honestly give it too high a rating - I wasn't sure whether I wanted to give it two-and-a-half popcorn boxes or three, but I think I'll go with reasonable doubt over the benefit of the doubt and give it the lower rating. Still worth a shot if you're into silly fun movies that manage to be funny in both deliberate and unintentional ways.

2.5

[honeykid]

Showdown in Little Tokyo is a fun film. I don't think I've seen it since the early 90's though.

[Iroquois]

#406 - The Long Kiss Goodnight
Renny Harlin, 1996

https://snarkysmachine.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/long-kiss-goodnight2.jpg

When an amnesiac woman living a quiet suburban lifestyle starts to remember her former life as a spy, it plunges her and a two-bit detective into the middle of a government conspiracy.

Four million dollars. That's how much Shane Black managed to earn off the screenplay for The Long Kiss Goodnight, an action-comedy that's not all that much of a comedy despite its many one-liners and off-beat visual gags. Though Black has earned something of a reputation as a screenwriting auteur in a manner akin to that surrounding someone like William Goldman, I have ultimately never been all that impressed with any of the films he's had a hand in writing, though I do acknowledge that there is some spark I'm probably missing. Even so, The Long Kiss Goodnight is a film that's only sporadically likeable with its familiar high-concept being given a somewhat comedic treatment as Geena Davis's chipper schoolteacher/wife/mother sustains a head injury that prompts her to slowly remember her past self, who just so happens to be a callous government agent that is proficient in all sorts of dangerous skills. This happens around the same time that she is attacked by a murderous convict and soon has to team up with a low-rent investigator (Samuel L. Jackson) in order to find out the truth behind what happened to her, which naturally involves going up against a serious government conspiracy.

Davis and Jackson have some decent odd-couple chemistry that changes up as Davis gradually makes the change from hapless innocent to cold anti-hero while Jackson gives a decent enough performance as a character that's at once a complete loser yet is still sort of cool as a result of being played by Jackson. Other characters tend towards the forgettable, even when played by memorable character actors like Brian Cox or David Morse. Though there is the occasional clever one-liner or exchange (often between the two constantly-bickering leads), too much of the script sounds like it's trying too hard to be clever (especially when you have one character watching The Long Goodbye on TV in one scene as if to draw attention to how much this movie wants to be a clever mystery film in its own right), while the conspiracy plot only occasionally throws up a surprise in its development. The action also leaves something to be desired, though the finale is handled reasonably well. Unfortunately, a few smart moments here and there plus a couple of good leads are not enough to make this otherwise pedestrian '90s action thriller stand out.

2

[Miss Vicky]

I've not seen it in quite some time, but I remember The Long Kiss Goodnight being worthy of more than two popcorn boxes.

[Tugg]

Geena Davis just has unique charisma and that's the main reason I like this movie. Her being tough despite most hopeless situations always puts a smile on my face.

[honeykid]

I've seen this a few times but, much like Showdown In Little Tokyo, I've not seen it in forever. From what I remember, I'd probably give it an extra half. Maybe a full box if it turns out I enjoy it more than I thought I did.

[cricket]

Was very happy to read your feelings on The Terminator.:cool:

[Mr.Sparkle]

Maybe I missed something.

You say you're doing one movie a day, yet you're at movie # 406??

[Miss Vicky]

I think the idea is that he must watch and review at least one movie a day.

[Iroquois]

Pretty much, yeah.

[Iroquois]

#407 - Terminator Salvation
McG, 2009

https://latimesherocomplex.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/terminator_salvation.jpg

During a post-apocalyptic conflict between humans and sentient machines, an up-and-coming member of the human resistance crosses paths with a mysterious human.

With the apocalyptic conclusion of Terminator 3, the franchise had finally managed to break free of the formula that had worked wonders two times out of three and was now ready to advance the story into the war-torn wasteland that had been hitherto seen in brief glimpses throughout the previous three films. This film, which takes place roughly a decade before the human victory that would prompt the events of the first film to take place, has a certain freedom to the development of its narrative that does suggest there's some serious potential for a good story. However, it's clear from the instance that its title is featured in the opening credits twice that Terminator Salvation is going to have its work cut out for it as it tries to take a classic action franchise into unexplored territory. This installment once again focuses on John Connor (now played by Christian Bale), who still hasn't managed to reach his destiny of being humanity's last best hope for survival and is instead merely a high-ranking member of the human army's chain of command that does butt heads with his immediate superiors, especially when he learns that a young soldier named Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin) is being targeted by Skynet. Meanwhile, a death row convict (Sam Worthington) who was executed before Judgment Day stumbles out of the ruins of a research facility into the harsh, machine-dominated wasteland and must team up with other humans he encounters along the way in order to survive.

Without a well-established plot to build off, Salvation definitely flounders when it comes to developing its own original plot. In trying to stay true to the series' mythology, it ends up constructing a plot that starts off being somewhat insensible (why does Skynet think it needs to target Reese, who at this point is merely a young scavenger who's barely a part of the resistance?) and finally heads into full-on nonsensical territory with its dramatic reveal late in the film. In the meantime, it pads things out in both plots - John Connor doesn't have much of an arc beyond being the ignored voice of reason who is torn between loyalty to his bosses and doing what he feels is right, while Worthington's character has an extremely bland redemption arc that is in no way improved by the apparently dramatic reveal of his true nature (which would constitute a spoiler if not for the fact that it was not only in the trailer but is also predictable right from the very first scene of the movie). The flatness of the characters is reflected in their actors' performances; Bale may have earned infamy for a passionately furious on-set meltdown during production, but that same energy barely translates to his take on John Connor as a comically gruff stereotype of a soldier. Worthington, meanwhile, shows off a limited range that doesn't feel justified even by later revelations, but at least Yelchin seems credible enough as a scared young kid. Other characters feel inconsequential and so do the performances (and it's also weird to see Helena Bonham Carter appear in a very brief role as a terminally ill doctor).

