Movie Tab II

[Classicqueen13]

http://bp1.blogger.com/_F_2xvc04me0/RgPEtTqHmUI/AAAAAAAAC0s/wU7uJvXgK7o/s400/poster.jpg

Great special effects highlight this suspenseful film. I was very pleased with the deepening of characters that is sometimes left out in this sort of film (for example, Helen Hunt's characters story about her father) but I thought they could've put it to better use. Hunt and Paxton are perfect together. While a lot of it I found completely improbable, it was still realistic enough to entertain. The script wasn't anything amazing, but was good. Very good blockbuster here.

Overall: 3.5


http://timswyka.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/the_hunt_for_red_october_movie_poster1.jpg
Of course, I'm biased about which Jack Ryan films I like the best. I really enjoyed this one, however. I thought Alec Baldwin did a very nice job introducing us to the awesome character of Jack Ryan. Sean Connery was absolutely perfect for his role. I hadn't realized Scott Glenn had such an active role in this film, and it was nice to see him. Tom Clancy is a fantastic story teller and it shows here.

Overall: 3.5 also



http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1010/104052.1010.A.jpg
I've heard almost nothing but dreadful reviews of this film, so I was a little skeptical when this one was picked. It wasn't nearly as bad as I had heard. Costner did well in an...interesting...role. The villian that supposed to be sinister actually makes you laugh, which is always kind of strange in how it works. I rather liked the little girl's part. It's pretty long, but it didn't seem that way to me. The ending was a little predictable, imo, but kept me interested. Not as bad as most people say.

Overall: 3


http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f6/ForeignCorrespondent.jpg/225px-ForeignCorrespondent.jpg
Hitchcock can be kind of hit or miss with me, but this one was a hit. A suspense classic. Hitchcock's direction is top notch as usual, and Joel McCrea is very good in the lead. The script is great, providing moments of comic relief as well as tension. Herbert Marshall is excellent here, as he usually is. One of Hitchcock lesser known films, it holds up very well. I prefer this to Strangers on a Train

Overall: 3.5


http://images.fandango.com/images/fandangoblog/secretincasposter2.jpg

I discovered this film only today on a Youtube video about Indiana Jones. As soon as I saw it, I made up my mind I had to see it. Heston plays an earlier version of Jones with only a few differences. (Very little in the costume, however) Thomas Mitchell does a nice job with a small role. I had a hard time seeing him as the villian, though. Nicole Maurey does very well as the female lead. The script has plenty of snappy dialouge and the storyline is a classic adventure. Anyone who likes Indiana Jones should enjoy watching this one.

Overall: 4

[TheUsualSuspect]

I wanted to like The Mist, but the religious angle/woman really grated on me (almost to the point of turning it off), and the ending was complete rubbish. I liked the premise a lot though (even if it is derivative of Carpenter's The Fog, and Gordon's From Beyond) and agree it was a noble attempt to revitalise the monster movie genre. Shame.

The ending is the best part of the entire movie.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse....BAM.

[Sleezy]

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/appaloosa.jpg

Appaloosa (Harris, 2008) 3_5

Peculiar film. I expected a gritty, hard-nosed Western, but Appaloosa turned out to be something of an unapologetic Spaghetti Rom-Com. There's a good dose of frontier grit and inevitable violence. But then you've got Harris and Mortenson, guns in hand, sipping coffee and bantering about women like college buddies. It's quite odd and surprisingly enjoyable.

Likewise, I actually appreciate Harris' courage to indulge a classic score and nods to old Spaghetti Westerns (riding off into the sunset, anyone?). The film feels like an Indie too, with a story that ambles lazily around a central narrative and resolutions that aren't entirely predictable. Toward the end, the film musters an attempt to take ownership of a deeper theme - the forlorn cowboy falling behind the times - but it appears too late in the film to hold weight. I guess that would be my only complaint: ultimately, the film doesn't seem to mean anything. (Well, that, and maybe the fact that Renee Zellweger looks more like a Comanche than the Comanches do.)

Still, the film is enjoyable in its own right, and although it's not nearly as good as The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, I'm glad to see Harris exploring ideas about what a Western can be.

[inthecornerdunce-]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ZDG0hTgcTIw/StJ_KyITXII/AAAAAAAADiU/NQfco8OcYXY/s400/MadeInBritainDVD.gif


Made In Britain ( Alan Clarke, 1982 ) - Roth's performance is brutal and realistic and the rough, hand-held style of the camera-work contributes to its documentary feel.

The most important part of this film is Trevor's honesty. Honesty, however horrific it is, is Trevor's primary motivation. After watching it again and again, this is what comes through more than anything else. Trevor is uncompromising. He refuses to let society dictate his own opinions, even when that society kicks him and beats him. Trevor almost never misleads people, and practices his mantra almost to the letter. His integrity is never in doubt. Like him or hate him, you will respect the fact that he stands for his beliefs.



http://media.avclub.com/images/media/movie/3365/This-Is-England_jpg_595x325_crop_upscale_q85.jpg

This Is England ( Shane Meadows, 2006 ) - Shane Meadows leads this film with steady-paced dedication and carefully-planned style. His nuance matches all the moods and textures which are accentuated throughout the film, and as a result everything falls into its right place. This is England not only provides provocative perspectives on our political state, it also manages to touch our hearts in the most memorable way. It's hard to forget such a brilliant film as this one.


http://www.raindance.co.uk/site/picture/upload/image/resources/natasha%20top%20ten/thebeliever.jpg


The Believer ( Henry Bean, 2001 ) - The Believer contains rare insights into Jewish identity, and it's a shame that the film was withheld from mainstream audiences due to ongoing controversy.

Nevertheless, this a powerful and compelling film, with a lead performance by Ryan Gosling. We see early on that Danny is capable of doing appalling things, but his moral conflicts are then presented so persuasively that we cannot help but empathize with him. The climax is painfully ambiguous. Those who are looking for easy answers may want to skip this film. But they will be missing out on what is easily the most authentic and profound exploration of Jewish self-hatred ever portrayed on screen.

[TheUsualSuspect]

Jennifer's Body

http://studio360.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/jennifers-body-movie-poster1.jpg

I wanted to like this one, I adore Juno and the genre is right up my alley. Yet I found it to be way too inconsistent and even more cheese than I wanted. Fox plays herself with the witty one liners that Cody just loves to throw into her screenplays. Her hotness factor is there, but she is quickly running thin on that. Give mer something more than just your face to look at.

The saving grace here is Amanda Seyfried, she steals the show from the title character. The gore is lacking and simply shows the aftermath, a lot of it doesn't make sense to me. I wanted it to go in one direction, it went the complete opposite.

A big disappointment from this one. I have people ask me what I expected from it, I tell them something to laugh with, not at.

1.5

[Harry Lime]

http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/1gateofflesh.jpg
Gate of Flesh (1964, Seijun Suzuki) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/2thedevilanddanielwebster.jpg
The Devil and Daniel Webster (1941, William Dieterle) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/3themagician.jpg
The Magician (1958, Ingmar Bergman) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/4angelswithdirtyfaces.jpg
Angels with Dirty Faces (1938, Michael Curtiz) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/5up.jpg
Up (2009, Pete Docter) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/6salo.jpg
Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom (1975, Pier Paolo Pasolini) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/7el.jpg
El (1953, Luis Bunuel) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/8timeofthegypsies.jpg
Time of the Gypsies (1988, Emir Kusturica) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/9fistsinthepocket.jpg
Fists in the Pocket (1965, Marco Bellocchio) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/10thewanderers.jpg
The Wanderers (1979, Philip Kaufman) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/11thetrial.jpg
The Trial (1962, Orson Welles) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/12limelight.jpg
Limelight (1952, Charles Chaplin) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/13theprefabpeople.jpg
The Prefab People (1982, Bela Tarr) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/14princeofthecity.jpg
Prince of the City (1981, Sidney Lumet) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/15deadmansshoes.jpg
Dead Man's Shoes (2004, Shane Meadows) 3

[TheUsualSuspect]

Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom.

Been interested in seeing this one for a while now. An further insight to it?

[TheUsualSuspect]

Zombieland

http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2009/07/15/zombieland-poster.jpg

A good entertaining film.

This did what I wanted Jennifer's Body to do, not only make me laugh, but make me cheer. It's got the gore, it's got the laughs and it stays consistent with its tone. The cast works well together, even if I didn't like the two females in it, but hey, there has to be some stupid characters in every movie right?

I would have liked to have seen a bit more zombie killing and a little less of the love angle. The purpose of this film is survival and it gets a little too caught up in this love sub-plot, but I give it points for trying.

I loved the titles as they came up and would have liked to of seen more of his rules, but I'll wait for the inevitable sequel.

If you want to see horror and comedy done well, check this out.

4

[Harry Lime]

Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom.

Been interested in seeing this one for a while now. An further insight to it?

I knew what I was getting myself into before watching it, but that still didn't prepare enough me for what I saw. I don't really want to get into too much detail about it, but I kinda joked to myself afterwards: "Here's a perfect candidate for the Movie Discussion Club." Good luck, Suspect.

