View Full Version : Joel's Reviews
SHALLOW HAL (2001)
dir: Peter and Bobby Farelly
Well, it's another Farelly bros movie, and as usual it has good patches and rough patches. The humor often comes off silly and lightweight, but once in a while, the cast knocks it out of the park. Jack Black and Gwyneth Paltrow really deliver outstanding performances here, which seems like a small miracle to me, based on the kind of movie this is.
Jack Black plays a surface obsessed jerk who goes after beautiful women who are clearly out of his social league. He wants supermodel hot chicks to date him and his entire life is basically just one rejection after another, but that doesn't stop him. I guess you could call him Tenacious. Get it?
After getting stuck in an elevator with a self help guru (played by Tony Robbins, essentially playing himself), this "shallow Hal" resurfaces into the world seeing only the inner beauty of people, and the results appeal to him as what he craves: supermodel hotness.
He scores with a sweet honey haired blonde (played by Paltrow) and develops a deep relationship, all the while, by mere chance, chatting up her wealthy father, who just so happens to be his boss at work.
He sees his new girlfriend as this ultra hot thin bombshell of a woman, and he just cannot wrap his head around why her self esteem is so low. Gwyneth really plays this role to perfection. Most of the screen time we really don't see much of her real appearance, but we know she is overweight in these brief shots of the "real world", but her tone is dead on as a girl who's used to being dumped on.
Now, this movie was panned for reasons I do not entirely agree with. It is true that a beautiful girl like Paltrow indeed carries the look of this film through most of the haul, but what I thought was bold, and inevitable, is that we eventually see her as the fat person she is, and from that we get a very heartfelt performance by Jack Black in a few brief moments where his face does all of the work. Hal starts seeing all of the people he saw "under the spell" as who they really are without his "beer goggles" on, and the revelation that these little children he visited at the hospital for his GF's charity work are actual burn unit survivors comes crashing down on him, when not just a few weeks prior, he had seen them as genetically flawless little tv looking children. The Farelly's really choose the right music at the key scenes (for once), and mixed with Black's depth as a person (yes, it's true), this becomes some very effective drama.
I laughed quite a bit at Shallow Hal, and enjoyed it much more this time around. However, I have a real gripe with the Farelly Bros' sensibilities. They always blow their endings with a happy-go-lucky bow-tie that is really hard to stomach. With There's Something About Mary it was sing-along that drove me nuts, and now with Shallow Hal, it's basically the same type of thing. Just this forced uplifting finale that could have afforded to have been removed. If they had just ended the film on a real note, it would have been a much, much better picture. I literally want to shake them and scream at them for this. They got such great performances, and shook off their contradictory comedy dust with the resolve, only to completely mash it out with a superficial ending. I hate that way of thinking. They don't trust their audience as being intelligent enough to take a lull down into misty eyed territory. They are afraid of tonal shifts that go past an 1/8th of an inch.
https://i.imgur.com/EM0VK7s.jpg
3
Gideon58
05-12-18, 04:46 PM
He watches out for the kids, even having to aggressively escort an old pervert off of the property. We see his rage in that brief moment where he calls out a criminal's number.
I think this might have been my favorite scene in the movie and I think this scene alone earned Dafoe his Oscar nomination.
Excellent review Joel.
Light bulb moment Re The Shallows. All the fanbois who obsessed over ms Blakely's ass cam!
SeeingisBelieving
05-12-18, 05:19 PM
Barbara Hershey, who looks beautiful here, and one can certainly see why she would be the object of affection for any older man, or any younger gent who has common sense. Her simple yet complex aura comes out with straightforward dialog carefully outlined by a devastating sex appeal that can only occur when you get the real thing in front of the lens, and that's her
I've just rewatched The Entity and what you describe adds considerably to that film as well, especially on a psychological level.
SeeingisBelieving
05-12-18, 05:21 PM
Pollock (2000)
dir: Ed Harris
rating_4
"That's a damn good picture" ;)
The Neighborhood (2017)
Dir: Frank D'Angelo
The way this movie starts off had me really nervous and bummed out. I had literally just debited the last 4 dollars out of a 5 dollar bank account balance just to see this movie since the cast is amazing. I'd never heard of D'Angelo's stuff before so I took a chance since John Ashton and Burt Young in the same movie as a Baldwin and Aiello can't possibly be a complete piece of shlt. Well, I was wrong. That is until I got to about the 1/2 way point of the film. Once the movie starts unfolding all of it's threads and that business is done and over (it was tedious to sit through), the film picked up my interest. The actors got to finally take over (which is a good thing). Early on, all of the production difficulties were pissing me off. Boom shadows, audio drop-outs (lack of well mixed foley and ambient sound), the editing was super awkward, and the movie didn't flow at all. Shoot, within the first major drone camera scene, I got treated to that red only black and white effect I have seen enough of already! My eyes rolled so hard that they actually made a squishy and clacking sound inside of my eyeball sockets.
But this was early on. I almost shut this down. Serious. I was getting really upset at the amateurish production and incompetent coverage and pacing of the film.
Once the story started breathing a bit, and the actors were allowed decent enough 2-3 camera set ups, I relaxed, and the writing and script started gelling together. I finally understood all of the flash backs and flash sideways scenes.
I'm not saying the editor was an ape. I'm not saying that. I am not psychic, and don't know if people's post production availabilities for loopings and re-shoots were impossible, but I will say that a lot of the "stylistic" choices were not my cup of tea. One scene where the object of affection for the main character, she says "I take care of my mother", and right then we get a white flash transition for the scene of her caring for her dementia ridden mom. And..that's fine, but it was jarring. Also, the red helmet motorcycle scene in black and white was an old trick used in music vids back int eh 1980's so..it made me loudly roll my eyes, as mentioned.
I think some of these scenes may've been added back in because the director figured this might be a bomb and he wanted everything in the final render for perspective. Kind of a "f#ck it, throw it all in" moment in the editing suite? Just a hunch.
Hey, it helped, for what it's worth. Eventually the story goes on and things get at the very least...semi interesting, ..and, by the end of the film - I actually cared about everyone. There were some strong dramatic scenes that worked. The themes of loyalty, friendship and taking care of your own were intensified in what seems to me to be a work of passion. This is a good story in the giant sea of crime films, but it's just too bad that the troubled production (seems obvious enough when you watch it) kind of has this picture cobbled together and hobbling along, and that may turn some people off who start to watch. I almost shut it down. Glad I didn't, though. It's one of the few movies of recent memory that actually improves if you give it a chance.
3
T i n M e n
(1987)
Director: Barry Levinson
https://i.imgur.com/H8VUEDP.jpg
Barry Levinson's follow up to 1982's Diner has his Baltimore, MD stomping ground set in 1963, revolving around 2 camps of aluminum siding salesmen who run in packs, often copping each other's tricks of the trade and celebrating commissions at swanky dance clubs when night falls.