Even leaving aside the drastic shortcomings of the narrative, the visual side of things leaves a lot to be desired. I concede that there's only so many ways you can depict a post-nuclear landscape, but even this one seems an especially dull and washed-out shade of brown (which is in stark contrast to the vibrancy of the past few films). The action features CGI to a significant and physically implausible extent, whether it's the inclusion of Transformers-like giant robots or the existence of motorcycle-like robots. It gets to the point that when a familiar-looking face appears late in the film, the deliberately uncanny fakeness is practically welcome. Terminator 3 had already ably demonstrating that upping the scale of the action and effects wasn't an automatic guarantee of quality, but here it's applied in such a way that beggars belief in all the wrong ways. That's without acknowledging the film's extremely tacked-on use of diegetic music with the inclusion of Alice in Chains' "Rooster" and Guns n' Roses "You Could Be Mine", the latter of which also doubles as a bemusing call-back to Terminator 2 even when it also makes sense in the context of the narrative, while there's nothing memorable about Danny Elfman's score.

While one might be inclined to doubt Terminator Genisys being any good on the basis of its admittedly ludicrous "reset the future" premise (which I already discussed in the relevant review), it's at least somewhat preferable to the series sacrificing virtually all its personality for the sake of a largely generic post-apocalyptic blockbuster (and saving all its personality for eye-rolling call-backs to its pre-war predecessors). Its main plot is riddled with some serious gaps in logic even if you haven't seen any of the previous installments, and the acting isn't good enough to sell the characters even when they are played by otherwise-renowned thespians. What started off as a franchise that distinguished itself through astounding effects work and captivating action has now become indistinguishable from any other big-budget sci-fi blockbuster that prioritises spectacle over substance. The fact that this was originally intended to be the first film in a trilogy is both amusing and sad - despite what the film tried to convey through Worthington's character's arc, apparently not everyone (or every film) deserves a second chance.

1

[Iroquois]

#408 - Terminator Genisys
Alan Taylor, 2015

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/2352954/thumbs/o-TERMINATOR-GENISYS-facebook.jpg

With the conclusion of the post-apocalyptic war between man and machine, a soldier in the human resistance is sent back through time to protect the resistance leader's mother but finds that things in the past are not quite what he expected.

Original review found here (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=41952).

2.5

[Iroquois]

#409 - The Picture of Dorian Gray
Albert Lewin, 1945

http://www.welovemoviesmorethanyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ru8F6S8zAHmb0l9KLLyV5LTbUNm.jpg

In Victorian England, a young man uses magic to transfer any ageing or physical debilitation he encounters onto a portrait featuring his likeness.

The Picture of Dorian Gray is an interesting enough adaptation of the Oscar Wilde novel of the same name, though I do have to wonder whether or not I'd be better served by having read the novel instead. It's an okay enough film thanks to some interesting enough possibilities that cinema affords it source material. The largely black-and-white film has a couple of shots rendered in full-blooded Technicolor in order to effectively capture the titular portrait both when it is first revealed and then towards the end when the effects of his lengthy and decadent life take their toll on the portrait. The first instance is striking because of the sudden shift in film stock and capturing the image in all its photogenic glory; the latter is a genuinely unsettling image that I have a little trouble believing came out in 1945. Between those two pictures, the story unfolds as the titular protagonist (Hurd Hatfield) soon develops an obsession with the idea of eternal youth thanks in no small part to the wry musings of acquaintance Lord Henry Wotton (George Sanders, once again playing a smarmy-voiced high-culture type) about the subject. To this end, he discovers the magic that leads to him being able to attain eternal youth while also weathering the effects of a hedonistic lifestyle.

While having Wilde for a source author guarantees that there are some clever one-liners weaved in and out of both the narration and dialogue as well as no small degree of homosexual subtext, The Picture of Dorian Gray ends up being a somewhat pedestrian example of a novel being put through the Hollywood system. There are decent actors in the mix - Sanders being the obvious one, though Angela Lansbury and Donna Reed turn in alright performances - but it's a shame that Hatfield makes for a relatively dull take on the protagonist who seems like he got the role based on his incredibly youthful and attractive appearance. Otherwise, it's a serviceable but not amazing rendition of its source.

2.5

[Iroquois]

#410 - Premium Rush
David Koepp, 2012

http://gas2.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/premium-rush-movie-wants-to-kill.jpg

A New York City bike messenger is assigned to deliver a package that draws unwelcome attention from an extremely corrupt police detective.