[Iroquois]

http://www.melissacwalker.com/blog/lost-boys-movie-poster.jpg

The Lost Boys (Joel Schumacher, 1987) - 2.5

First things first - this was a disappointment. I think I might even be overrating it slightly. However, it did have a certain charm to it. I don't know for certain whether it was because of or in spite of the ridiculously exaggerated 80s setting and incredibly stilted-sounding dialogue, but that certainly saved the movie for me a bit. To me, Lost Boys failed as a horror for not being scary and it didn't fare much better as a comedy either (nothing quite as painful to watch as an obvious attempt at humour that doesn't make you laugh). The whole film strikes me as a lot of wasted potential, although I'm damned if I can think of anything to make it any better than it was. All in all, not really worth a $10 blind-buy.

http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/release_images/269/26_box_348x49.jpg

The Long Good Friday (John Mackenzie, 1980) - 4

This is more like it. An extremely well-done British gangster film, anchored by a powerhouse performance by Bob Hoskins and a cleverly-written plot (which was admittedly ruined a little bit because I already had the ending spoiled for me - on this very site no less - although not enough to kill the rest of the film dead in the water.) Special mention has to go to the infectious synthesiser music.

http://dudehesthestallion.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/demon-seed.jpg

Demon Seed (Donald Cammell, 1977) - 3.5

Man, I almost feel like I'm underrating it slightly. This was a surprisingly effective sci-fi/horror film, despite the fact that the bulk of the film is just Julie Christie being tormented by a psychotic AI - a concept that does seem somewhat boring when I write it like that, but is nonetheless rather engaging when you actually watch it. There's some potent exploration of ideas on offer, to say nothing of the surprisingly well-done special effects (that giant geometric robot thing is a damned impressive piece of machinery) and managing to achieve a palpable sense of fear, if only because the idea of living like a prisoner at the whim of a computer is only getting all too real nowadays.

[mark f]

Yeah, that's her.
I must have missed Ruth Gordon saying that.

I DID assume she was the 'first attempt' given the fact of the necklace, but then wondered why Mia was there then.

Did they decide then and there she was not working out?
If so, why was Mia already there?

Or did they decide a while before? If so...why not kill her before Mia got there?
Seems better than having her witness the event and spot the necklace!

This just seemed badly plotted aspect to me, almost forgotten in the edit process.

I'm not sure what you're talking about here. The coven has nothing to do with Rosemary and Guy moving into that apartment, and it's just a coincidence when she meets Terry (without the coven ever knowing although that laundry room is kinda spooky), but it does give Rosemary some background about her nosy neighbors who are about to become more involved in her life after the demise of Terry. I find nothing illogical about the character in the writing or the editing of the scenes whatsoever. What else were you doing while you were watching Rosemary's Baby? :cool:

[42ndStreetFreak]

I never thought it was pure accident that they moved there.
I guess I saw a conspiracy not dubious coincidence.

I assumed they moved there for that purpose, but perhaps it was the fault of Cassavetes endlessly untrustworthy performance that made him seem like he was up to something from the start...A major problem I have with the film. Redford would have been so much better a choice.

Cassavetes moves her in and they fulfil their part by getting him a film role (man...this is one highly dubious plot! Not much of a prize for pimping out your wife to the Devil and bringing the Anti-Christ into the world is it??).

It just being a coincidence they moved into a witches coven den though makes sense as far as the dead woman goes, yes.

[TheUsualSuspect]

G.I.Joe

http://blog.80millionmoviesfree.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/gi_joe.jpg

A top secret organization known as G.I.Joe must take on an arms dealer hell bend on destroying parts of the world.

In watching the previews for this film the first thing that came to my mind was "This is going to suck". The over the top cheese factor was all over the previews. The suits they wear to make them run faster, jump higher, was ridiculous. Not to mention the horribly miscast lead of Tatum and the out of the blue decision to include Quaid. With all of this going against, I finished the film was a smile on my face. I was...wait for it....entertained.

I thought I was going to hate this film, it didn't feel like a G.I. Joe film to me, it felt like they were just cashing in on the character names and fan base. This still feels true, but the film has fun with itself and never tries to be more than the sum of its parts. When you compare it to other loud and dumb action films of the summer, like Transformers 2 and Wolverine, G.I. Joe is better.

The plot is inane and they do screw up some characters. They had a chance to do something special with the "Rise of Cobra" but the sequences of his "flashback" seem wasted. The character himself is weird and nothing what I, or the fans for the most part, expected. Is he bad? In those terms yes, but for some strange reasons he works in this film. He was more interesting than any of the other characters. Scarlett is heavily underwritten as is Heavy Duty. In the realms of this film they do their job, heavy gunner and sex pot. Duke, the aforementioned Tatum is the main character and Tatum plays it wooden. He has a relationship with the Baroness, but it's hastily thrown together and doesn't have the weight it should. The is the same for Cobra and his relationships in the film.

The special effects are mixed here, sometimes it looks horrible, such as Destro's face and the obvious green screen moments. Other times it blends in relatively well with the action scenes. The attack on the Joes and the Paris chase sequences are well done and thrilling. I get excited seeing a group of highly trained "bad-guys" fight highly trained "good-guys". I would guess that's why I liked the movie as much as I did. That and every scene with Snake Eyes. Who, for a character who doesn't speak, has more back story to him than most of the other characters.

This film is not as bad as everyone says it is, it is pure popcorn entertainment with over the top action sequences and some cheese. The 3rd act takes place underwater and there are fight sequences in underwater vehicles. It's a neat spin on the space battles you see in Star Wars. I expected trash, got high-octane entertainment. I might be really generous with this score and on a second viewing it might go lower, but as I said before...I was entertained.

3.5

[Loner]

Dog Star Man (Stan Brakhage)

Pseudo intellectual hippie horse-crap.

Watch a man with an axe and a dog walk up a mountain.

Swiggly lines.

A beating heart.

A baby.

A woman's breast giving milk.

Different swiggly lines.

Solar flares.

The sun through the trees and so on.

For drug users only.

0

[meatwadsprite]

:rotfl: sounds like an interesting flick

[Loner]

:rotfl: sounds like an interesting flick

It is man. Because you know what I'm saying man.

http://www.glass-pipes-water-bongs.com/foto/bigw/118-large-blue-marble-bong.jpg

It's about you know the universe man and like how everything relates man.

http://www.hookahtown.com/images/WooWooHookah.JPG

You know the cycle of life man. It's all beautiful man.

[meatwadsprite]

Better than final act of 2001 ?

[Loner]

Better than final act of 2001 ?

Absolutely man.

Except for the man with axe and the dog; and the score, and the special effects, and the director, but besides that, it was totally groovalicious.

[mark f]

What score? Oh. That's what you meant.

Have you watched Black Ice? I like that one, but I've always been an advocate of a little bit goes a long way. I truly believe that this little bit goes a long way. What say you, Loner?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-rACt6IX5c&feature=related

[Loner]

What score? Oh. That's what you meant.

Have you watched Black Ice? I like that one, but I've always been an advocate of a little bit goes a long way. I truly believe that this little bit goes a long way. What say you, Loner?

5 down and 368 left to go.

Really, life is to short for Stan Hackage.

Though the Arabic Numeral Series looks fascinating, can't wait get to no. 19. :sick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1oma9Cf52E

[Iroquois]

http://www.movietrimmer.com/content/default/english/images/movies/90553_3.jpg

Undead (Spierig brothers, 2003) - 2.5

Welcome to Australia's best-known zombie movie - one very badly-made but nonetheless a relatively entertaining splatter flick. The characters are annoying and acted horribly, the dialogue's pretty poor, the effects work is pretty laughable (although I get the impression this was somewhat intentional, aiming for the sort of horror-comedy vibes of Peter Jackson and Sam Raimi) although I have to admit that the story's bizarre twists and turns do go some way towards improving the film if only for giving the zombie movie a welcome change. I'd probably recommend this to the people who think that Evil Dead 2 and Dead Alive were fun movies, although Undead is definitely not in the same class as either of those. It's certainly gotten me curious as to what Daybreakers is going to be like if it's going to feature the same level of inventiveness on a larger scale.

http://analogmedium.com/blog/2007/07/36chambers1.jpg

The 36th Chamber of Shaolin / Shaolin Master Killer (Chia-Liang Liu, 1978) - 4

I often wonder how to grade martial arts films. Given that the primary focus of any film is the elaborate stunts and action contained therein, it seems like any other considerations are secondary. However, this is definitely not the case with The 36th Chamber of Shaolin, which doesn't vary too wildly from the filmmaking conventions of most other kung fu films from the 1970s. However, it does manage to stay thoroughly engaging even though a large chunk of the film is essentially an hour-long training montage, riddled with impressive action and surprisingly intelligent writing. I can certainly see how it's hailed as one of the greatest kung-fu films ever made. It's slick, stylish and above all engaging.

[Malky]

Rocky 4.5 First time I have seen this in decades it is amazing such a good underdog story. Very well acted and shot as well

[Golgot]

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/182/diehard4.jpg

Diehard 4.0

Maybe I’m too fond of the preceding trilogy, but this one feels like a death too many. McClaine is nudged out of centre stage, no longer taking on tech-savvy foes primarily with his own folksy force and wit, leaving us with the obligatory vacuous comedy-kid to fill the vacuum. Dull dialogue and tired memes (whether it be the new ‘plug in firewire cable’ shots, or the old walkie-talkie bravado etc) don’t help either.

It’s still fun, just not as fun as the others. I’m all for parkour baddies, gridlocked carnage and this particular indestructible hero (whose final escape from death was a nice touch). Not sure Wiseman was the ideal choice for director though. He doesn’t seem to have worked out the kinks of working on ads and music vids (and the Underworld flicks ;)), as the end result had the glossy disjointedness of a feature length toothpaste ad, at times. Anyways, it had a jet vs a truck, and sometimes they even looked real. Shouldn’t really complain ;)

3(+)

[Dog Star Man]

Pardon me for asking, but what is this "movie tab" and how does it work? What is its function? Is it just a place to put up smaller reviews or what?

[Golgot]

Pardon me for asking, but what is this "movie tab" and how does it work? What is its function? Is it just a place to put up smaller reviews or what?