Immediately the film's gorgeously photographed detail shots of new model cadillacs perks the viewer's attention, and the film to follow this opening is just as crisp. Levinson had delivered a very witty screenplay and rolled his sleeves up for a very fleshed out comedy drama that features nuanced performances across the board.
https://i.imgur.com/fkUtkbk.jpg
DeVito does his usual fast talking sleaze ball to perfection while Dreyfuss sticks to his jewish street savvy tough guy persona that allows him to crank up the comedy with manic explosions. Perhaps, though, the biggest accolade I can give the film is the quiet performance by Barbara Hershey who uses her natural screen magnetism to play an every-woman so well. She is the thread that holds all of this together as she teeters between the two leads as a wife and a lover, respectively.
https://i.imgur.com/OClCqhg.jpg
The supporting cast are all endowed with great lines tapped and tempered from Barry's fresh script, and this highly original piece of work seems very well protected by everyone involved. There are no mistakes here. This is gentleman league storytelling and though this film was not a smash hit, it confidently floats along time, gaining more distinguished appeal with each passing year. This is attributed in no small part to not only the sharp photography, but the costuming and set design. Every character is given a note to play with aesthetically, and play with it they do.
https://i.imgur.com/Khf0hyw.jpg
Some highlights include music by Fine Young Cannibals, who at the time, had just been releasing their controversially brilliant 2nd studio album consisting of 1960's styled R&B numbers as well as cutting edge dance hall singles. Their appearance in the film is included in one of the most satisfying editorial choices of the run time and that is when B roll shots case the nightclub in which they play.
I can't really say anything bad about Tin Men. It is exactly what it intends to be.
https://i.imgur.com/nHuDrKt.jpg
4.5
cricket
06-02-18, 07:08 PM
I didn't think much of Tin Men when I saw it in the late 80's. I suspect I'd like it more now.
I used to think it was bland back in the day. As an adult I see it with the right perspective. I mean, I was like 11 years old. I wanted Stakeout.
I'm still keeping an eye on your thread Joel. But so far I haven't heard of any of the movies on this page. You watch some very different movies:p Then again I suppose we all do! I just watched Wagons East with the great John Candy. You seen that one?
I've seen very brief clips of it when I was in my teens and have avoided it like the plague because I didn't want to remember Candy in the way of having this as his last film. Am I safe now, though? As a mature adult? lol ;)
Citizen Rules
06-29-18, 10:57 PM
I've seen very brief clips of it when I was in my teens and have avoided it like the plague because I didn't want to remember Candy in the way of having this as his last film. Am I safe now, though? As a mature adult? lol ;) It's safe! Wagons East was a lot better than I thought. Though, it's definitely an ensemble cast. Candy's role isn't all that big.
Is there any of Candy's films you haven't seen? I've think I've seen them all, except some of this early bit parts in films.
It's safe! Wagons East was a lot better than I thought. Though, it's definitely an ensemble cast. Candy's role isn't all that big.
Is there any of Candy's films you haven't seen? I've think I've seen them all, except some of this early bit parts in films.
I haven't seen all of Candy's films, but I've seen the good ones, haha!
I even started to watch one he directed called..hmm..forgot the name..google it and it's on youtube to watch in full.
Oh, Hostage for a Day is the name of it. It's not bad..I mean, it's not good, but after a lousy and corny opening, it actually picks up a bit and kind of gets silly again...I think if he had lived, he would have been a decent director with more experience. He has nods to Hughes' style in this movie.
Citizen Rules
07-02-18, 10:32 PM
I haven't seen all of Candy's films, but I've seen the good ones, haha!
I even started to watch one he directed called..hmm..forgot the name..google it and it's on youtube to watch in full.
Oh, Hostage for a Day is the name of it. It's not bad..I mean, it's not good, but after a lousy and corny opening, it actually picks up a bit and kind of gets silly again...I think if he had lived, he would have been a decent director with more experience. He has nods to Hughes' style in this movie. There all good! Well at least I haven't seen a Candy film that wasn't worth watching. Hey, you got me on Hostage for a Day, I've never seen that one:cool: I'll have to give it a look, thanks:p
Some quickie reviews
Locke (2013) - all talk, no real action, and basically a one man show with voices over bluetooth in a car is the premise. This is no My Dinner with Andre but I was compelled enough to not shut it off, and by the end, I felt I had seen a very good film.
Star Wars - The Last Jedi (2017) - Very much in line with Empire Strikes Back, or is it? Who cares? I enjoyed this way more than I thought I would. The new proper sequels are very well done and more importantly well meaning. It's true that the charisma is missing a bit from some of the cast but director Rian Johnson's humor makes up for some of that. The humor is kind of bonkers and very unlike the humor of past SW films. It's as if Terry Gilliam slipped in there, or maybe even Jean-Pierre Jeunet. We see the empire's clothes being automatically ironed, Skywalker grunt and swills green milk from a disgusting mammoths teat, and his fishing pole! Look at the size of that thing! Good fun, amazing pacing and action sequences/editing/effects, and a bit of bad-assery as one would hope for. Solid, solid installment. As for the complaints of the female jedi's lineage...um..like..who cares? Flowers come from shlt, great art comes from nothing...stop being so romantic and enjoy the movie. Weird humor beats out typical crowd pleasing humor any day of the week for this viewer. Score for The Last Jedi!
Pee Wee's Big Holiday (2016) - John Lee's directorial take on Paul Reubens' Pee Wee Herman is no Tim Burton take on the big PW, but he does inject some great humorous bits. This is a strange homoerotic comedy that hits the marks that past Pee Wee always aimed for and usually bullseyed. Humor that is good for kids in a creative way, but still packing enough left over lunch for adults to snack on if they're weird, too. The thing that makes this a step or two down from Burton's film, and I hate to compare but - how can I not? - is the way it's lit and shot. No extravagant sets, nor any moody lighting. Everything is bright, white and smooth. It's more in line with Big Top Pee Wee look-wise, but still manages to have a few dark moments to savor, and is certainly a welcome return.
How it Ends (2018) - Run of the mill in just about every way, this apocalypse "thriller" has no real destination and struggles, or should I say refuses, to engage the viewer on barely any level aside from some decent visuals that carry no weight for a truly unexciting story. Here's another yawnfest rehash film where the cast are uninspired and badly chosen, the one shining star in Whitaker is completely wasted, and the ending ...well, the ending basically makes fun of itself because there are so many ways to use the title in a derogatory way. For example ..."I really, really do not like HOW IT ENDS!!"
A Star is Born (1976)
Had to violently shut it off. Horrible sound mix, awful, wretched music, and clunky staging. Promising shots early on, which got me excited but ... once the music started, and then Streisand showed up, it got highly irritating, which is a shame because I usually enjoy her and adore Kris Kristofferson.
John Carpenter's Vampires
I used to slag this picture off as corny and chintzy until I had the chance to reappraise it a few times since its home video release. It's a solid movie that is both gorgeous to look at and sometimes really funny. I will say that this is Carpenter's last decent film. He did a commendable job on In the Mouth of Madness, but that took so many viewings for me to finally appreciate it. Vampires was a bit quicker. I had really started to miss the old JC, and his pacing, music score and intensity he brought with these things combined with the cast, but Vampires does deliver this in a more updated way. Saying the word "updated" about a Carpenter movie is a stretch because the guy clearly hasn't ever really shed his old skin in way of telling a story. There's always something familiar with his methods. Having James Woods improvise was a very smart move.