On its surface, Premium Rush seems like it'll be an engaging enough high-concept mix of lightweight comedy and thrills as it takes a fairly standard MacGuffin plot and builds it into the world of bike messengers, who do exactly what the name implies. Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays one such messenger who is ready to narrate his carefree philosophy about how much he enjoys his job in between snarking at every character he comes across regardless of how much he actually likes them. His skill at bike-riding also extends to him developing a preternatural ability to predict different routes through rush-hour traffic and whether or not they would result in him crashing. The plot picks up when he has to deliver a seemingly innocuous package, but he soon becomes a target for an unruly detective (Michael Shannon) who becomes obsessed with getting his hands on the package that Gordon-Levitt is carrying. Thus begins a cat-and-mouse game that frequently jumps back and forth in time to showcase the perspectives of various players such as Shannon and the package's sender (Jamie Chung), thus explaining what's in the package and why everyone needs it sent one way or the other.

Despite the supposedly high-speed premise that involves chases up and down the busy streets of New York, Premium Rush ends up being not so much dull as slightly irritating. Gordon-Levitt's cockiness far outweighs his charm and makes for an annoying protagonist while nearly everyone else involved delivers equally flat or unlikeable performances. Shannon is the one who stands out in any favourable way, even if he is just channeling his usual brand of Walken-like weirdness. It struggles to fill out its already brief running time in any meaningful way, relying on extended flashbacks and unnecessarily convoluted circumstances to pad things out. Even the promise of fast bike chases and stunts isn't enough to keep this entertaining. The film also seems unsure of how seriously it wants to take itself as well, with its jokes not being funny while the serious nature of the climax is downplayed considerably. The entire "flash mob" sequence alone is enough to break what little suspension of disbelief you might have left. Premium Rush definitely ends up being the kind of movie that has been done far better before, and the introduction of bicycles does nothing to make it a sufficiently interesting film in its own right.

1.5

[Iroquois]

#411 - Kung Fury
David Sandberg, 2015

https://dr56wvhu2c8zo.cloudfront.net/kungfury/assets/2173642e-fecd-4226-ad2c-abe9bd4c99d4/kung-fury-time-travel.jpg

An '80s-style action parody concerning the titular police officer as he decides to go back in time to fight Adolf Hitler.

Original review found here (http://www.movieforums.com/reviews/1323875-kung-fury.html).

0.5

[Iroquois]

#412 - Duck, You Sucker!
Sergio Leone, 1971

http://cinapse.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Duck-You-Sucker-Coburn-Steiger1.jpg

During the Mexican Revolution, the leader of a gang of Mexican bandits forcibly recruits an Irish demolitions expert to help him carry out a bank robbery.

Out of all of Sergio Leone's six main films, this is definitely the one that gets the least appreciation, though that isn't to say it gets none whatsoever. At first, it's a little hard to see why - it's certainly got plenty of action thanks to the frequently-explosive nature of its premise involving Rod Steiger's trigger-happy bandit and James Coburn's mischievious terrorist, plus its position in Leone's loosely thematic trilogy about American history suggests it's got a depth on par with Once Upon a Time in the West and Once Upon a Time in America. In that company, it's not hard to see how it might be overlooked - even in the relatively simplistic context of the Dollars trilogy, one can see how it's perhaps a little too complicated or even derivative compared to those films.

It's not hard to think of the belligerence that Steiger and Coburn share with one another during their journey together is like any of the uneasy alliances that form between characters in any of Leone's previous films, most obviously that which formed between Eli Wallach and Clint Eastwood in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly because of how much Steiger and Coburn resemble those particular characters. At least they are good enough actors to compensate for the repetition; I can almost buy Steiger playing a Mexican, while Coburn's charm manages to survive his mangled Irish accent (between this and his playing an Australian in The Great Escape, who told this guy he could do foreign accents?). That being said, it's more than a little difficult to sympathise with Steiger's character and his many plights throughout the film when one of the first things he does to establish himself as a fiendish fellow is to not only rob a stagecoach full of wealthy white racists, but also to rape the sole woman amongst them. At least Coburn's character's back-story, which is slowly revealed through flashbacks, makes him a much more likeable and tragic figure.

The film's setting in Revolution-era Mexico (with the occasional reference to Pancho Villa and Emiliano Zapata plus the inclusion of modern aspects like machine-guns and the German military) does make for good action sequences, as does Coburn's frequent use of dynamite in combination with an utterance of the film's title. The odd-couple chemistry between him and Steiger and the occasional comic moment counterbalance the instances where Leone attempts to deconstruct the concept of revolution by showing us that, while the regime is definitely a reprehensible one that will imprison people in bank vaults and carry out mass executions, the fact that Steiger's amoral-at-best outlaw constantly lucks into being hailed as a revolutionary hero shows just how hollow the heroism behind it can be. Meanwhile, Coburn's background as an IRA member in exile from his homeland demonstrates the toll it can take on a person no matter how much of a success or failure the revolution ends up being. Though I was stuck with a pan-and-scan version of the film (easily the worst possibly way to watch Leone), I could still pick out some well-made visuals. Meanwhile, Morricone provides what's easily his worst collaboration with Leone - even now, the only piece that sticks with me is the lilting leitmotif that plays during Coburn's flashbacks, which is accompanied by an irritating high-pitched voice singing "John, John" over and over again. It's easy to say that Duck, You Sucker! is my least favourite Leone film after only a single viewing, especially since it doesn't quite manage to justify its 150-minute running time no matter how many gunfights and explosions it sets off. Time will tell if it grows on me, though, and being the worst Leone film still puts it far ahead of many other directors' worst films.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#413 - Wild Wild West
Barry Sonnenfeld, 1999

http://www.hotflick.net/flicks/1999_Wild_Wild_West/big/fhd999WDT_Will_Smith_011.jpg

In 1869, a pair of U.S. marshals are forced to team up with one another in order to bring a ruthless Confederate scientist to justice.