Yep pretty much. Anything you've watched recently that you feel like rating/reviewing etc :)

[TheUsualSuspect]

Undead is a weak film, but it shows potential for the filmmakers.

[Iroquois]

Agreed. Daybreakers certainly has a more interesting premise at least.

[42ndStreetFreak]

"Drive-In Massacre" - 1

At a California Drive-In cinema someone is taking a swing at the audience with a Katana sword and lopping vital body parts off.
Two Cops (Steve Vincent and Bruce Kimball) are assigned to the case and proceed to make a complete hash of tracking the killer down as the body count grows.
Is it the nutty Janitor?
Is it the teen hating Drive-In owner who sports an outrageously large black cross?
Is it……


Welcome dear reader to the world of really, really bad films.
Bad films, really, really bad films, are actually a pretty rare event with ‘worst movie ever made’ descriptions for example being strewn around with disgraceful negligence aimed at films that are not remotely that.
But now and again you do indeed happen upon one of these rare beasts, a truly bad film with almost no redeeming values of any kind and that, when it finally ends, you hate with a vengeance for wasting those precious moments of your too short life.
“Drive-In Massacre” is one of those films.

The Director would go on to make “Insatiable”, the late in the day, 1980, hardcore porn vehicle for Marilyn Chambers. It seems that he found his true calling and level three years too late to save us from a different kind of shafting here though.

It’s one and only real positive aspect is that it certainly delivers (Cop investigation aside…more below) a very pure Slasher film aesthetic early on, more so than “Halloween” and certainly more than “Black Christmas”, a good 3 years before this type of Slasher film would truly gain popularity as the 80’s dawned.

As such the few killings on show tend to play out like your classic 80’s Slasher death scene, far more than anything seen before (the closest before this came from 1974‘s "Silent Night, Bloody Night”) and at least the first two deaths are suitably graphic, bloody and nasty, with only the cheap FX diluting the effect.
A decapitation where we see the head actually slashed off and a lingering death via sword through the neck open the film very nicely.
And sadly they also close it. As from now on we are in the den of that beast…the dreaded…truly bad movie.

As mentioned, the deaths are few and far between and nothing ever comes close to those first two murders, a sword in the back is all we get to actually see the rest of the gore consists of a few messy aftermath shots.
As such we are left with endless dialogue exchanges, which would be dull enough without the pitifully dire sound recording to contend with.
It sounds like the actors were in an attic while the sound guy was in the room below, desperately trying to capture their muffled words. It’s truly horrendous.

The worst dialogue offenses occur during some tediously long police interview scenes with a mentally challenged, ex sword swallowing, Janitor (Douglas Gudbye) where muffled dialogue is once more the order of the day of course but is even more annoying here as these great blocks of speech are actually explaining half the plot and naming and describing possible suspects.
So I guess we should pay attention to these drab sequences, but quite frankly it hurts the brain to even try.

Another abuse of the ears comes from the horrendous musical score which seems to someone hitting two sticks together while falling on top of a Casio keyboard.

The entire Police investigation is boring actually, with the two dull Cops mumbling questions to various suspects before walking away and repeating it all once again somewhere else.
The questioning is so drawn out and repetitive that the film almost turns into a Police documentary in fact.

No thanks! I want a horror film please.
Or perhaps this is all a clever plan on behalf of the makers. They may have put in these great slabs of tedious drabness, of repetitive nothingness, so if the film was ever shown at a Drive-In the 'kids' would have plenty of down time to make out!
Perhaps these God-awful scene are a sexual public service.

The extended investigation is so damn useless as well and opens up gaping plot holes.
If people are being murdered every night at the same Drive-In...how can they fail to catch the guy?
How come the Drive-In is even allowed, after these first murders, to carry on operating so normally in the first place?
And how come so many people still decide to go at all, given the wide publicity about the murders? Are we really meant to believe that so many people want to risk being butchered, cheap thrills or not?
Given the setting and et-up then this type of Slasher film can only really be set during one night. As quite frankly the place would be closed down and deserted after the first two sets of killings.

The fact that the entire Police operation simply consists of two middle aged, overweight, Detectives pretending to be a courting couple (complete with one of them dressed in a woman's dress and hat!) means that we have to conclude that the Police took the investigation as seriously as the filmmakers...which is not very seriously at all.
The residents of this California town should ask for a tax refund!

For a film called “Drive-In Massacre” the drive in atmosphere is mortally compromised by never seeing the screen (except for one brief scene near the end), and as such we only given (yet more) muffled speaking in the background to portray the movie being shown.
We also see very little of the ticket and concession buildings, so we lose all that trashy, neon flecked, junk food razzmatazz that was so much part of the Drive-In experience.
The cheapness of the whole enterprise also shines through in the fact that we see no one else at the Drive-In (all the cars seem empty!) except the would be victims and/or the Cops.
As such this stranding of the cars away from the actual Drive-In screen and atmosphere makes it feel like the movie should have been called simply "Car Park Massacre".
It seems this is a regular problem with Drive-In set movies, as even the more up-market horror film "Ruby" lacked any real visual Drive-In aesthetic,
As such it is perhaps "Targets" that remains to this day the ultimate Drive-In based movie.

With a lean running time, of roughly 70 minutes, it becomes almost suicidal for the screenplay (co-written by George ’Buck’ Flower, no less) to concentrate so much time the aforementioned Police questioning scenes and general walking around doing nothing passages, let alone to then have an entire stalk and chase sequence based on an obvious red-herring suspect, who we have never even seen before.
This machete waving loon rants and creeps for a good five minutes before the two dullard Cops show up to partake of a badly handled action/shoot out scene that has nothing at all to do with the Drive-In killings in the slightest!
This sequence has a nicely black-comic punch-line, but it's the wrong thing to concentrate on at this time in such a short film.
In fact this concentration on the inconsequential happens with only 5 minutes of the film left, a time when the film should really be ratcheting up the tension and scares in the actual plot the movie is meant to be about!


And as for the big finale? Holy Hot Dogs, what a confused non-event!
As such, despite a promising opening, we are left with a truly foul pile of putrid matter masquerading as a horror film that serves less purpose on God’s green Earth than a eye burrowing parasite in an African watering hole.

It may have been one of the first true examples of the Slasher sub-genre that would get honed to perfection a few years later…but being the first crap example of something that would get much better is hardly a triumph to shout about.
Avoid.

[jrs]

Ink 5 - So visually compelling and geniusly creative, the film is like Matrix, Dark City, and Donnie Darko all rolled into one. It may be a little confusing at first, but that's the glory of it. It gets your mind wandering and your juices flowing. I recommend this to everyone.

It just was released on DVD and Blu-ray (which I STRONGLY suggest you pick up that version - if you have a BR player that is) today. I unfortunately don't so I have the DVD version...which I enjoyed immensely nonetheless.

Synopsis:

As the light fades and the city goes to sleep, two forces emerge. They are invisible except for the power they exert over us in our sleep, battling for our souls through dreams. One force delivers hope and strength through good dreams; the other infuses the subconscious with desperation through nightmares. John (Chris Kelly) and Emma (Quinn Hunchar), Father and Daughter are wrenched into this fantastical dream world battle, forced to fight for John's soul and to save Emma from an eternal nightmare. Separate in their journey, they encounter unusual characters that exist only in their subconscious. Or do they? Ink is a high-concept visual thriller that weaves seamlessly between the conscious and the subconscious.


Below are both trailers for Ink...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBGeErufQdY&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5I1SavGyA&feature=player_embedded


http://fdaward.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/ink_poster.jpg

[Golgot]

Of course, DH4 by far, doesn't compare to the first two, particularly since it doesn't feel like it's part of the series, but in the end, I didn't find it completely unenjoyable.

Yeah, there was some fun to be had, and some nice set pieces (even if some were even sillier than normal - quite Transporter-like). I didn't hate it or anything. Just didn't love it either. Ach well.

[zedlen]

My review of The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus..

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a314/zedlen/main_imaginarium.jpg?t=1257892657 (http://javascript%3cb%3e%3c/b%3E:void%280%29;)

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

Terry Gilliam 2009


I have to begin by telling you that I am disappointed. I was all over early reviews even though I knew I wouldn't pay much attention to them since I am such a fan of Gilliam and the majority of actors involved. The reviews I read described it as messy and lacking direction but extremely creative and colorful. I presumed since most of Gilliam's work is messy to some extent and always colorful that these reviews were just unfamiliar with his style. Sadly I was wrong, The Imaginarium of of Doctor Parnassus is a real mess.

Read More... (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=581158#post581158)

[42ndStreetFreak]

I agree with alot of what you said.
I never planned on ever watching the 4th. Die-Hard, but it was my gf's pick one "movie-rental" night, and so.....
Turned out, it wasn't near as bad as it's rep made it out to be, IMO at least.
One of my favorite lines in the film was when Justin Long's character admits that he always thought that an actual "cyber-collapse" would've been cool, but now that he can actually see the consequences of it's actions, not so much. Something that to me seems like a lot of today's testorone bravado doesn't seem to take into account by the younger generation.
Of course, DH4 by far, doesn't compare to the first two, particularly since it doesn't feel like it's part of the series, but in the end, I didn't find it completely unenjoyable.

No, I thought it was good. Not great but a good enough romp.
But then the stupid CGI jet fighter, that destroys half the city for no valid reason, appeared and the film jumped into the rubbish bin. Only managing to crawl out in time for the (so, so) ending.

[42ndStreetFreak]

"This Film is not yet Rated" - 2

Firstly, I agree that some of the MPAA decisions are stupid, the appeals system is a total disgrace and their is obvious bias as far as homosexual sex goes compared to hetrosexual sex as far as ratings go.
Also yes, violence gets through where even some of the most basic sex and nudity wont.
And it is silly about members of the MPAA not being known and yes I don't much care for religious people being included (though you don't have to be a priest to have strong, even loony, religious views anyway).