Cold in July (2014)
Totally worthwhile chameleon picture that shifts tones similar to Demme's Something Wild. OK, so it's not nearly as masterful as that movie, but it is a refreshing change of pace to a lot of the ultra self serious movies coming out this decade that always concentrate on how icy and sophisticated they are by, what?, pushing the blue shadow areas in the color timing and being f-ck-all boring and un-engaging with bad casting choices that are always made on genetics rather than actual charisma.
Enter Don Johnson and Sam Shepard (in one of his final roles). There's a point when you realize that this movie can do anything, and it sometimes seems like it does. It allowed me to fill in the blanks with my kid imagination, and I can never get enough of movies that do stuff like that. There aren't many. It plays its cards close to the sleeve. Very subtle movements, but the color changes are tremendous. Very, very fun and intense film. I've seen it twice now and I am sure I will see it again.
A History of Violence - dir. David Cronenberg
Very well acted and edited movie that is both gruesome and interesting. This is different work from Cronenberg, who usually doesn't stray too far from the surreal style he's known for. I found myself coming back to this after seeing it in the theaters when it came out and not being too impressed with it then. Glad I gave it a second shot, though. If there's one thing that seemed out of place it was William Hurt's casting. I like William Hurt a lot, but his place in this movie actually helps it lose some believability because his method as a bad guy seems so pretentious and hammy. Maybe the next time I watch this - I'll warm up to his work.
The Dungeonmaster (1984)
Rated PG-13
OK, an assorted movie with a thin plot broken up into game-like segments has a few things going for it.
When was the last time you saw full frontal nudity in a PG-13 film? Think LONG and HARD about that.
The Woman in Red shows Kelly LeBrock's vagina for about 1 second as she turns away. In Dreamscape you had breasts (but only in the 4:3 non-cropped home video version from Thorn EMI). In National Lampoon's European Vacation you had boobs at a nightclub with strippers, and then a little more action when Rusty takes a German beer girl behind a set of bushes and she opens her blouse.
But what about full nudity? I'm talking breasts, vagina, and butt in generous, unobscured glry, as if this was an R rated teen romp sex comedy.
Well, within the first two minutes of The Dungeonmaster you get this.
You also get nicely rendered visual effects in the form of color outline glows around people and things, electricity crawls, lasers (lots of lasers), ranging from red to blue to purple....and thin set design that still manages to look inspired, if not cheap and goofy.
This is not a good movie, but it is a good movie to watch if you crave b movie overload.
TheUsualSuspect
08-31-18, 11:45 AM
The Dungeonmaster (1984)
Rated PG-13
OK, an assorted movie with a thin plot broken up into game-like segments has a few things going for it.
When was the last time you saw full frontal nudity in a PG-13 film? Think LONG and HARD about that.
The Woman in Red shows Kelly LeBrock's vagina for about 1 second as she turns away. In Dreamscape you had breasts (but only in the 4:3 non-cropped home video version from Thorn EMI). In National Lampoon's European Vacation you had boobs at a nightclub with strippers, and then a little more action when Rusty takes a German beer girl behind a set of bushes and she opens her blouse.
But what about full nudity? I'm talking breasts, vagina, and butt in generous, unobscured glry, as if this was an R rated teen romp sex comedy.
Well, within the first two minutes of The Dungeonmaster you get this.
You also get nicely rendered visual effects in the form of color outline glows around people and things, electricity crawls, lasers (lots of lasers), ranging from red to blue to purple....and thin set design that still manages to look inspired, if not cheap and goofy.
This is not a good movie, but it is a good movie to watch if you crave b movie overload.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!"
I chose this for the B-Movie HoF (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43893)
I remember seeing this as a kid, my parents had it on VHS. So I tracked it down on DVD and bought it in a 4 pack with other classics like Cellar Dweller, Catacombs& Contamination 7. I've yet to watch any of the other 3.
What immediately caught my attention was that opening naked dream sequence. Without a doubt that was not in the original release. That HAD to have been added after the fact. Right? I would have remembered that opening scene as a kid.
Anyways, this movie is cheese and all over the place. It's sci/fi it's fantasy it's horror. I like it for the trash value. Good movie? No.
You know what? You're probably absolutely right. And that explains the PG-13 rating and the cut I have is the more recent shout factory blu ray release. I guess pg13 is still safe through time.
A Simple Plan (1998)
Dir: Sam Raimi
This is by far one of the best american thrillers I have ever seen. On the surface it seems that the characters are completely void of any intelligence or common sense, but soon into the picture the origami script starts unfolding into so many different dramatic human directions, I couldn't help but be totally immersed into this nightmare about greed and desperation for greener grass.
Set in a rural small town stacked with snow, two brothers and a friend accidentally uncover a small plane buried under ice in the woods carrying no less that four million, four hundred thousand dollars. Once their plan gets set into motion things start going terribly wrong.
The performance from every single character in the film is deft and solid, even reaching grand heights with Bill Paxton as the sheperd who strays from his righteous path.
The music score isn't the typical style that composer Danny Elfman produces. This time he seems to be using detuned piano keys and nylon stringed instruments to an extremely haunting and nauseating effect.
Raimi's direction has never been better in any film he's done. He knows exactly how to build clammy handed suspense as good or better than any other director I've seen doing this style of cinema. The script is superb, the photography is beautiful but never distracting, only completely serviceable.
I can watch this film once every year and still be blown away by its power. It's a tale of caution and a reaffirmation that the grass is not always greener.
I think I have A Simple Plan, but for some reason never quite finished it.
Everyone's different. For me it was easy enough to settle into a story about roundabout small towners as I grew up with that simplicity and atmosphere. I don;t know much else aside from my journey out, which has proven to be just a lot of noise and chest beating with words. Maybe another beer is in order.
I remember it being quite good, but I think it had to do with my mood at the time. I'll definitely finish it.
https://i.imgur.com/Za1rLnC.jpg?1
Pumpkinhead
(1988)
Director: Stan Winston
Director Stan Winston had been responsible for The Terminator's look as well as serving as James Cameron's right hand man for several films - utilizing make-up and prop effects.
In his directorial debut he shows a firm hand at pacing as well as choosing the perfect script for a halloween morality tale.
Teenagers on dirt bikes accidentally cause havoc to a rugged country store owner and his fuse it lit to the point of seeking hell-bound revenge. He visits an old witch and she tells him how to unleash vengeance (the most venomous of man's sin). Once the curse is in place bad things happen.
I liked this movie not only because it was spooky and atmospheric, but also because it deals (very well) with the characters and how they change throughout the film. I was just reading some discussion on character arcs not necessarily making a film great, but in this case the changes in attitude of people are what sets this movie apart from a standard, run of the mill horror film.
The effects and creature design is second to none because, well, it's Stan Winston making it. Everything has an organic and deliciously fiendish air about it - including the graveyard, which looks beautiful and classically stagy. I love things like this.