I remember being all of nine years old and seeing Wild Wild West when it came out in theatres. At the time, I thought it was amazing, with its combination of eye-catching "cattle-punk" (read: the combination of steampunk and Western) aesthetics, ludicrously over-the-top nature, and of course the constantly bantering cavalcade of cracked-up characters that populated the film. Those were the days. Unfortunately, revisiting Wild Wild West in 2015 because it just happened to be on TV only contributes to the sad and ever-growing realisation that nostalgia as we know it is a fake idea and should not fool us as much as it does. It's a shame, because even now there seems to be hints of a good movie inside as this movie attempts to replicate the success of Men in Black by swapping that film's sci-fi genre for the Western. It once again teams Will Smith's charismatic back-talking persona with a polar-opposite white character (Kevin Kline as a snooty colleague with a love of gadgets and disguises) and puts them both up against an unambiguously villainous scenery-chewer (Kenneth Branagh as a legless megalomaniac). There are differences, sure, but it's still fundamentally the same film.

Unfortunately, the most glaring difference is that Men in Black actually held up as a decent (if not exactly amazing) genre comedy when I re-watched it at some point in the last year or two. Despite the promise of a Western adventure full of wacky antics and clever one-liners, it barely delivers. The humour is off-colour in not quite all the wrong ways, but enough of them. Smith and Branagh's constant exchanges that consist of little else than jokes about one another's race and disability respectively, the many jokes that play the concept of men disguised as women for laughs to the point where even people who'll find that funny will get tired of the terrible jokes based off the subject, or the frequently asinine bouts of physical humour that happen as a result of all the various weird inventions that characters create. Assassins hiding in paintings, extremely elastic ropes, an execution method that involves magnetic collars and giant flying buzzsaw blades, the invention whose appearance marks the beginning of the third act...it's probably the sheer weirdness of the visual aesthetic and the physically implausible action it creates that is the main reason I don't quite feel like giving this a 0.5 at the moment (even though it probably should be generating excitement instead of unintentional amusement). There's also the impressive Elmer Bernstein score that deserves a better movie than this (especially that main theme). Otherwise, it's still a serious slog through all kinds of comedy that I thought was hilarious back in the day but now barely raises the thought of amusement.

1

[rauldc14]

Man, you are watching way too many movies you dislike.

[Iroquois]

The price of high (or maybe just idiosyncratic) standards.

[cricket]

Glad to see I'm not the only one who didn't like Premium Rush. I thought that movie was lame.

[Iroquois]

#414 - When Marnie Was There
Hirosama Yonebayashi, 2014

http://d1oi7t5trwfj5d.cloudfront.net/7c/10/1403362a45eea082fd3c2a91f220/when-marnie-was-there.jpg

When a young city girl with asthma is sent to live with relatives in the countryside, she strikes up a friendship with a mysterious girl who lives in a supposedly abandoned mansion.

When Marnie Was There is the final film produced by Studio Ghibli before the company officially went on hiatus, with the possibility that it may be the renowned studio's final film ever hanging over it and possibly influencing one's perception of it. The same feeling of finality ran through my mind when I watched Hayao Miyazaki's last directorial effort The Wind Rises earlier this year. Fortunately, When Marnie Was There amply lives up to the staggering expectations heaped upon it, and it does so with an admittedly simple storyline that is nonetheless fleshed out with all the things that make Ghibli great (save for excessive amounts of fantasy). Instead, When Marnie Was There takes an approach that involves magical realism with its tried-and-true premise centring on Anna, a 12-year-old city girl heading to the countryside in order to get some fresh air and recover from some recent asthma trouble. Aside from having a physical illness, she also has some trouble relating to others and appears to have depression as well, even as she encounters multiple locals who are willing to accommodate her. Things change when she discovers an abandoned mansion on the edge of some marshland that appears to come alive after dark. There, she meets and eventually befriends the titular Marnie, a blonde girl who seems to be a ghost but claims to be real.

As with any Ghibli film worth its salt, the visuals are top-notch even though there is nothing overly inventive about them - compared to Miyazaki films full of fantastic creatures and elaborate world-building, it's a decidedly mundane affair. This is not a strike against it; if anything, it's a point in its favour that it's able to construct a sufficiently compelling narrative even while being more grounded in realism than your average Ghibli effort. It's sentimental without being mawkish and one can definitely sympathise with Anna even when she makes mistakes, while there are no genuine villains to be found anywhere (except perhaps in the case of a handful of strict guardians on Marnie's side of the story, but they are not major antagonists). Instead, the conflict emanates from Anna trying to figure out Marnie's full story while also learning to confront certain issues regarding her status as a foster child and her general sense of loneliness, which does go into some extremely emotional areas as the film progresses (though an experienced audience member may be able to pick what's likely to unfold before it actually does in certain places). The resulting film ends up being an all-around stunning piece of work in terms of both ostensible style and narrative substance. While I'm not inclined to think of it as a contender for the best film Studio Ghibli ever produced, I reckon that, in very much the same way that The Wind Rises was the right film for Miyazaki to retire on, so too is When Marnie Was There a good film with which Studio Ghibli can conclude an extremely phenomenal run.