But as far as the actual ratings go I don't see what point the film is trying to make.
If trade mags, newspapers, distributors, stores and cinemas won't take an 'NC-17' film...that has nothing at all to do with the MPAA.
Blame all of the above.

If the argument is that a film got an 'NC-17' in the first place..then that argument only works as far as fairness goes. But if the film was indeed rated 'NC-17' fairly then what has the MPAA done wrong?
One film maker was even happy her film got an 'NC-17'. It was only when she was told about the attitude of the trade mags, newspapers, distributors, stores and cinemas that she became unhappy!

So what, scrap the 'NC-17'?
OOPS! Not too good that, as the very reason the 'NC-17' even exists is because film makers were moaning about their films having to be cut to get an 'R' and/or being hit with a dreaded porno 'X'.
So instead of an 'X' the MPAA created the 'NC-17' to add a legitimate rating chance for a film so it would not have to be cut but also not carry the stigma of a 'porn rating'.

But then, it is absolutely nothing to do with the MPAA if all of the above people and organisations still decided to treat the new 'NC-17' just as badly as an 'X'.
It's not their fault.

So what to do?
Go unrated? Well then you can't blame the MPAA for anything. You avoided them.
But guess what? All the same people and organisations that refuse an 'X' or an 'NC-17' also refuse an unrated film!
So even with the MPAA never being involved and as such are then blameless...you still can't get your movie shown!

So what do the film makers want? For everything to simply get an 'R' and never have to be cut?
Okay...works for me. But it does not work in the real world of business or general society.
If all films of an adult nature get an uncut 'R' then the 'R' will itself become another 'NC-17' and then 'R' rated films won't be accepted by all those same people and organisations either.

The hard fact is...if genuine, fairly rated, 'NC-17' content was simply given an 'R' then that content will be criticised for being in an 'R' film.
And then when more films with genuinely explicit content also get an 'R' then the general public and all the organisations will take against it.
The same mindset, morals, values, beliefs that condemn an 'NC-17' film to the dustbin will still all be there when the exact same 'NC-17' film now gets an 'R'.
Hell, one director even moans about his film getting an 'R', not moaning that it doesn't.
So it seems even getting an 'R' is not always acceptable.
Would an 'R' rated film (still amazingly lenient compared to a UK '18', seeing as any age can go as long as a parent is there too) about real soldiers fighting in Iraq really be hurt by that 'R'?
Would a 'PG-13' really boost the box office where such a film is concerned?
And really, what has this got to do with the MPAA if they gave a rating that other film makers are hoping to have, while others moan about getting it?
Either it's good to get an 'R' (as those hit with an 'NC-17' seem to be saying) or it is not. Make your minds up.

So what next? NO ratings at all on anything? How would that work?
You have to have a guide to a film's content. Or else little Jimmy will be seeing rape and torture for his 10th Birthday trip to the cinema as no one knew what the film contained.
You have to have a guide to content.
And even if you overhaul the MPAA, ditch the secrecy, stop the rampant bias and dubious pulling of strings...You would still have to have someone that rates films. And what rating that film gets will still effect how it is treated.

So yes, aspects of the MPAA need exposing and tackling to change them...But ultimately the war will only ever be won when the real problem is tackled and the real culprits fought...and that is the studios, trade mags, newspapers, TV station and cinemas that are prejudiced against 'NC-17' in particular and certain content in general.

And at least America has (especially vital now in the Internet shopping age) something the UK does not (as all DVD's must also be rated like all cinema films)...and that is getting the fully uncut version of the film out there and seen via 'unrated' DVD's.
It matters little if stuffy 'Blockbuster' won't take unrated DVD's as there are now plenty of other stores that do...and the massive choice of Internet stores (that take all and everything) means that it is as easy as breathing to get your film seen by millions of people in its uncut form at good prices.

And let's face it..Today a cinema release is quite simply not that important to a great many films. And many film makers themselves know this.
Where even if they did get an 'R' the appeal of the movie is limited or cult in nature and so it would only get small cinema showing anyway. Probably costing more to put on than would be taken at the box office.

Nowadays most films (unless a huge blockbuster hit) make their money on home market DVD sales/pre-sales and worldwide DVD sales.
And they make FAR more than any small cinema release ever could, and they can make it via an 'unrated', MPAA free, release.
And as bigger TV's, better home sound systems and higher quality transfer technology gets cheaper and more common the real value of an MPAA approved cinema release dwindles away anyway.

I also dislike the way the film seems to go as 'moral' and judgmental as those it is critical of as far as violence goes.
Yes, I agree that it is stupid and wrong not giving a film an 'R' because it showed pubic hair while a film that showed a guy getting his brains blown out does get an 'R'
But I get a nasty taste in my mouth when the violent scene itself is looked down on, maligned and has dubious 'it's dangerous to society' accusations thrown at it!
It seems personal bias against some things is as much part of the makers of this film as it is with the MPAA.

As such, in 2009 at least, I just can't find the enthusiasm the makers of "This Film is not yet Rated" get at following some middle-aged Mother or Father down the road to a diner, to catch a glimpse of their face and learn their name, as they feverishly declare..."I THINK WE'VE FOUND A RATER"!
And quite frankly I'm even less interested in the personal life of the PI following them in the car, while they act like they're in "The French Connection" and about to find out who the head of the crime syndicate is.
And no amount of stupid 'action music' can make footage of a lesbian Private Investigator, who made the mistake of getting married to a guy once (I need to know any of this why?), following someone as they go to eat some chicken for lunch remotely interesting, let alone exciting.

We have some good points made, we have some interesting visual comparisons where gross bias has been displayed and it's always interesting to hear from the likes of John Waters, Matt Stone and Kevin Smith, but quite frankly much of this film is uninvolving, unimportant and dated terribly by DVD, Internet and home viewing technology that relies not one tiny bit on the people in the MPAA, or where they go for lunch.

[mark f]

What movie got an NC-17 for just showing pubic hair? I mean, Manon of the Spring has Emmanuelle Béart's pubic hair dancing around outside in plain sight and it gets a PG. :cool:

One other thing to remember is that Blockbuster basically rents all unrated movies nowadays, but they rarely (if ever) rent out an NC-17. The reason for this is that an unrated movie doesn't mean that it contains extreme amounts of violence and/or sex which were forced to be cut. All it means is that the new scenes included in the video version were never subjected to being rated. It means that the company and/or filmmaker decided to add in more scenes which were cut out prior to theatrical release and the rating process. The odds are that they were not cut out because they were extreme but for other reasons, such as running time or streamlining of the plot.

[Holden Pike]

What movie got an NC-17 for just showing pubic hair? I mean, Manon of the Spring has Emmanuelle Béart's pubic hair dancing around outside in plain sight and it gets a PG.

I haven't watched the documentary in a while, but if memory serves that was what director Wayne Kramer was told he had to "trim" (pun intended, thank you) from one of the sex scenes between William H. Macy and Maria Bello in The Cooler to avoid an NC-17.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2079/2473585397_6c6c93cfac.jpg?v=0 http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:8yhzPY5p-tz1oM:http://www.impawards.com/2003/posters/cooler_ver3.jpg

[mark f]

That sounds about right. The other thing to remember, besides the fact that nobody exactly knows who these "raters" are (sounds like the National Board of Review), is that they keep changing all the time and changing what may constitute a "such-and-such" rating. The ratings don't so much evolve as the raters.

[42ndStreetFreak]

That's the one..."The Cooler". No pubes please!

Oh yes...Despite that long-winded waffle about "This Film is not yet Rated" I actually forgot to mention the most annoying and biggest flaw in the thing...The sensationalist theories and general nutters they use to put them forward.

The main culprits here are the accusation that the MPAA are behind the U.S. Army not giving help to films that are critical of the U.S. Army!
Please!
I think we can in fact assume that the U.S. Army itself is quite capable of saying 'we're not going to help you slag us off'.
MPAA or not!

The most farcical, indeed utterly mad, point that is made (these supposedly enlightened film makers find people to use and arguments to make that make them sound as bad as the nutty "This film is to blame" and 'Marilyn Manson is Satan" brigade) is that because the MPAA supposedly have a hand in the Military not helping out with movies critical of the Military...AMERICANS HAVE BECOME MORE WAR-LIKE!
What drivel is this? What utterly unproven by any fact at all in the film drivel IS this?

And not only is this basic point (is it even worthy of being called a point!?) garbage but the most basic of movie knowledge, old and new, shows this point to be made on completely false theories.

Since Vietnam there have been COUNTLESS Hollywood/American anti-War, anti-American, anti-Military, anti-Pentagon movies.
Bar "The Green Berets" you'd be hard pushed to find a 'Nam film that isn't indeed some or all of these!

So where is this non-stop pro-Military wave of movies since the 70's that have, according to the loonies in "This Film is not yet Rated", warped Americans into being war like animals?

And as for now...Again film makers have had no problem getting made a few dozen utterly anti-war, generally anti-American Military, movies concerning Iraq!
In fact the sheer amount of them makes it look more like a Saddam backed propaganda campaign.
All got funded, equipped, made, rated and released...Despite the shadowy MPAA having fingers in shadowy pies.

Such blatantly false, generally mad, content does this film no good...And finding out that a 'RATER' is called Joan, is married with 2 kids and hides a spare dildo under the wash basin... does not change that.

[Malky]

Audition 3.5 its bold and different. It is an experience, to be honest I am having difficulty describing it.

[beelzebubbles]

Audition 3.5 its bold and different. It is an experience, to be honest I am having difficulty describing it.