I also enjoyed how it ended. Again, this is where the editing was elegant. The scenes during the film kind of layer themselves to not only show an event happening, but rather to build some tension with a simultaneous scene and then a revisit to see what will happen. At the end, the film just kind of nods on to credits, and the slight but almost poetic way the white letters crawl against darkness basically told me that whoever pieced this together had a golden touch. This all felt like a real story. Not real as in "realistic", but real as in - it's a scary tale to tell around the camp fire, and no goofy things got in the way. Winston did good work here, and I'd go so far as to say, considering the teenage cast and typical cliches present, his first effort as a director did not at all seem shaky or unsure of itself.
3.5
I Think We're Alone Now (2018)
Director: Reed Morano
Peter Dinklage stars as a loner of few words (sound familiar?), cleaning up his town after something wipes out the human race. He goes into houses, windexes counter tops, drags the bodies out, buries them, and then goes to the immaculate library where he used to work and logs everyone into files to keep some order.
When he finds out there is a 20 year old girl causing a reckless noise fest close-by - tensions mount.
Right off the bat I compared the meditative cinematography and mood to The Quiet Earth (one of my favorites of this kind), but soon enough that notion was broken apart by the introduction to a famous canadian rock band. And then again..and then again..and then...again.
That was OK after a while, but I have to admit that one scene had me cringing.
The plot twist is super weird and not well explained but the more I thought about it the more I felt that it didn't really need to be explained any more than it already was.
This is a decent little film. I'm not a huge fan of Ellie Fanning, and her expression bothers me for some reason, but I came around finally to almost warming up to her in the film.
This isn't a great film but it is a good one. I was actually surprised I liked it as much as I did even though I really wish it had been handled better. There are some silly things happening that seem kind of forced and unnecessary.
I checked some reviews and many people were disappointed with the pacing and the ending. I can sympathize considering that really the only strong element is Peter Dinklage but..there are enough little moments that it made it worthwhile for me despite its shortfalls.
So when I say "Great ending - and a great tune from a great band. But I'm not telling you who it is", what I really mean is that it worked for me but may very well not work for you at all.
3+
Aliens (1986)
Director: James Cameron
What can I say new about this much reviewed film? It's great. Without comparing it to the original, I'll just say that it does a fabulous job at continuing the story of Ripley. The Marine segments are hilarious and scary once things start going south. Bill Paxton makes this movie in a lot of ways. He's so ridiculously over the top "quit s-screwin' around!"
I love the atmospheres created. Cameron, being the effects and set genius he is, really puts the amp up to 11 with the outside planet world and the heavy metal machines navigating through the terrain. This is a blue and silver looking movie.
Lance Henriksen as Bishop adds a nice Disney touch that's probably enough even though the Newt character does add some incentive to really kick the alien's ass.
Paul Reiser oozes scumbag perfectly.
I prefer the theatrical cut to the extended DC. I feel the off world colony didn't really need to be seen as the aftermath still puts across the despair in spades considering a little girl is living in an AC duct.
Plenty of comic moments peppered over terrifying moments of the aliens getting closer. And that reveal of the giant cockroach-like gang of warrior aliens in the overhead grated ceiling was beyond freaked out.
4+
I've never been a fan of Aliens or James Cameron. Aliens is too much of an action movie with not enough horror and way too many generic expendable characters with really boring dialogue that only exist to get killed off. I always felt the acting and script were extremely weak. A lot of the lines are very wooden, and many more are just filler with no significant purpose or depth. I think people just like it because the marines are cool and there are lots of aliens and action.
Citizen Rules
10-03-18, 01:05 PM
It's been a looooong time since I watched Pumpkinhead. I don't normally like modern horror films but that film really had this melancholy, Achilles heel theme to it, much like a tragic Greek play. And for that reason the movie stayed with me.
Aliens, I've only seen this once and liked it. The scene with Ridley and the little girl as the alien comes around the corner, is the stuff of movie legend...I've said this many times, the theatrical release of a film is almost always better than the extended director's cut. The later is like including the bits of film that were discarded in the first place. Good to see ya back writing some reviews, Joel.
Nah, Zotis. No way, bro. Totally disagree with what you say about Aliens. The marines were played perfectly cartoonish as intended and their delivery was classic and animated. There is plenty of horror. Did we see the same film? haha
Trapped in the locked lab with a face hugger and no ammo. Being cornered by the mother alien in her nest with the minions close by.
The gang of roach-like aliens stampeding through the ceiling grates...that scene alone builds so much suspense because we're wondering why the motion sensors are reading that the aliens are beyond the sealed entry points.
The only thing about the script that didn't hold water with me was the notion that these marines seemed oblivious to xenomorphs and needed Ripley to explain their nature to them, but a few sentences later Hudson comments on the mission being a "bug hunt". That always bothered me. I think something was flaky there. But I just don't care because I think the movie is tremendous for what it is. I also think that, for 1986, ..it was a different time and something like Aliens was very cutting edge and effective.
Still love the first film and do like it better than the sequel but....
Sorry, I think we saw a different movie, in a different universe.
It's been a looooong time since I watched Pumpkinhead. I don't normally like modern horror films but that film really had this melancholy, Achilles heel theme to it, much like a tragic Greek play. And for that reason the movie stayed with me.
Right?!
You just described what I couldn't. Something special about Pumpkinhead despite its obvious mid to late 80's trappings.
cricket
10-11-18, 06:53 PM
Aliens is my second favorite action movie after Die Hard, and it was one of the best times I've ever had at the cinema. Also a fan of Cold in July, A Simple Plan, and Pumpkinhead. I was a little disappointed in A History of Violence but want to see it again.
The Principal
(1987)
https://i.imgur.com/D0JP12z.jpg
James Belushi plays an angry alcoholic teacher desperate for a career change after being dumped by his girlfriend. When he gets a cosmic offer the very next day for a principal position at a violent high school, he reluctantly accepts the offer.
We are expected to believe that mullet dominated Belushi is a real bad ass fella. He rides a motorcycle, frequently knocks over bar stools, and chases people around with a baseball bat if they piss him off. He seems to be the perfect fit to clean up a school of criminals.
Suspension of disbelief. I think suspension of disbelief requires one to use brain and gut muscles that are paramount to utilizing other functions of the human condition such as forgiveness and the benefit of the doubt. Second chances, though often ill advised, are granted based on using this area of non prejudice. The question is, how can anyone grow as an individual without this active function?
This is the case when watching The Principal. No other way will allow much inspection of the solid script, which really spends time with the students and forms a bond between a teacher ready to give up on his life reaching out to others ready to do the same.
We have tropes here, more so now because this was from a period when things happening in this film weren't as worn out. There are laughable scenarios and forehead slapping moments seasoning the mix. But what stood out to me was not just the gritty location or the rugged look of the actual film stock and camera work/lighting, but the seriousness behind the actors in their roles. Because the writing was solid and the characters each had enough screen time to be able to tell their story, we get something to invest in, using of course our suspension of disbelief.