4

[gbgoodies]

Man, you are watching way too many movies you dislike.


But in this case, he's right. Wild Wild West is a terrible movie.

[honeykid]

At no point in my life have I ever thought about watching Wild Wild West. It has always looked too terrible for words.

[gbgoodies]

At no point in my life have I ever thought about watching Wild Wild West. It has always looked too terrible for words.


Yeah, it's terrible, but I'll watch almost anything with Kevin Kline.

[honeykid]

For me he's just another reason to miss it, but as a Drew fan I understand completely what you're saying. :)

[Iroquois]

At no point in my life have I ever thought about watching Wild Wild West. It has always looked too terrible for words.

Well, I knocked out a couple of paragraphs on it, so it's not that terrible - but yeah, it does come awfully close. Also, I did point out how I was nine when I saw it - it's not like I had the most discerning taste (while you clearly have more years on me and thus presumably knew better at the time).

[Iroquois]

#415 - Eyes Wide Shut
Stanley Kubrick, 1999

https://filmgrimoire.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/fhd999ews_nicole_kidman_006.jpg

After an argument with his wife about the subject of infidelity, a wealthy doctor wanders into the night and ends up having a series of bizarre encounters.

Unsurprisingly, I did not think all that much of Eyes Wide Shut when I first saw it several years ago. Even at the peak of my interest in Kubrick, I could recognise that it still had his same sense of visual mastery, but the subject matter left a lot to be desired. Clocking in a staggering 160 minutes, it ended up being one of his longest films and based around a story that was alternately sluggish and bizarre thanks to its focus on exposing the banality behind supposedly scintillating subjects such as sexuality, infidelity, and perversion. This was amidst a somewhat thriller-like plot where the situations within the film escalated from the intriguing to the dangerous. Even so, I figured that I'd give it time to breathe and return to it at a later date, and now here I am with a far more favourable opinion. In a clever bit of stunt-casting, the film stars the most famous celebrity couple of the late-90s, Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, as a general practitioner and his stay-at-home wife respectively. They seemingly have it all - wealth, a good home, a loving daughter, and a seemingly healthy relationship with one another - but that last one slowly gets picked apart after the duo attend a Christmas party held by one of Cruise's friends (Sydney Pollack). After they get into an argument over gendered double standards in regards to sexual thought processes and especially in regards to infidelity, Cruise decides to leave home and ends up wandering through the streets of downtown New York, having a series of increasingly surreal encounters that lead him to question virtually everything he's ever known about human nature.

I guess it's just as well that Kubrick's final film ended up being what was probably his most dense and difficult work (even in comparison to the disorienting approach to science-fiction he took with 2001). There's a superficially easy to spot plot thread thanks to Cruise's character going through a journey of curious self-discovery, but it's used as the launching pad for scenes that range from lengthy discussions about subjects outlined above to lurid scenes depicting near-incomprehensible displays of eroticism (case in point - the notorious orgy sequence full of figures wearing masks and robes). Throughout it all, Cruise makes a good choice to play a character who is as good an example of the "typical" Kubrick protagonist as you're likely to find with his charming yet hollow persona feeling like the director once again playing a lead's acting weaknesses for maximum effect (see also: Barry Lyndon). Kidman, meanwhile, does the best with what she's got but between her character being deliberately set up as an ill-tempered instigator for Cruise's narrative and the developments that are supposed to make her more complex than that it feels a bit too inconsistent in terms of quality (and it's not helped by her relative lack of screen-time). Otherwise, the cast is populated by some characters that range from the understandably bland to the unforgettably unique.

Though this is technically one of the most mundane films Kubrick ever made (there's no war or sci-fi or supernatural horror), he certainly doesn't skimp on bringing in a lot of recognisable visual trademarks, whether it's the sweeping Handicam long-takes or the way in which still shots are framed. The use of colour is very effective, especially when the colour blue is involved ever-so-slightly in a lot of the scenes (as if to reflect the sheer artificiality of these people's lives). Knowing that the film was (as with most of Kubrick's output) actually filmed in Britain makes his recreation of downtown New York stand out as an uncannily detailed one, with there being just enough changes to make it feel like the somewhat surreal dream reality that it may or may not be intended to be (though interpreting it as a dream sounds kind of boring). There is once again an interesting selection of music, whether it's the signature leitmotif that consists of an arrhythmic two-note melody playing over the most unsettling parts of the film or a typically Kubrickian mix of classical tunes. Though it's perhaps a little on the long side even for Kubrick, it's still a compelling film more often than not (and this is on a second viewing, no less) and its sheer weirdness makes it a good way for Kubrick to conclude his filmmaking career (not like he had much choice in the matter). Still not sure how it'd stack up to the rest of his films, but it'd definitely hold its own regardless.

4

[honeykid]

Also, I did point out how I was nine when I saw it - it's not like I had the most discerning taste (while you clearly have more years on me and thus presumably knew better at the time).
Absolutely. I didn't mean to infer anything with my post other than what it said. :)

[Iroquois]

Absolutely. I didn't mean to infer anything with my post other than what it said. :)

I didn't think so, but I still feel like I had to explain myself.