Here let me try. It's insane. It is horrifying. If you are scared of needles, I advise you not to watch it. If you enjoy scenes of physical torture and bondage, you will love it. If you like to see the tables turned, a tiny woman overpowers and has her way with a man, then you will love it. If you want creepy pictures burned onto your retinas, this is the movie for you.

I think I just sold a few copies.

[honeykid]

Never seen the appeal or fascination with Audition. I found it a rather boring, pointless viewing experience and, as for finding it scary? Who are these people?!?

[Malky]

Never found it scary I found it brutal but not over the top gorno, as there was a definite psychological element to it. I'm glad I watched it but I doubt I shall ever feel the need to see it again.

[Loner]

"This Film is not yet Rated" - 2

As such, in 2009 at least, I just can't find the enthusiasm the makers of "This Film is not yet Rated" get at following some middle-aged Mother or Father down the road to a diner, to catch a glimpse of their face and learn their name, as they feverishly declare..."I THINK WE'VE FOUND A RATER"!
And quite frankly I'm even less interested in the personal life of the PI following them in the car, while they act like they're in "The French Connection" and about to find out who the head of the crime syndicate is.
And no amount of stupid 'action music' can make footage of a lesbian Private Investigator, who made the mistake of getting married to a guy once (I need to know any of this why?), following someone as they go to eat some chicken for lunch remotely interesting, let alone exciting.

Another problem I had with the film were the simulated phone calls using cartoons. Could the film-makers look anymore childish and amateur?

[TheUsualSuspect]

Audition is indeed a memorable film.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Never seen the appeal or fascination with Audition. I found it a rather boring, pointless viewing experience and, as for finding it scary? Who are these people?!?

Same here. I thought it a long, slow, dull build-up to get to one scene that was okay for a few seconds.

Give me "Ichi", "Visitor Q", "Fudoh", "Full Metal Yakuza" and Dead or Alive" any day.

[Prospero]

Same here. I thought it a long, slow, dull build-up to get to one scene that was okay for a few seconds.

Give me "Ichi", "Visitor Q", "Fudoh", "Full Metal Yakuza" and Dead or Alive" any day.Agreed. The final scene of Audition is incredibly brutal, but it's a long, very slow road getting there. On the other hand, I enjoy the almost cartoonish violence of Ichi. Visitor Q is okay, and I haven't seen the other two you mentioned.

I love Battle Royale, although it is by no means a horror film.

[inthecornerdunce-]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/BerlinExpress.jpg/200px-BerlinExpress.jpg


Berlin Express ( Jacques Tourneur, 1948 ) - The movie is shot very well and the early scenes are excellent.

Unfortunately the script is weak. Towards the end I realized that I just wasn't clear on why things were happening as they were. It felt like the plot was just a backdrop to the ambiance, which was fine in the beginning but became a problem as the plot moved its wobbly self to center stage. I can't entirely blame the script though; I think Tourneur's greatest failing as a director is that while he had a lot of style and could always make things interesting, he could be sloppy in terms of telling a story. Of course he wasn't the only director who believed you could gloss over a lot if you just kept things moving, but that works better with a good muddled script like The Big Sleep rather than the distinctly ordinary but muddled script he worked with here. Still worth seeing though.


http://www.8mm16mmfilmscollectibles.com/ConfessionsNaziSpy1a.jpg


Confessions Of A Nazi Spy ( Anatole Litvak, 1939 ) - All of the performances are very good and hit the right tone. The most interesting thing about the film was that all these Nazi infiltrators were living on U.S. soil expressing belief in the Reich and Hitler - yet each time one of them was told they had to return to Germany, the blood drained from their faces and they begged to stay in the U.S.! Interesting film, as are many of the films that preceded the U.S. involvement in World War II.

[Used Future]

http://www.wired.com/ly/wired/news/images/full/comamovie.jpg http://i2.digiguide.com/up/0811/1228338000-13136-Coma-12270897320.jpg

Coma (Michael Crichton, 1978) 3.5+
This is one of those movies I always happened upon half way through whilst channel hopping. It used to get shown a lot on UK TV in the 90's, but I never really knew what was going on and just assumed it was a run-of-the-mill pot boiler. In reality Coma is a grade-A thriller with a fantastic cast, and the kind of queasy premise that really gets under your skin. Genevieve Bujold is great as a young doctor who thinks she's stumbled on a hospital conspiracy to deliberately render patients brain dead in order to sell their organs on the black market. Naturally no-one believes her, including on-off doctor boyfriend (Michael Douglas), and skeptical boss (Richard Widmark) who puts it down to the trauma of having recently lost her best friend (rendered comatose after a routine operation). Bujold wont let it lie though, and is soon being chased all over the hospital by an assassin (Colonel Decker from the A-Team) out to silence anyone close to the truth.

Coma is a delightfully tense affair that grips like a vice from the outset, and consistently sustains the nail biting suspense throughout. Bujold is pitch perfect as the conscientious doctor out to expose the truth, finding the perfect balance of gritty determination, and feminine vulnerability. This is effectively offset by Widmark's sinister turn as her concerned boss; all thinly veiled threats and mock sympathy. The scenes in which she's chased through the hospital, and later a hi-tech clinic are thrilling to say the least (particularly the morgue freezer sequence), and Jerry Goldsmith's superb score adds a chilling edge to the proceedings. Thumbs up.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WMfu8hiMD7I/Sjg8RnlBzZI/AAAAAAAAFLk/IwO9AK1RUPc/s400/__2223464.jpg http://shamefulcinema.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/whipcord_3.jpg

House of Whipcord (Pete Walker, 1974) 2.5
Penny Irving plays a gullible French exchange student-come-model (Anne-Marie) who gets a slap on the wrist from the law after exposing herself in public for a photo-shoot. Soon she's being seduced by sinister lothario Mark E. Desade (Geddit) played by Robert Tayman who couldn't look any more evil if he donned plastic horns and took to carrying a trident around. After the obligatory wining and dining Mark's whisking her off up north for the weekend to meet his parents. Unfortunately for Anne-Marie Mark's parents are a couple of crackpots who run an illegal women's prison in which they sadistically readdress the failings of the British justice system...

What could have been a smart satire, and social commentary on the erosion of justice in modern society is sadly given a mundane, and dare I say it, dumb treatment here. Irving (who's French accent is no more convincing than Dick Van Dyke's English patter) is awful, but the rest of the cast are fine; especially Sheila Keith who steals it as the sadistic warden, Barbara Markham as the loony-bin Governor, and Patrick Barr as her well meaning, but senile husband. Unfortunately the film is sluggishly paced, and most unforgivably; rendered completely ridiculous by the fact the young prison inmates never think of overpowering the three middle aged female guards, and casually walking out of the prison. Add to that Irving's unsympathetic lack of brain cells, and a third act that lapses into escape attempt cliche, and you're merely left with Keith, and the interplay between Markham and Barr who provide the film's conversational bright spots. Disappointing considering the intriguing premise.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6DpEiwWPjI8/SpjKVhcD1JI/AAAAAAAAGJA/Ya1Jc9jDQLM/s200/Giornata_nera_per_ariete_PRCD122-710691.jpg http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww335/GialloFunk/gialloproject-fifthcord6.jpg?t=1258018448

The Fifth Cord / Giornata nera per l'ariete (Luigi Bazzoni, 1971) 3
Franco Nero plays Andrea; an alcoholic journalist on the trail of a killer who only strikes on a Tuesday, and leaves a glove behind with a finger cut off for each of his victims. At first Andrea is on good terms with the police, and making progress with his investigation, but each of the victims are people he knows, and his lack of an alibi soon makes him a prime suspect. Matters take a turn for the worse when he deduces the killer's victims are all linked by their zodiac signs; the same sign shared by his estranged wife...

The Fifth Cord is a text book giallo in that it has a meaningless title, poorly drawn supporting characters, the obligatory gloved killer, and a convoluted cliched plot (which isn't helped by one of said supporting characters changing wigs so you don't recognise her). Typically it also sports some excellent set pieces; not least a scene in which an invalid woman (Rossella Falk) is stranded without her wheelchair, and reduced to crawling around her mansion with the killer lurking. The coup de grace however comes with a genuinely frightening climactic sequence in which a young boy at home alone is stalked after laboriously closing a series of automatic window shutters. These sequences (like the whole film) are made all the more atmospheric and satisfying by cinematographer Vittorio Storaro's (of Il Conformista, and Apocalypse Now fame) wonderful compositions and lighting. I'm not exaggerating when I say The Fifth Cord is one of the best looking thrillers you will ever see; all angular shadows, blue gel lighting, silhouetted figures, and stunning architecture. Sadly the substance isn't there to match, but Nero is always watchable, and does good job here as the womanising alcoholic protagonist. Giallo fans on the look out for the obligatory bottles of J&B will also no doubt find the shot of Nero swigging from one at the wheel of his car highly amusing. Good for genre fans only.

other stuff I watched...

http://static.omdb.si/posters/active/268132.jpg http://www.badmovieplanet.com/unknownmovies/pictures/prison4.jpg

Prison (Renny Harlin, 1988) 3 +
Before he went all Michael Bay Hollywood, Renny ''Die Hard 2'' Harlin turned out this decent low budget horror flick for Charles Band's Empire Pictures. Here, pretty boy jail bird, Burke (Viggo Mortensen who looks like he's just stepped out of a Calvin Klein advert) is shipped off to an old recently reopened prison governed by hard case Warden Eaton Sharpe (Lane Smith). Before you can say 'don't pick up the soap' Burke is ordered to knock through a wall to an old Electric chair chamber in the basement, unwittingly releasing the spirit of wrongly executed prisoner Charles Forsythe (also Mortensen). Naturally all hell breaks loose, as the bodies pile up, and a trail of corruption is exposed leading to Warden Sharpe and bloody retribution...