The Principal got slammed when it was initially released, and I haven't found anything much positive about it since it came out, whether on line or in the trade archives. However, I will say that this is the kind of film that can be very easily dismissed because it has the odds stacked against it.
https://i.imgur.com/nwfcTUx.jpg
It is silly, and it is cliche, and it isn't politically correct. But on the other hand it stands within the ranks of other films of that period like Stand and Deliver and Lean on Me. What it does not do is ooze any kind of sentiment that begs for oscars or other achievement awards. It gets right to the core as soon as it can, and getting there still doesn't feel rushed or contrived. This is not a film you stand up and cheer for at the end. It's essentially a routine picture that does end in some violence, but I still feel as if this picture is responsible in the sense that it doesn't just "waste kids" because they're bad. It is fully aware of James being the white guy. It is aware that a lot of the problems here aren't with race division as much as inter-race relations. People of the same skin are hurting each other. But this is not a loud shout for ghetto/poverty injustice as much as it is an action picture with some comic relief that usually misses its mark.
I didn't sit there and think about this picture as being an undiscovered gem. I understand why it got low ratings and continues to gather low ratings to this day. But I will say that The Principal is a solid effort, and it was fun to watch.
https://i.imgur.com/nHLzcDh.jpg?1
3+
Three O'Clock High
(1987)
Director: Phil Joanou
Long time Coen bros DP Barry Sonnenfeld helms the camera and lighting in this ultra stylish teenage comedy picture directed by a budding Phil Janou (State of Grace).
Music is by Tangerine Dream, and things definitely harken back to Risky Business not only with some very similar musical themes, but with some very overt stylistic movements on display.
Three O' Clock High is essentially an art action film set in the teen comedy universe. The insert shots and coverage are meticulously and frantically paced in editing providing a very rich sense of the self aware film making. The camera movements are fluid and dramatic, the framing and composition are among the top tier of anything coming out of this period of film. Sets, design, and wardrobe are all in check.
So taking all of this into account, now we have the luxury of being treated to a funny film. The scenes play out loomy and dramatic, but inside this dark comedy is a lot of very well placed comedic shticks that always hit their marks.
A high school nerd is assigned to write a welcome to campus piece on a reputed psychotic bully. When this nerd confronts the bully in the boy's room urinal, trying to break the ice, things accidentally go south and the bully challenges the nerd to a fight after school.
https://i.imgur.com/c95ES9k.jpg
That's the basic premise. And what a world is created around that!
This is the kind of movie where it sets up the basis of the story very early on and then just continues to dazzle with its inventive story telling. As much as I doubt this is any kind of award winning film - it really doesn't aim for that. I'd say that a movie like this just does what it does - and does it extremely well.
https://i.imgur.com/eqXqhGa.jpg
It combines all of the elements of a teenage comedy and puts spins on it. The best thing about Three O'Clock High is that it delivers the goods. It doesn't take short cuts. I've read criticism that it mocks it's own morale by ultimately giving into a fight scene at the end, but I disagree. I believe the point of the film is that sometimes you have to fight, especially when you have no choice, which is exactly what our lead has in this film: he has absolutely zero choice.
It's a fun movie and doesn't require a lot of brain work. All of the visual flair is like being catered to at an upscale restaurant. Also, this film doesn't rely on sex and drugs to be the "hook". It uses well timed physical comedy and some zany performances to sell itself. The villain of the film is perfect, and when moments of darkness hit on that visceral gut level - you feel them. I actually welled up with tears once or twice because the film making is so powerful.
https://i.imgur.com/jQF5dCI.jpg
But most people would just scoff at a movie like this because they would try to apply the same logic to reviewing a film like this to say - a Christopher Nolan movie or something, so ...I can't force anyone to think different, but I would highly recommend this film to anyone who "gets it", and wants to either check out a real gem passed over, or reinspect a film from their youth. You won't be disappointed.
I also highly suggest watching this on a clean source such as blu ray. This may be one of the best meat and potatoes high school films made that isn't trying to break new dramatic ground.
https://i.imgur.com/aXlyQWu.jpg
4.5
The Greasy Strangler
(2017)
https://i.imgur.com/4DOPn2O.jpg
Tasteless, crude, filthy, X-rated, disgusting, repetitive, and usually not very funny, this nasty concoction of sex, violence and dim witted humor makes its way from the gutter in the spirit of John Waters (Pink Flamingos, Hairspray) and Frank Henenlotter(Basket Case, Brain Damage).
Do I have to give away the premise? It's so stupid.
A father and son team take idiots on fake tours around the city to spots they lie about being havens for yesteryear's disco sensations like - The Bee Gees. Incognito, the dad turns into a nasty beast that strangles people at night until they are dead!
Not much else to say. The music is so ridiculous - it lives off a bass heavy synth patch and some strange trimmings on top. The sex is usually with heavy set women with pretty faces. The violence is not only over the top but almost vomit inducing.
So, why am I giving this a rating of 3 popcorns?
I am not sure yet. Ask me in another few years, maybe a decade.
This picture has balls, and the good grace to bludgeon the viewer with humor so strange and thin that it literally takes repeated phrasing to hammer it home until it becomes a mantra. This was done a lot by Will Ferrell alumni at SNL, but here it's just certified crazy.
The narrative is almost non existent, in fact, near the end it completely abandons itself in favor of some meta commentary on alternate universe tribal babble. Fine by me.
It's effective cinema. Just the fact that I had a real chance to turn it off before bed and then started it up the next night is testament to it having put a spell on me.
I'm not ashamed, but I am curious. No closure in this review.
3
THE MASTER
2012
Paul Thomas Anderson
I hated this film when I saw it in theaters. I cannot watch films like this when I'm out. They require attention and replay capabilities I simply don't have when sitting in a public seat.
This is my third time trying 2012's The Master, and this time I made sure to have no distractions, no foul mood, and no expectations.
I've known all along that Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix are acting giants and served this film well, even though I thought the narrative was complete garbage and that the pacing was an insult to the public at large.
After about ten minutes into the film I decided to enable subtitles so I wouldn't miss a word of the script. I often have trouble hearing certain garbled dialog, and this film has plenty of that. This was a very smart move on my part because with that small adjustment, I was finally able to enjoy this movie exactly the way I should have all along.
PTA films post Boogie Nights and Magnolia have forced me to warm up to them. With PTA's first three films he practiced an accessible feast for general public with the bonus of sensibilities not usually found in commercial cinema. I should note that I've also hated There Will Be Blood, but reconciled a year or so back, and now consider it masterful film making.
With most of PTA's later output, I just needed time to digest it. I don't believe it's that I am slow or stupid, I think it's because I need to be in the mood to really take it on and play around with the inner text. There's a lot to see and hear in this picture, so trying to follow an obnoxiously slow pace was a chore the first two times, and I resented this film for it, even though I champion slowly paced films. I can't figure it out. What's wrong with me? Nothing. It's called changing tastes over time.