[cricket]

I really like Eyes Wide Shut, but for whatever reason, it's a movie I always think higher of in hindsight. I suppose that's to it's credit.

[Iroquois]

#416 - House
Nobuhiko Obayashi, 1977

http://whistlerchicago.com/sites/whistlerchicago.com/files/imagecache/record_banner/bands/hausu_567759_pp.jpg

When summer vacation starts, a schoolgirl convinces a group of friends to to accompany her to her aunt's remote house.

Well, you have to hand it to House...it's certainly a cinematic experience that is difficult to forget. Despite its rather conventional horror premise - a group of young girls trapped in a haunted house getting picked off one at a time by malevolent forces - its execution in virtually every other regard is extraordinarily unconventional. The first third of the film plays out like an excessively jaunty comedy complete with comical music and the introduction to a series of outsized characters; in the English subtitles on the version I saw, the main cast are referred to by nicknames such as Kung Fu, Gorgeous, and Fantasy, each of which aptly describes their most definitive character trait. In addition to their peppy interactions with one another and also Gorgeous's mysterious aunt (who is clearly going to be the villain from the outset, even if our heroines are oblivious to it at first). The comedic sensibilities constantly bleed into the genuinely horrific parts of the film - though this does sort of rob the film of the ability to genuinely provoke fear or fright, it amply compensates in terms of pure entertainment as the girls encounter all sorts of bizarre circumstances and attacks as they take up residence in the house.

To list all the filmmaking techniques that are invented, discarded, or subverted throughout the film's brief running time would take a good few paragraphs on its own. Needless to say, there is a palpable visual energy to virtually every frame of this film even when it's not engaging in any genuinely supernatural shenanigans. Of course, the main thing that anyone will come away remembering is the sheer creativity behind the visuals. Even the technical shortcomings manage to add to the charm as a lot of visibly blue-screened effects are used, to say nothing of the clearly superimposed effects such as the evil white cat's eyes flashing green whenever it casts a spell. Mixed in with the extremely rapid-fire and deliberately incoherent editing and cinematography, House never fails to lose one's attention. If there is a flaw that stops me genuinely loving this film, it's that, despite its briefness, it does lose its momentum here and there even as the body count grows and the film nears its end. Anarchic energy can last so long even in the case of a film as off-the-wall as House manages to be, but I'd still consider it highly recommended to anyone who wants to see something that is as far from your average movie as movies can possibly get.

3.5

[Iroquois]

#417 - Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles
Neil Jordan, 1994

http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/screencrush.com/442/files/2014/01/Interview-with-the-Vampire.jpg

A vampire agrees to tell his centuries-long life story to a writer.

Interview with the Vampire is another one of those movies that I've seen 100% of the way through from start to finish. I started the book but never finished it, while I've watched virtually all of the film but missed the start. Now that I've had the opportunity to watch the whole thing from start to finish, I have to admit that I do still find the final product a little underwhelming. Granted, it's not without its highlights. It's almost too good watching Tom Cruise chew every possible inch of scenery as Lestat, the mischievious blonde vampire who turns suicidal widower (and eventual interviewee) Louis (Brad Pitt) into a vampire, which prompts a whole bunch of odd-couple nonsense as Louis struggles with the notion of killing and feeding on humans. Eventually, they add young orphan Claudia (Kirsten Dunst) to their company and to go on any further would definitely be taking it into spoiler territory.

While the film may have the sort of lavish production values that would suit a story spanning centuries and continents, it's melodramatic to a considerable fault. While the visuals are decent enough for the most part, the score is a major offender with its histrionics being almost enough to put me off a lot - while the old-timey harpsichord suits a lot of scenes just fine, the full-blown orchestra just sounds ridiculous in virtually every instance where it's used to indicate drama and tension. Regardless of whether or not Cruise may be miscast as Lestat, his rampant flamboyance always promises to liven things up - without him, the film starts to sag considerably regardless of the tragedies afflicting both Louis and Claudia. While Dunst does alright playing a character well beyond her years, Pitt's maudlin turn as a self-loathing vampire may have some point but in 2015 the whole "mopey vampire" thing has well and truly run its course. As a result, it's hard to truly give a damn about these characters who have been cursed with eternal life even if it's somewhat understandable. The film then relocates once again and tries to engineer a climax that doesn't feel nearly as cathartic as it thinks it's being. While there are some good moments here and there, they have been realised better in other movies. Ultimately, Interview with the Vampire may have some decent 1990s period-piece horror visuals and an amazingly against-type performance by Cruise, but the storyline is pretty underwhelming for the most part and it's not really what I want out of vampire fiction these days. At least that ending is a good one.

2

[Iroquois]

#418 - Prometheus
Ridley Scott, 2012

http://screeninvasion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Prometheus.bmp

In the late-21st century, a scientific expedition travels through space in search of extraterrestrials that made contact with ancient Earthlings.

I have long thought of Ridley Scott as a director who didn't prioritise style over substance so much as prioritising technique over both of those qualities. While that attention to technical detail has contributed greatly to his most beloved and acclaimed works, it also makes it easy for me to take a more impersonal approach to his work and, if the plot and characters of a particular film don't prove sufficiently interesting or engaging (especially on a repeat viewing), then my attention ends up drifting to the artificial side of things and tends to stay there. As a result, my feelings about his filmography cover the preferential spectrum from all-time favourites to boring wastes of time. Prometheus marked the first time that Scott had taken on outer space since his 1979 breakthrough hit Alien, and of course the speculation that this would be some sort of expansion of that film's existing canon ran rampant. While I'm not sure what the statute of limitations is regarding the untagged discussion of spoilers that confirm or deny such speculation, it hardly seems relevant to the film at large. The most positive thing that I can say about Prometheus is that it looks good, which really is one of the clearest examples of damning with faint praise that I've ever given out.