Prison impressed me with it's moody direction from Harlin that makes excellent use of the bleak setting, and delivers some cool special effects that still hold up today (the razor wire sequence is especially good). The film has an impending air of dread about it, and riffs on, as opposed to lazily exploiting the cliches that come with the prison flick genre. On the downside Mortensen is far too pretty to convince as a tough guy convict, and delivers his lines with all the gusto of a church mouse (the scene in which he grabs the crotch of a man mountain adversary who subsequently turns chicken is painfully unconvincing). The support from the likes of Lane Smith however is great and the film is action packed and generally very entertaining. Much better than Wes Craven's similarly themed Shocker, released the following year. Recommended.

[42ndStreetFreak]

I'd have to give "Whipcord" another 0.5 mate.

What with all the blood curdling screams of the punished, the silhouette of the ever ready noose, the broken, whipped bodies of the prisoners (and the severe mental breakdowns they experience) all these visual/audio ingredients are expertly crafted by Walker to make a very powerful, dark and disturbing look at what horrors the Human mind can create when fanatical beliefs mix with outright psychosis.

Keith is great isn't she? She never fails to deliver. One of the most underrated horror stalwarts ever.

[Used Future]

Don't get me wrong I enjoyed House of Whipcord; it's just I wanted more from the subject matter than boobs, torture and sadism. I wasn't expecting anything more than exploitation, but found the film underwhelming because there was a fantastic opportunity for some great satire there, and I don't think Walker nailed it.

The best part of the film for me was E. Desade's seduction of Anne-Marie at the beginning. I thought it was both creepy and blackly comic because Irving's character was so gullible, and Tayman's so sinister and predatory. It was almost like watching Peter Cook in Bedazzled.

Then Tayman disappeared (talk about wasting a great character) and the film entered run-of-the-mill women in prison territory for me. I agree Keith is sensational and I'd like to see more of her films, but the only other scenes of merit were between Markham and Barr in which they debated the morals of their actions. Sadly these were too few, and the rest of the film just didn't stand up to scrutiny for me. Media Blasters' transfer sucks too. I assume you've got the spiffing UK boxset.

[mark f]

French Kiss (Lawrence Kasdan, 1995) 3

http://rapidsharecollections.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/french_kiss_film.jpg

Cute romantic bauble which allows Kevin Kline to play Luc, a Frenchman with a sometimes full-blown Monty Pythonish French accent. Meg Ryan basically plays herself while trying to retrieve the fiance (Timothy Hutton) who jilted her, and she gets involved with the Kline character who's stolen a necklace and planted it in her bag aboard a plane flying into Paris. Multiple problems arise when the bag is stolen, the fiance is already engaged to a younger Frenchwoman (Suzan Auban) and a police inspector (Jean Reno) wants to bust Luc for the jewels and a grapevine he snuck into the country. The chemistry between Ryan and Kline is excellent and the beautiful French locations add to the air of romance and mystery which permeates this lightweight charmer. Be sure to stay for the credits to hear Kline sing "La Mer" in French which Bobby Darin popularized in America as "Beyond the Sea".

God Forgives... I Don't (Giuseppe Colizzi, 1967) 2.5

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fqqaJoECa0g/SkBB6f7pBXI/AAAAAAAAC10/zMz8SykXug4/s400/God+Forgives...+I+Don%27t%21+aka+Dio+perdona...+Io+no%21+%281967%29.JPG

Acceptable spaghetti western with a solid cast comes across as a lite version of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. When a train rolls into town with all the passengers murdered and $100,000 in cash missing, Cat Stevens (!) aka "Pretty Face" (Terence Hill) and his hulking sidekick Hutch (Bud Spencer) realize that it seems to be the work of outlaw Bill San Antonio (Frank Wolff). The strange thing about that is that Cat killed Bill months earlier during a duel in a burning building, but maybe it was just a set-up. This is the first teaming of Hill and Spencer and it offers plenty of fist fights and gunplay. Wolff is an impressive villain, and the whole thing has a modicum of wit although it does play out quite a bit darker than you may expect from having watched the Trinity films.

Putney Swope (Robert Downey, 1969) 2+

http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1010/343624.1010.A.jpg

Robert Downey Jr.'s dad directed this satire on corporate advertising during the height of the Black Power movement, and although it has quite a few laugh-out-loud commercials in it, it's a bit too one-note to qualify as a success. Putney Swope (Arnold Johnson) is the token black man on the Board of Directors of a huge advertising agency, but when the President dies, he's accidentally elected to take his place and quickly changes the company's white bread traditions to those of his Soul Brothers and Sisters. Some of his ad campaigns are hilarious and the entire flick is refreshingly un-P.C. However, there are few things which hurt the overall effect of the film, and for me, number one is that Putney's voice is dubbed by none other than the director himself. At first, it provides some weird comedy to the mix, but once it becomes clear that we're hearing a white guy's voice substituting for the new Black "Prince", it somewhat blunts what I think was the intended effect. Another flaw I find with the film is that it gets awfully repetitive, so if you think it's overall funnier than I do, then you'll probably think even the repetitious parts are funny, but I didn't find them to be. I also wish that Antonio Fargas's "Arab" character had more screen time. Even so, I'm going to rewatch this film again because when it started I was somewhat caught off guard by Downey's absurdist leanings even though I was smiling quite a bit and obviously should have been prepared since I'd already seen his Greaser's Palace.

Mr. Brooks (Bruce A. Evans, 2007) 3.5

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xvEEWEAOvXM/R4o6uWdHG4I/AAAAAAAAAYk/HnNeSDNwHKI/s320/mr_brooks.jpg

The writing team that brought us Starman and Stand by Me are back with one of them directing a different kind of flick, one where Kevin Costner convincingly plays a fastidious serial killer who, although happily married (to Marg Helgenberger), with a college-aged daughter (Daniele Panabaker) and "Man of the Year" in his local business community, just has to periodically let off steam by becoming the Thumbprint Killer, aided and abetted by his imaginary sidekick Marshall (William Hurt). This latest murder committed by Mr. Brooks was witnessed through an open window by an up-and-coming psycho photographer known as "Mr. Smith" (Dane Cook), who basically blackmails Mr. Brooks to take him on his next murder. There's also a millionaire policewoman [don't ask] (Demi Moore) who's in the middle of a nasty divorce and takes an active interest in trying to again solve the case of the Thumbprint Killer. Mr. Brooks isn't campy at all and it delivers a surprising amount of sex and violence to go along with a complex cat-and-mouse plot. In fact, there seems to be about four cats and maybe eight mice in the film, so along with delivering some mostly-intelligent psychology and suspense, Mr. Brooks always keeps you guessing when and if the various shoes set up during the flick will drop and in what order. This film should even be solid entertainment for any Costner haters out there... I dare say.

Time After Time (Nicholas Meyer, 1979) 3.5+

http://static.omdb.si/posters/active/337356.jpg

I realize that 42ndSt reviewed this recently in here, and I pretty much agree with what he said about all the charm, suspense and humor which this film has to offer. My wife loves romantic adventures and murder mysteries, so this film, with one of the greatest plots I can think of, is obviously right up her alley. The acting by the three principals is all outstanding, with Malcolm McDowell (Victorian H.G. Wells) and future real-life-wife Mary Steenburgen (liberated 1979 San Francisco woman Amy) a perfect fit as a couple totally unsuited for each other who are still destined to be together, and David Warner is suitably menacing as a Jack the Ripper who finds San Francisco's Tenderloin District a perfect amusement park for his metallic predilections. The film is propelled by Miklos Rozsa's rich romantic suspense score just as much as its race-against-time plot, especially when Jack sets his sites on Amy, and the couple learn that according to one of the local newspapers from the future, he successfully kills her! This is one of those films which is just right the way it is. Please don't remake it and ruin all the thrills and romance with a lot of pointless CGI effects.

The Witches (Nicolas Roeg, 1990) 3.5+

http://static.omdb.si/posters/active/371638.jpg

You should already know that I'm a heretic around here (and elsewhere) and often say things which other film buffs/historians can only shake their heads at. Well, here comes another one. This is my fave Nic Roeg film. I was hooked right from the opening credits, flying over the snowy Scandinavian mountains and ending in a spooky Norwegian village where the wise Grandma (Mai Zetterling) of young Luke (Jasen Fisher) tells him scary warnings on how to protect himself from murderous witches. This being a Roald Dahl story, three people die in the first ten minutes, and the majority of the film is set at an enormous hotel at the English seaside where Granny, Luke and Luke's two pet mice just coincidentally come to stay where a convention of witches is meeting under the auspex of the Grand High Witch (Anjelica Huston) herself, who once cut off one of Granny's fingers. Luke makes friends with Bruno (Charlie Potter) and eventually both boys are turned into mice by the witches whose ultimate plan is to turn all children of the world into mice and then destroy them. The film begins as a dark, suspenseful thriller and then turns into something resembling a kid's version of an Indiana Jones movie with expert special effects and makeup. The supporting cast is full of familiar faces and farceurs, including Rowan Atkinson as the hotel manager, Bill Paterson and Brenda Blethyn as Bruno's parents, Jane Horrocks as the High Witch's secretary, Jenny Runacre as an English witch working in the hotel and Jim Carter as the Head Chef who would like nothing better than to cut off one of the boy's tails with a carving knife. Sure, one could quibble about such details as using rat stand-ins for the mice, but I'm not going to do that here. :cool:

Keetje Tippel (Paul Verhoeven, 1975) 3

http://www.gazillionmovies.com/Movies/Review/DVD/Posters/Tickets/K/Images/KeetjeTippel.jpg

I saw this and Verhoeven's earlier Turkish Delight at the theatre in the mid-1970s and subsequently watched his epic Soldier of Orange at the art house. Turkish Delight was a self-imposed X rating here in the U.S. and this film got an R even though it has a shadow of a fully-erect penis seen on a wall right next to the face of the lead character who then proceeds to lose her virginity to the guy attached to said hard-on. Keetje Tippel is about an impoverished Dutch family who moves to Amsterdam in 1881 to try to find work and make a living. Keetje (Monique van de ven) is the family's beautiful, eldest daughter, and she proceeds to take several poor-paying jobs where she's always taken advantage of. Eventually she becomes a prostitute and her eyes are awakened as to the pitiful working conditions for almost the entire proletariat. So yes, although Verhoeven was always obsessed with sex and violence, he shows a political awareness in some of his Dutch films which is mostly lacking from his mainstream American entertainments. This film does feature Rutger Hauer as a man whom Keetje wants to grow old with and is gorgeously photographed (slums and all) by Verhoeven regular, Jan de Bont. What seems the most incredible of all is that Keetje Tippel is based on an autobiographical novel by Neel Doff who became a very popular socialist author and this film claims was nominated for a Nobel Prize in Literature although the veracity of that claim is open to question.