Now, I know damn well that this film was an experiment and that the narrative isn't, or wasn't meant to be as clever as some say it is. Essentially it's a lot of things. It's a story about a smooth talking intellect who takes a shine to a wild and bullish man because he is reminded of his own inner animal. It's about control and conceit. It's about the roots of L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics. It's about sexuality and how it drives you mad. There is a lot going on. A lot.
Freddy is a mean spirited child. He bullies his old flame's mother on her own doorstep. He bullies and humiliates a portly man getting a portrait taken for his wife. His knack for evading responsibility is illustrated at one point when his hooch kills an old man working in the fields at an odd job Freddy briefly holds down. He's a wicked gypsy man child with volcanic rage.
Dodd on the other hand is a charming, energetic and very composed picture of a father. He shows Freddy a way out of his torment, even though Freddy admits no such thing exists. Eventually, their relationship becomes an enabling joint venture. Freddy is Dodd's muse and bodyguard, and Dodd is Freddy's father figure, as well as his financial ticket. Freddy constantly sizes up net worth in Dodd, his writings, and his fine porcelain. As much as a friend as Dodd is to Freddy, Dodd will not be shut down by anyone. He has two episodes where he is called out by onlookers or devotees and his temper flares.
There are several well placed comedy moments in Anderson's script, and the actors are up for the fun. This is very much, like TWBB, a comedy with tones of drama and thriller. Some of this movie plays it so over the top you feel as if you're getting the piss taken. You are. There's no question that PTA is pulling the viewer's leg at several key moments. Fat Matt Damon introduces himself as Dodd's son. Quell remarks "Yeah, I see the resemblance". I suspected a lot of the time, all of the drama was somehow a private joke, and I later confirmed it with viewing the outtakes to the film, not the bloopers, but the deleted scenes. These guys were having a laugh.
I'll say, as an experience in cinema, especially american cinema, you can't get much more rich than The Master. It looks beautiful, sounds regal with Jonny Greenwood's symphonic score always gnawing at dissonance, and time spent with the two leads is a real treat because they are so into their characters, it just comes off like a big shlt eating grin joke. It's so intense.
Also, Amy Adams shouldn't go unnoticed in this review. Her portrayal of the co-brain of the entire Dodd operation is nicely played, if not overwhelmingly camp like that of Quell and Dodd.
So on this viewing I was right at home with the pacing, even during the most dreaded scene for me; when Quell walks back and forth between a window and a wooden wall panel, eventually explaining his experiences that illuminate some of his well shrouded plight. On this viewing that scene was rewarding. I noticed inserts of Dodd eating on his patio, watching Quell, demanding he go again while he is perfectly framed between the fine white picture window drapes.
The final note of the film left me feeling miserable. Quell makes love to a woman he meets at the pub, and he starts riffing on Dodd's teachings - badly. We're left with this as a pathetic end to their relationship, and the promise of them being at odds with each other in the next life.
https://i.imgur.com/y34guiK.jpg
R.I.P. Philip Seymour HoffmanThere is no greater actor at this time
4+
Liked your review of this film...Beatty is one of the industry's most underrated talents and I love Liev Schreiber too...will be adding this one to my watchlist.
Hey, did you ever end up watching this?
Spring Forward?
The Outing (1987)
Director: Who Cares?
https://i.imgur.com/WzFGKdY.jpg
Horrible film. Nothing interesting except maybe a few shots of opticals and amuseum at night atmosphere. I wished I liked it better, but I didn't. As poor as this review is, and as short as it will be, the movie went on forever, and this review is better than the film so...you're lucky!
The Princess Bride
(1987)
Director: Rob Reiner
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9naHXviCtBM
https://i.imgur.com/wKuO318.jpg
Here's one of the best movies ever made, and so easy to watch. Nothing is really disagreeable when you just want to get involved in a film but not be overwhelmed with carnage or suspenseful mind games.
The Princess Bride dishes up so much humor in just about every scene that you almost forget it's also a fairy tale. This isn't just cute comedy for the family. This is the kind of comedy that represents what comedy was and should still be. It's not all cynical, in fact, a lot of it is just intelligent and light. Between the performances and impeccable timing of the cast, to the lush and lavish set design and costuming, it's really going to be an exercise in futility to find something inherently wrong with Rob Reiner's best film.
The writing is a shining star in Reiner's adaption of the book, and the screenplay is written by the original author in Goldman. His sense for humor decorates every pitfall and narrative post, and it's a thing to behold because I really cannot remember this film being as good as it is. I've seen it several times since its debut on Nelson Home Entertainment VHS back in 1988.
https://i.imgur.com/mBRkWDD.jpg5
https://i.imgur.com/pY2POYD.jpg
Phantom Thread
(2017)
Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
I made sure to pay very close attention to this romantic drama starring Daniel Day Lewis and a very beautiful Vickie Krieps. I had no distractions and I was ready for greatness based upon my reappraisal and pleasure with Anderson's last two challenging films (There Will Be Blood and The Master).
However, I can't say that I was super impressed with Phantom Thread, and unlike The Master or There Will Be Blood, I was at home when I watched it, and didn't feel as if I had to watch it again and again to pick up on something I "missed". I saw the film, I digested it fully, and was still left kind of hollow and bewildered.
The first hour or so is absolutely dull, and I don't mean that as an insult as much as a straight up fact. It's slow, un-involving, and quite frankly, a bit pretentious. Ok, so, no big surprise. Let's not forget who we're dealing with here, it's Mr. P.T.Anderson, after all.
My main issue was the narrative, although interestingly written to a certain degree (hard headed wife lightly poisons work-a-holic artist husband to get him vulnerable so she can feel more wanted), the pay off was kind of cobbled together and didn't hit that grand note of irony for me that was clearly trying to do so to a general audience used to this kind of work; elegant, subdued, paced, and engaging. My problem was that I wasn't engaged. Aside from a few F words that seemed to be the only element to break up the strictly light PG grayness of the complete running time, I felt this movie had very little humor, which was a surprise. It's a bit of a mad love story, sure - but I expected so much more from a film maker like Paul Thomas Anderson.
The things that seemed perfectly fine were the sets, costuming, lighting, and music score. All of these were beautiful and strange, but nothing too extraordinary. Johnny Greenwood's score was impressive, if not a bit on the classical and routine side. I don't know. There seemed to be potential, but it just didn't cross all of the T's.
The narrative, or lack of - that was another big issue. The whole sub plot with the doctor. We are never even sure if the wife had an affair with him, and by the end of the film it seemed like either that portion of the story was cut out, or just never really finished being written. It only served as a red herring distraction for what is essentially no climax aside from a rather silly character arc from the dress maker, as he finally gives in to the poisonous treatment and jokingly falls back in love with his nutty wife, even going so far as to tell her to close the door behind her when he's about to vomit, all the while donning a wide grin on his face.
Not sure I thought that was especially good writing, but it was different, I'll give it that. Having said "I'll give it that" - well, "that" still isn't enough because this movie almost seems to aim for black comedy but somehow just drops the ball and comes off serious. OK, so it's a serious drama, right? Wrong. WRONG!! It doesn't even honor a gothic fiendishness, and that is sorely missing from a film that only hints at what it could have been.