When it comes to plot and characters, Prometheus starts out promisingly enough with the concept of humans putting together an expedition to find an alien race that supposedly had contact with several ancient human civilisations, leading them to plot a course for the co-ordinates common to every ancient inscription. Of course, the film doesn't spend too much time defining its characters all that well - you have the jerkass who only cares about getting paid (Sean Harris), the person begrudgingly financing and supervising the expedition (Charlize Theron), you have the extremely nervous scientific type (Rafe Spall), the laid-back ship's captain (Idris Elba), etc. The two characters of any particular note end up being Noomi Rapace as the chief archaeologist and also Michael Fassbender as the expedition's token android. Rapace gets the most expansion on her background, especially how her perspective balances science and faith even after she deals with various personal traumas, whereas Fassbender's character models himself on the titular character in Lawrence of Arabia as a means of approaching some semblance of humanity despite the fact that every other character still feels the need to point out his objective lack of it. He comes across as a somewhat interesting attempt to graft some of the themes regarding artificial beings from Blade Runner onto an Alien kind of film, though it feels kind of disappointing how Scott and co. seem to be recycling concepts from all two of the other science-fiction films he's done. Besides, in a film that attempts to feature as large an ensemble as this one does, having only two of the characters stand out in any sufficiently favourable way does not say much about how well this film handles its characters.

While the visual effects definitely make for the best part of Prometheus, they are still considerably undone by the poor development of the story. When the film isn't trying to show off its elaborate sets, holograms, and gadgetry, it's too busy getting caught up in some poorly judged plot developments. From one character removing his helmet at the slightest suggestion of breathable atmosphere through Spall's constantly terrified character becoming inexplicably friendly towards alien fauna all of a sudden to characters attempting to evade a large rolling object by running in a straight line instead of to the side, there are plenty of leaps in logic and believability that not even the inherent vagueness of the planet's alien materials can adequately justify. As a result, while Prometheus may have some impressive effects, a couple of characters whose development covers more than one dimension, and a cursory attempt to address themes of faith as a result of its human characters' search for their "creators", it's still a fundamentally flawed piece of work and a difficult film to genuinely appreciate. According to IMDb, this film is currently slated to receive a sequel (produced but not directed by Scott) at some point next year. While a sequel to a film I genuinely disliked sounds like a bad idea in theory, it is at once a slight compliment and a grave insult to this film that a sequel sounds like something that needs to happen to it.

1.5

[honeykid]

What do you want out of vampire fiction?

Obviously I love Interview With The Vampire. At one time it was my favourite film and I love the first three books.

Prometheus was on tv over here last week. I thought about recording it just to see if there was anything I could get from it. In the end I decided against it simply because I have so many thing to watch that a film I've little/no interest in would just be taking up valuable space atm.

[Thursday Next]

I think both of these films are much better than you have rated them! I was underwhelmed by Interview the first time I saw it. I loved the book and the film was never quite going to do it justice, but it grew on me considerably and I love all the melodramatic 90s vampire histrionics. Prometheus isn't the greatest installment in the Alien franchise, but there's enough there to deserve more than a 1.5.

[Iroquois]

What do you want out of vampire fiction?

Obviously I love Interview With The Vampire. At one time it was my favourite film and I love the first three books.

Prometheus was on tv over here last week. I thought about recording it just to see if there was anything I could get from it. In the end I decided against it simply because I have so many thing to watch that a film I've little/no interest in would just be taking up valuable space atm.

Hard to say, really. I really enjoyed Only Lovers Left Alive because it took elements that were hinted at in this story and built a whole film out of it, plus it took the whole played-out "tortured vampire who wishes for death" thing that this film plays straight and played it for black comedy. It's a good response to the kind of familiar vampire stories that Interview with the Vampire played straight. That being said, I don't have much appreciation for the films that just play the vampires as straight-up villains either e.g. John Carpenter's Vampires.

While I generally don't like Prometheus, it'd be hard for me to say whether or not anyone else would get out of it regardless of their tastes. At the very least, the fact that I gave it a second chance made me think that there would be something of worth there, but there's got to be more to a film than just flashy effects and a really good Peter O'Toole impression.

I think both of these films are much better than you have rated them!

I get that a lot.

I was underwhelmed by Interview the first time I saw it. I loved the book and the film was never quite going to do it justice, but it grew on me considerably and I love all the melodramatic 90s vampire histrionics. Prometheus isn't the greatest installment in the Alien franchise, but there's enough there to deserve more than a 1.5.

Yeah, I never finished the book and probably never will at this point, though I remember liking it well enough at the time (which would have been what, early 2007?). As I outlined earlier, I don't much care for vampire melodrama unless it's of the ridiculously hammy kind as demonstrated by Lestat, who basically comes across as a classier, haughtier version of the vampires from Near Dark.

What do you think there is about Prometheus that would deserve more than a 1.5 (incidentally, what rating would you give it anyway?)