The Dark at the Top of the Stairs (Delbet Mann, 1960) 3.5+

http://www.britposters.com/images/the%20dark%20at%20the%20top%20of%20the%20stairs%20320x240.jpg

William Inge's play is turned into superb, honest entertainment. Even though it's almost 50 years old and set in the 1920s, this film really seemed to be about important issues which are affecting most everybody today. For example, how is Dad (Robert Preston) going to find a job to take care of his family? He had a traveling salesman job which supported them but his business is becoming extinct (he sells supplies for horses and the internal combustion engine has taken over). Now, since Mom (Dorothy McGuire) and Dad are having difficulty with their lovemaking because he's gone too often and they don't have as much money as she thinks they need, how is he even going to tell her that he lost his job? They quarrel and he goes off to see a lifelong friend (Angela Lansbury) who has carried a torch for him since school days, but he's never been unfaithful to his wife, so they just talk and she gives him a place to sleep. Mom calls her older sister (Eve Arden) and her milquetoast husband (Frank Overton) over to try to comfort her when Dad storms out of the house. Meanwhile, their daughter (Shirley Knight) is scared to death to wear her fancy new dress to a country club dance, but she feels much better when she learns who her blind date is, but even these kids can't even get a chance to have a childhood because of adults' petty prejudices. Then there's the family's younger son (Robert Eyer) who enjoys collecting photographs of silent movie stars, fireflies and bullfrogs. He seems like maybe he can be a kid, but wait a minute.... This flick still retains all the plainspoken honesty, tragedy and humor about what it means to be alive, and Robert Preston in particular is in standout form, fresh from his Broadway popularity in The Music Man. There are no simple answers to life's problems but everyone has to go through them no matter how difficult they can be, but this wonderful film does illuminate that there's more than just dark at the top of the stairs.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Loving this stuff guys!!

Mark - Top thoughts there on "Time after Time". Glad to see some love for this film.

Nice to see you liked the rather overlooked "Mr Brooks". I thought this was a wonderful little film that delivered a good plot, fine performances, some good violence and some nice little twists.
Pretty much ignored because it seems Costner can do no right any more.


Used - No worries my friend.
I love your insights and we share an appreciation for similar movies.
I do agree with some of what you say...there was a formula here. But I guess I can forgive some of this 'let's just get to the whipping' attitude because it's done so well and for it's time this was pretty groundbreaking stuff as far as UK horror goes.

I agree that, some top notch Keith rants aside, any social/justice (social justice even) remarks and points were pretty much left until the very end scroll (this stance on rehabilitation is something Walker and McGillivray cover in a lot of their movies as you probably know, including the weak "Schizo", the fine "The Confessional" and the damn fine "Frightmare") but the pure Exploitation sequences were handled so well I'd have to give it 3 popcorn boxes.

Er.......as far as versions go, I have the Uk 'Redemption' DVD actually. I picked up the films over a time as separate releases. I've not got the boxset.

[42ndStreetFreak]

"Nowhere to Hide" - 3

The under-appreciated Amy "Streets of Fire" Madigan (one of those forgotten Oscar winners) stars as the tough wife of a murdered Airforce Major, who was killed because he was investigating a series of mysterious helicopter crashes.
On the run for her life,with her little boy, she fights to discover the truth....


Dreadfully overlooked little action thriller from (I assume) Canada.
Low budget it may be, but thanks to a stirling cast, fine acting, a tight pace and well staged action this conspiracy thriller has been a favourite of mine for many years.

While not overly violent it does have its moments, the strongest being the blood spattered shooting of the Husband (well played and who could easily have been a likeable lead hero) that ends on a genuinely disturbing note when his body drops onto the bed where his Son is hiding, meaning the child has to look right into the blood smeared face and staring eyes of his dead father.

Madigan is great here and does a superb job essaying a tough, resilient woman, a grief stricken widow, a terrified victim and a determined Mother throughout the movie.
The film makes her a strong nemesis for the bad guys (she despatches them with everything from guns to a blowtorch), while never (until the rather OTT finale) moving her away from what she ultimately is...A realisticlly scared, grieving, woman trying to protect her child.

Lots of tense moments and action is spaced nicely into the opening hour, and one of the best parts of the film has yet to even make an appearance...Michael Ironside!
The always welcome and wonderful Mr Ironside plays an ex-Army family friend, who now lives as a recluse in the mountains, who Madigan turns to for help when all seems lost, and he does a lovely job in a (sadly) too short role.
But he has a chance to shine as he takes out bad guys with his doberman dogs and deadly bow and arrows!

Should be better known and available.
Check it out for some solid, no nonsense, well acted, very 80's (bad 'military' synth score included) action funstuffs.

[inthecornerdunce-]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ii3i2MwxHio/RbLIEETf5pI/AAAAAAAAADM/7187r7Rc1QU/s400/Gwynplaine.jpg


The Man Who Laughs ( Paul Leni, 1928 ) - Conrad Veidt always found the emotional authenticity in bizarre roles. Here, in the familiar 19th century figure of the suffering clown, his performance is transfixing: whether tremulous as the girl's hand explores his face, or mortified by the laughter of the House of Lords, Veidt's face makes the role more than a simple martyr: he is man struggling with unjust destiny ["A king made me a clown, a queen made me a lord, but first God made me a man!"].

[Prospero]

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/newsdesk/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/serenity.jpg
Serenity
I loved the TV show Firefly, and this feature film is a nice coda to the series. Part western, part sci/fi adventure, it should please both fans of the show and newcomers to the Serenity universe. The fast-paced action (especially in the third act) and smart dialogue hearken back to Star Wars: ANH (think of a spaceship full of Han Solo-like characters). it also provides a bit more of a back story to the mysterious prodigy River. My only complaint is that they didn't make much use of Ron Glass' character. Whether that was a decision by Mr. Glass or the movie's producers, I don't know, but he was missed.

4


http://images.apple.com/moviesxml/s/independent/posters/spiral_l200801231233.jpg
Spiral
A weird littler indy film about a disturbed telemarketer who is befriended by a charming female coworker. He starts sketching her, then painting her, becoming more and more obsessed as the movie progresses. Although it's not a great film by any means, it did hold my interest and kept me wondering where it was going to go.
NOTE: This was listed as a horror movie. It is NOT HORROR. I'd call it more psychological suspense. Not great, but not bad, either. The acting from the entire cast was superb.

3


http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t05592c2ryz.jpg
Bell, Book, and Candle
I saw this nmovie when I was a kid (my pet dinosaur watched it with me), and I remember loving it. Unfortunately, it hasn't held up too well. Book publisher Jimmy Stewart meets witch Kim Novak, and is introduced, unbeknownst to him, to her circle of witchy friends. Hilarity ensues. Ummm...yeah. With a cast including, besides Stewart and Novak, Jack Lemmon, Elsa Lanchester, and Ernie Kovacs, you'd think this would be a can't miss proposition. Unfortunately, due to ham-handed directing by Richard Quine and overacting by Stewart, it doesn't exactly hit the mark.

Oh well, I'll slot this next to Chitty Chitty Bang Bang under Memories Best Left Undisturbed.
2.5

[42ndStreetFreak]

"Drag me to Hell" 3.5

Nice to see our Sam getting back to his whacked-out horror roots with a fine little film that manages to mix his hyper-kinetic, slapstick, horror violence (though no real gore sadly) and sticky fluid throwing with top notch FX work and high tech gloss.

Nicely played by all, this is packed with memorable moments, but perhaps it does blow its load too early with the truly stunning, laugh out loud funny, gross, exciting, creepy as hell car park fight scene, as our heroine, Christine, fights off the rampaging power of a pissed off old Gypsy woman with a grotesque eye and even worse dentures.
This is easily one of the finest moments in Raimi's career.

From then on we have some good and well crafted scares and smackdowns as Christine's 'dragged to Hell' possible fate gets nearer.
Raimi astutely plays these fright scenes for (for the most part) black comic laughs and the chance to pile on the slapstick violence.
This ensures the incidents become purely entertainment, instead of seriously delivered false scares, which would have been a huge and costly mistake as the plot has explicity told us that actually...she's not in the slightest bit of real danger yet.

Fans of his early work will relish the muck, filth, vomit, goo and blood plastered all over these scenes as well as the 'Three Stooges' level of bodily abuse.
And almost all the effects are expertly rendered and imaginative.