If invisible nuance and more of the same long stretch is what defines a good film for you-then I can strongly recommend Phantom Thread. But if you want an OK Computer to a Kid A progression, well..you're not going to get it. Anderson seems to have gone a bit backwards with his high reaching pattern. He's made an elegant film for "Adults", but it doesn't have any teeth. I suppose us as the general audience should be happy we got something extravagant in the way of sets and clothing.
Points sustained for gorgeous rendering of locations and some decent enough moments, but hardly a great film.
3
https://i.imgur.com/3Xjwt9f.jpg
Summer of 84
Under construction.
3
when harry met sally - 1989 dir rob reiner
https://i.imgur.com/440E9Kv.jpg
Nora Ephron, Reiner and Crystal, along with Meg Ryan, all chipped in on the script with bits and pieces to make this snappy dialog picture fire on all of its cylinders, but it's the basic layout, structure and heart of the movie that should go to Ephron who had a stroke of genius with how this film plays out. The emotional component is that of a nurtured relationship that seems destined to evolve into an explosion of mad love. But it's this very premise, as well executed as it is - that ultimately undermines the picture. It's because it takes too long to get to the obvious. Even with the understanding that the filmmakers wanted to really build it up - by the time it finally gets there and we can say "ah, they're pefect for each other!", the audience has already been waiting 90 mins or more. It's serviced from the start so there are no real surprises here.
The good part is that the journey is worth its weight in gold. It's a funny, light and entertaining film - something Reiner knows how to slap together. He's a damn good director, and as showboaty and stereotypical as he gets with his characterizations and actor wrangling, he really does have his heart in the right place. That seems to be a trademark with him. He means well, and more often than not - he scores on multiple levels, which is kind of rare because I don't see his contemporaries like Ron Howard even being able to sustain that in their body of work. Reiner is less homogenized as a comedy director, and his familiar venture in romantic comedy drama hits notes that don't envelope themselves in a thick and cerebral domain. Instead his notes make the ride stress-free (at the expense of some believability). I mean come on already, we get it. They're going to hook up. Some of Meg Ryan's acting is very obvious and community theater, but there are also moments where she blows me away. She's very good, and she has that face that made me pay attention when she is kissed. It's her virtuosity that balances between cartoonish and obvious, to deep and vulnerable that makes the sauce not taste like syrup. She may lean towards the sugar bowl a little too often playing her nose up in the air when she tries to act upset, but when she lets the camera give her a moment to play her own beat she's really hot stuff.
Crystal can't carry a picture with much depth. He's a comedian, and mostly just that. But in this film he works because he plays along so well with the script. It really was made for him so it's a shoo in for all intents and purposes. It's not that he's unbelievable as a romantic lead, it's just that he isn't required to go to any dark places, and that's just fine considering this isn't that kind of movie, anyway. So this doesn't really qualify as a negative criticism as much as it's a statement about how to make a good recipe compared to how to make a bad one. If Henry Rollins kissed Meg Ryan I'd have to shut it off.
It's a good movie.
cricket
02-09-19, 11:52 AM
R.I.P. Philip Seymour HoffmanThere is no greater actor at this time
I thought he was the best while he was with us. You see Before the Devil Knows Your Dead?
R.I.P. Philip Seymour HoffmanThere is no greater actor at this time
I thought he was the best while he was with us. You see Before the Devil Knows Your Dead?
Yeah i think i have a review on here...good flick
Velvet Buzzsaw (2019) dir: Dan Gilroy
A winking horror film that deals with the art world, gallery owners, artists and commerce - all very unsuccessfully.
What could have been a creative and limitless piece of film making is instead a diluted and highly embarrassing satire that quite frankly doesn't even deserve that word to be attached to it - satire. A satirical film is at worst slightly clever and at best game changing. Velvet Buzzsaw is such an awful movie that I was in utter shock at how the ratings were so high for this.
Jake Gyllenhaal does what he can with the camp factor. His delivery is good as usual, but then again we're forced to witness a completely unrelated fascination with his creatine and anabolic steroidal work out regimen in some grotesque fashion where it appears he's joining the neckless fraternity in the legion of jocks. Ok, then we have Jon Malkovich who just seems to pop in to lend some art cred I guess? What? Why?
Renee Russo does nothing but grate on the nerves as she tries to be a 65 year old bad ass sexpot as a former member of a rock group calling themselves Velvet Buzzsaw. OK, so..wait WHAT?! Why is this movie called Velvet Buzzsaw again? The name has absolutely nothing to do with what's happening in the story aside from a brief mention of her band (which by the way is an obvious and uninspired rip off of Velvet Underground or even more likely Velvet Goldmine and adding Buzzsaw instead) and some cheap kill gag involving a tattoo. Oy, this is such a garbage movie.
Nothing is funny. Nothing is interesting. No technique is explored. Every piece of an attempt at having fangs in the script is just more recycled stereotype about what the art world is on a commercial level. Yeah, we've seen it before. It's all been done better in movies that only briefly touched on that part of the planet.
I think the only part I laughed at was when some entitled little art skeez was freaking out, tapping away at her phone trying to close out of an art image that wouldn't go away. Yikes! Did I mention that this movie is a piece of shlt yet?
"Hey, I have an idea! Let's take a movie about the art world and politics, and cross pollinate it with an old slasher movie, except we'll write the jokes flat and obvious and leave any true scares or ingenuity completely out!"
Hey, ya sold me! I'm the sucker who watched it. Brought to you by the always reliable folks over at Netflix! Yayy!! :)
1
My reviews have zero flow. Damn
cat_sidhe
05-10-19, 06:14 AM
:lol:
The Highwaymen (2019)
dir: Johnny Lee Hancock
https://i.imgur.com/gAUzk6m.jpg
Costner and Harrelson get cast alongside each other as two Texas rangers on the trail of the infamous Bonnie and Clyde crime spree. The film tells the story from the viewpoint of the law and makes many attempts to sway the public embrace of B&C as modern day Robin Hoods, instead painting a picture of sociopath criminals with no regard for human life. It is successful at this illustration.
The tone of the film is very dark. The cinematography is crisp and deliberate, sometimes beautiful. Costner seems to have grown into a good character as in the past I've found his acting to be soulless and wooden. There is a certain depth with him here, as if his entire career was building up to this moment with his acting choices. Possibly Costner was just ahead of his time?
Harrelson pretty much plays it like he always does. Southern drawl, cheery disposition, able to let the expository work flow from his assured tempo. Maybe a bit too Hollywood for some tastes, but effective.
As a buddy film little struck me as very good, but moments throughout didn't keep the box unchecked as a success, however minor the chemistry. As a drama some moments stand out. Quiet moments. A rim lit Costner on the porch in 2 different locations, brooding at night, just outside of an open window. Looks like director Hancock saw a good thing and decided to use it twice.
The plot was a bit confusing, as the subtext was buried in garbled dialog that would require a rewind to catch it all. On a streaming service this isn't the most desirable way to take everything in, as losing your spot in the movie is all too common for a netflix type of scenario. I didn't bother rewinding so perhaps a deeper film with more perspective was there, but I didn't see it for better or worse.