[TylerDurden99]

I don't like vampire films, but I do really like Interview With The Vampire. However, it's really Tom Cruise that carries it and elevates for me.


I saw Prometheus a while back, didn't think too much of it. That might be down to the fact that I'm not really an Alien fan either, but I remember it being kind of dull for most of it's running time.

[Iroquois]

#419 - Sanjuro
Akira Kurosawa, 1962

https://billsmovieemporium.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/vlcsnap-2011-11-29-21h09m40s9.png

A ronin becomes involved with a power struggle between corrupt officials and a group of samurai.

Sanjuro marks the sequel to Yojimbo and once again features Toshiro Mifune as the eponymous character (though this time the title refers to his chosen name instead of his occupation). The basic premise also has similarities thanks to its use of a singular masterless warrior stumbling into the midst of a conflict between two different forces. While Yojimbo generated interest thanks to both sides of the conflict being fundamentally villainous gangs of thieves and murderers that Mifune would play against one another for both profit and justice, here the morality is a lot less ambiguous. Mifune sides pretty definitively with a small group of naive samurai who are concerned with the injustices being done by the local superintendent and his underlings. The resulting film is largely unconcerned with exploring complex themes, instead saving the complexity for the various ploys that Mifune and his companions use to gain the upper hand over the opponents.

While it still very much feels like any of Kurosawa's other films from this particular era, there's something about Sanjuro that doesn't engage me in the same way as the other ones. There is a cursory exploration of the nature of violence as some characters are willing to openly criticise Mifune's tendency towards favouring bloodthirsty solutions and force him to at least think about less lethal answers to the group's problems. It does guarantee the odd interesting moment - at the very least, that ending is a worthwhile conclusion - but otherwise it feels like this might just be my least favourite of all the Kurosawa films that I've seen so far. Of course, with a director and cast as talented as the ones featured here (Tatsuya Nakadai pops up again, though he is almost unrecognisable due to this being the first role I've seen him in where he has a balding topknot instead of a full head of hair and a topknot - I guess that might be to distinguish him from the gun-toting hothead he played in Yojimbo) this is definitely an instance where a least favourite doesn't automatically equate to a bad film.

3

[Iroquois]

#420 - Friday
F. Gary Gray, 1995

http://static.gamesradar.com/images/totalfilm/f/friday-1995-.jpg

Over the course of a single Friday, two friends - one recently fired from his job, the other a two-bit drug dealer - spend their time hanging around in their neighbourhood.

When I first saw Friday many years ago, my initial feeling about it was that it was like an African-American version of Clerks. There are certainly plenty of similarities - the 24-hour timeframe, the confinement to a small area, the two twenty-something leads that are alternately a miserable straight man dealing with relationship problems and an irresponsible slacker who annoys people - but Friday definitely has enough personality to strike out on its own ground. Its setting in a street in South Central L.A. results in a cast that is almost entirely black (save for a pair of Latinos and one Asian, but the briefness of their combined appearances still make them exceptions that prove the rule), which of course plays into a film that starts off relatively light-hearted. The seeds are sown early on with pothead drug dealer Smokey (Chris Tucker) ending up in debt to his boss (Faizon Love) to the point where it could literally cost him his life, while the local neighbourhood bully (Tiny Lister) is constantly dropping by to coerce both Smokey and his best friend Craig (Ice Cube) into either helping (or at least not preventing) him commit his own petty crimes. Amidst all that, Craig has to contend with his newfound unemployment and the fact that he is caught between his shrill, demanding girlfriend (Paula Jai Parker) and his affections for his sister's friend (Nia Long).

The film does a decent enough job of incorporating hood politics into an otherwise goofy stoner comedy, enough so that the second half where the threats of drive-bys and beatdowns don't feel like too much of a shock as the tensions bubbling under the street's somewhat peaceful surface finally explode. Even the inconsistent moralising that permeates the film (Smokey's rampant pot-smoking, though it does end up endangering his life before too long, is still compared favourably to the pathetic life of the neighbourhood crackhead) isn't too much of a problem - at the very least, it doesn't detract from the amusement on offer. Cube and Tucker make for decent enough anchors (with the latter naturally stealing the show with his trademark loudmouth wackiness) to a story that is full of memorably quirky characters, from John Witherspoon as Craig's cantankerous father through to Bernie Mac as a cheerful pastor. There are plenty of great instances of both verbal and physical humour, even if a lot of it does get a little scatalogical (such as Smokey's attempt to relieve himself, which had me laughing so hard I couldn't breathe the first time I saw it). The direction is competent and the soundtrack is full of good tunes. All things considered, Friday isn't quite as good as I remember it being but it is still a very solid and dependable comedy that I will not hesitate to watch if I get the chance.

3.5

[honeykid]

I preferred Sanjuro to Yojimbo.

I've only seen Friday once, I think, sometime in the mid/late 90's, but I remember enjoying it quite a bit. Never tempted by the sequel(s), though.

[Miss Vicky]

Friday gets 3.5 but Interview With the Vampire gets 2? :tsk:

[Iroquois]

Friday gets 3.5 but Interview With the Vampire gets 2? :tsk:

http://img.pandawhale.com/post-38657-Friday-I-dont-give-a-****-gif-SOGE.gif

It's a shame this website is so hard on swearing, otherwise this would be perfect.

EDIT: But to give you a serious answer, yes.