This is a good film. It's a damn good film. There's a passion about it, like a fever dream between the master shots and the music score, letting small moments play that I really responded to. ie - the car pulls over to show the two rangers switching seats, taking turns on who would be driving, just as the sun is going down. A camera floats over the greenest grass at night while the rangers enter a dark and abandoned house, looking for clues.
My complaints are that some of the script elements are too on the nose, like when Costner's character confides in Clyde's gas station attendant father played by William Sadler. It seemed a bit too melodramatic and heart sleeve too quick, too convenient, and knew it, so it tried covering its tracks by openly addressing it "why are you telling me this?" (referring to Costner's break from icy secrecy into divulgence of his haunted past).
It's a minor classic, The Highwaymen. I have noticed that nowadays with all of the films coming home to roost on the internet, that something has been lost, something in the way of confidence, the way to tell a story, the old master way of putting something on the screen, avoiding the prominence of attractive shortcuts and sound bytes that may cheapen the film. This film falls victim at times to the new copy paste way of selling its product, modernized goal posts that break the authenticity of the era depicted - the music score, as good as it is - can be heard as something of a deterrent, as well as some of the attitudes and acting chops - they ring a little too true to the online culture of meta awareness that history has clearly shown wasn't really in the vernacular back then, how could it be? But this is forgivable because after all, it's a movie and it certainly isn't the first time that modern sheen has been injected into a period piece to wake it up for demanding audiences who need sugar with their tea. It's clear to see that inside The Highwaymen there is a really, really good film, and that gets my respect.
3.5
https://i.imgur.com/MiPtRlk.jpg
Mandy by Panos Cosmatos
2.5
Well, I did re-watch this to give it a fair shake, and all I have to add now is that this film would have been a lot better if it'd been balanced more tonally. Nic Cage's joke moments land weird. Like, we're in an unrelenting nightmare world and he cracks a one-liner about a torn t-shirt. This didn't seem like that kind of movie, even though I guess technically it is.
I did appreciate most of the visuals and incredible music score. This is book ended by a decent love story, even though brief. My thoughts are that Mandy saw the evil in her lover on first sight and somehow did call out for the carnage and heartache that was to follow. If you really look at the clues it's plain to see that Mandy was gravitating towards evil the entire time but stumbled on some amateur hour cult that made her jaded and soon after burned at the stake. Cage's character found his calling. He loved and then became darkness to avenge his love, but it all played out like a perfect fate warts and all.
I did like the movie but thought some of the script elements were a little too mismatched to make it that perfect movie it probably could have been with a more carefully measured presentation by way of editing/writing. For example the expository scene with Bill Duke seemed a miscast of Duke's talents. The writing seemed too broad and on the nose at the same time. It could have been written more cryptically and Duke's delivery seemed too deflated. Also, because this seemed a pinnacle moment of story, Cage's "don't be negative" remark seemed out of character for a guy who just saw his girlfriend burned alive.
SeeingisBelieving
05-28-19, 01:19 PM
I prefer the theatrical cut to the extended DC. I feel the off world colony didn't really need to be seen as the aftermath still puts across the despair in spades considering a little girl is living in an AC duct.
Yeah I think imagining what happened to them – and Newt – is far worse.
KeyserCorleone
05-28-19, 03:15 PM
Nice Radiohead comparison for your Phantom Thread review, though it could be more optimistic.
Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama
1988, not quite the 90's but definitely a few steps away from the concentrated era of the mid eighties. Direct to video releases become more and more common, and sleazy exploitation films adopt a newer, more polished sheen.
Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama is an almost perfect example of capturing that campy, cozy and one stop shop video going experience. It had a limited theatrical run (if at all), and was released to the market amidst several other low budget affair, but unlike its contemporaries, say, Chopping Mall, the fun in this movie plays better. The locations are more decadent, the skin is more decadent, the camera work and lighting are many cuts above average, and the acting is almost twice as nerve grating.
This is one stupid little movie which is why it's almost sheer perfection for anyone looking for a mindless and fun film with atmosphere to spare.
The basic story is that three college boy doofuses find themselves in company of three attractive sorority girls at an after hours bowling alley/shopping mall on an initiation dare to steal a league trophy.
Somewhere along the way a genie is unleashed from the trophy and wishes are to be granted. From there things turn weird and silly, but not without a heaping dose of light show and comedy that always lands with a loud thud.
And while most of the humor that's intentional fails to leave a lasting impression, it's the quickly sketched lines that make a mark. Abbot and Costello routines sometimes find their way in as well as foul analogies muttered by a night janitor. Linnea Quigley shows her guns and everyone else just simply gets naked for long stretches of time.
There's nothing like a movie you've never seen before that is able to take you back like a time capsule and deliver the mood and fun of an 80's video fringe night in such a way where the first time feels like the 5th time, and there's not many movies that are so bad and average that can pull all of this off while still being moderately tame save some nudity and a decapitation.
This gets a high mark for me because it hit the right spot at exactly the right time. I won't pretend it'll do the same for anyone else, though.
4.5
https://i.imgur.com/25OU9P7.jpg
FromBeyond
08-15-19, 06:08 AM
[CENTER][B][SIZE="7"] Costner seems to have grown into a good character as in the past I've found his acting to be soulless and wooden]
I just said this to a friend after watching Tin Cup the other day.. for some reason I found myself thinking Patrick Swayze would have been better in the role.
Dolemite is my Name (2019)
Eddie is back in hard R rated territory finally after decades of pg-13 maximum. I guess he was being a good dad and not making filth flarn, flarn filth in those years.
Though I didn't laugh but a half handful of times (and the chuckles were minor), this was a well made movie on a technical level. I suppose because this was a "crafted" film, and not a knee slapper - it most likely is the reason why Eddie isn't nearly as funny as he can be. The thing about Murphy, especially in later years of his career, is that it isn't what he says that makes him funny as hell, it's the look in his eyes and the sound of his voice when he fever pitches his manic delivery. We catch a glimpse or two of this in Dolemite, but not much more because the story is hard at work here, which is commendable.
I'm not sure I'd see this film again because, though decent and heartfelt, it does drag a bit with the mechanics of allowing Rudy's story to unfold, and the comic potential suffers for it, but, I am glad that this film has all the esteem behind it because that means Murphy has finally broken his bad track record, and will hopefully be back to make us bust up again really soon.
3.5
Decoder (1984)
German art film from early 80's offers tons of seemingly unrelated micro imagery, gel blends by lighting, and graphic violence.
The story doesn't make a lot of sense, and the telling of the tale is pretty funny from a technical standpoint, but if you're looking to reinvigorate your creative well, Decoder is a film maker's late night treat.
Synopsis:
No, thanks.
re93animator
11-07-20, 02:39 PM
Decoder (1984)
The DVD was essential to me thanks to the personnel involved and the industrial-avant style (both in the music and images), but I agree, it's just not very entertaining or as thought-provoking as it wants to be.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.