And if it wasn't for one easily avoidable cock-up near the end involving far too much (needlessly and easily avoided) fuss being made about something happening that should barely have got any coverage at all...The film would also have ended as effectively as the journey to that ending most certainly was.
The ending itself is perfectly fine...Raimi just blew the possible effectiveness of it by foolishly telling us pretty much what was going to happen 10 minutes or so before.

There were also a few other niggles.
Much is made of Christine's bashed up lip in one sequence, only to have said bashed up lip in the very next scene (in huge close-up no less) then shown to be absolutely unmarked in any way! Boy, frozen peas are a miracle cure!

We are also informed about the Seer who Christine goes to visit offering to refund money paid for her aborted fortune reading.
Yet, in one continuous scene, all the Seer ever does is take hold of the credit card, walk into a room, turn the light off and sit down at the table to do the reading.
Unless the guy is not just a palm reader but also Human credit card reader...he never took any money!

The film also has some plot hiccups as far as huge jumps in the narrative go, which makes me think a number of bridging scenes were cut.
For example Christine goes from walking out of a dinner, to a bust up at the Indian Seer's shop, to her trying to gather money together to pay for help when all of a sudden her boyfriend comes in and says he has paid the Seer!
But as far as we are shown the boyfriend was never with her during any of these scenes, she has had no contact with him and has no idea at all about the need for money or what it's for.
And seeing as only Christine can see and hear what she does...there is actually no sense in her uber-sceptical boyfriend suddenly becoming uncertain about what he believes.
It seems some kind of rushed editing of screenplay or actual footage shot was the order of the day.

Al this aside though..."Drag me to Hell" was a nice return to his roots for Raimi and, although disappointingly low on gore, it delivers tons of fast paced, slam bang supernatural violence, laughs and thrills.

[Prospero]

The Man Who Laughs ( Paul Leni, 1928 ) - Conrad Veidt always found the emotional authenticity in bizarre roles. Here, in the familiar 19th century figure of the suffering clown, his performance is transfixing: whether tremulous as the girl's hand explores his face, or mortified by the laughter of the House of Lords, Veidt's face makes the role more than a simple martyr: he is man struggling with unjust destiny ["A king made me a clown, a queen made me a lord, but first God made me a man!"].[/LEFT]I saw this a while back an loved it. Veidt's performance is amazing, as he imbues his character with every human emotion, even though his face is always fixed in the same expression.

It was also nice to see him as something other than a villain, as he was in Casablanca and The Thief of Bagdad.

[Sexy Celebrity]

Last of the Red Hot Lovers (1972) 4.5

Up (2009) 3

[Sleezy]

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/1984.jpg

Nineteen Eighty-Four (Radford, 1984) 4

I'm quite the fan of Orwell's original, so naturally Radford's approach agreed with me. Very honest translation, with all the right nods and voice-overs to streamline the experience of reading the book. Doubleplusgood.


http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/sunshinecleaning.jpg

Sunshine Cleaning (Jeffs, 2008) 5

Really taken with this one. Like any great Indie, Sunshine Cleaning is quirky and sincere, and takes its concept a little deeper - never forgetting its audience's desire to relate to the characters and their experiences. The way the "job" is treated was wonderful, but doesn't floor me nearly as much as the girls' search to know their mother. Incredible film.

And I'm in love with Amy Adams. :yup:

[mark f]

"In love", get in line...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Qzd9HIsRWeA/R0QR8IQQKcI/AAAAAAAACUY/7XbYVX01OJw/s400/Amy+Adams.jpg

(I love you Brenda.)

[Prospero]

Last of the Red Hot Lovers (1972) 4.5

Up (2009) 3
Sorry you didn't like Up! more.
That's my second favorite Pixar film after Toy Story.

[TheUsualSuspect]

I really enjoyed Drag Me to Hell. Specifically because there were no false scares.

[42ndStreetFreak]

"Unarmed but Dangerous" - 1 (for the head in a bucket joke)


Originally called...wait for it..."Kung Fu Flid" (it stars Mat Fraser, born with stunted arms after his Mother was one of those given Thalidomide in the 60's) this British Gangster/Martial Arts flick certainly has a great central idea and shows a welcome relish to wallow in the bizarre and outrageous.
But....
There is nothing else here remotely welcome or worth relishing. It's truly awful.

Shot on a video it looks ugly and cheap and this lack of technical shine is not only visual either as every aspect of the film is technically awful.
From the sound, the acting, the script, the editing and the laughable action all is so bad the film often becomes a genuine chore to sit through.

Despite the original title Martial Arts (Flid-Fu or not) is only a tiny part of the film and is staged, filmed and performed with all the effectiveness of a bucket with holes at both ends.
Fraser might be able to kick his legs up and do a bit of (very) close quarters fist pummeling but his blows never carry any power or force and the camera spends most of time trying to cover up (and often failing to do so) the fact that most punches and kicks never actually connect.

Nothing here is done well in fact, guns fire with almost no noise, people slump off camera when shot to save money on actually doing anything to imply a bullet hit and even when the violence is effective and genuinely bloody (and I mean bloody!) the actors are so awful (and the director so blind and deaf it seems) at portraying the realistic effects of such violence that even the few technical things that are okay are ruined.
When Fraser's Wife is shot, twice to the chest, she not only moves around as if nothing has happened but then holds a shouting conversation with such vigor and energy that you'd think she was just received a vitamin shot, not a gun shot.

The Gangster characters are all the same old cliche geezers we have come to love or loathe (me, I loves 'em) but the appalling screenplay shows just how bad and annoying such characters can be when not handled carefully at the script stage and by a director who can guide the actors during the often essential broad performances that come with essaying such characters.
Fraser is okay as an actor and "Lock Stock" bad guy Frank Harper as the gangster boss is fun (if outrageously hammy) and delivers the better dialogue moments well.
But everyone else is dire and too often mugs for the camera.

The screenplay is messy, rushed and badly plotted as it bogs us down in really bad dialogue sequences and 'crazy' characters that actually show just how damn good Guy Ritchie and Quentin Tarantino are at delivering these aspects.
The basic formula is that poor characters, played by poor actors, deliver poor lines before each of these poor set-pieces ends in a brief burst of poorly staged action...and repeat.

The film is also unsure on what it actually is. The taglines, title and basic plot make the film look like a Martial Arts revenge film with an unusual setting, but most of the film is a a time hopping crime/gangster film that suddenly turns into "Hostel" during numerous nasty torture sequences.
One such sequence involves a Scottish psychopathic serial killer (with really false looking tattoos that loo like paint) who suddenly takes over the film with much overacting as he tortures Fraser's Wife and friend in a blood spattered room full of sharp objects and power tools dripping gore.
This extended sequence then cuts back and forth to Fraser taking a taxi, driven by a mad Jesus preaching driver who gets lost, in cinema's least energetic and exciting rescue plan.
The mad Scot is then, after all this build-up and screentime, simply dispatched by a punch in the nose by the Wife whose two bleeding bullet holes STILL don't seem to exist outside of a visual make-up effect.

The finale is an utter mess as well and is nothing but a ranting, swearing chaotic stew of bad acting, silly plot mechanics and the worst Kung Fu yet seen.

Now I love my British Gangster films, and I love my mockney/Cockney geezers (yeah...I admit it!), I love it when everyone shouts and call each other c*nts, and I love a bit of blood and nastiness, and I love the idea of a whacked-out Kung Fu set-up...and I had all that in "Unarmed but Dangerous"....and yet I still ended up hating the film.
Avoid!!

[Malky]

The Men Who Stare at Goats 4 Thoroughly enjoyable light hearted romp kind of Coenesque but it kept me entertained and laughing throughout. There was one joke that I chuckled to but later on in bed had me buckled when the outrageousness of it hit me. Defintely worth a watch

[Sleezy]

"In love", get in line...

Screw that. For Amy Adams, I'm cutting line. :yup:

[Used Future]

Harry Brown (Daniel Barber, 2009) 3+
I don't venture out to the cinema that often these days, but the prospect of seeing British institution Michael Caine follow in the footsteps of Charles Bronson, and most recently Clint Eastwood (Gran Torino) was too good to pass up. Yes we're back in vigilante territory again, with Caine on blistering form as the Harry Brown of the title; a recently widowed pensioner and ex marine, who dishes out his own brand of justice to a gang of hoodies after they murder his best and only friend (played by David Bradley).

Set in and around a nameless London high rise council estate (indeed this could be any inner city ghetto), Harry Brown is a simple tale, given an extra shot of gritty social commentary from relative newcomer Daniel Barber. It's an approach that admirably steers clear of sensationalism in favour of grimy realism, and heart wrenching emotional depth. This is largely thanks to Caine's wonderfully measured performance as a man who once patrolled the Ulster streets, and now lives in the hell hole that is modern inner city Britain whilst mourning the loss of his wife after a long term illness. His only social contact is fellow pensioner Len (Bradly) who meets Harry for games of chess at the local pub. Both reside on the afore mentioned estate, and Len Confides in Harry about living in fear of the local thugs who regularly push dog muck through his letter box, openly deal drugs, and assault passers by in the street. The next day he's dead, leaving Harry completely alone in the world with seemingly nothing to live for, or lose. Predictably the police arrest the culprits but are unable to charge them with anything more than manslaughter because Len had been carrying a knife for protection.

Familiar as Barber's film is, and not without it's problems (the teenage yobs for example, are all portrayed as stereotypical, irredeemable low lifes); Harry Brown still manages to touch upon many of the hard issues plaguing modern Britiain. From the insensitive, dismissive police sergeant who describes delivering bad news to victims of crime as a 'death-o-gram'; to his out of touch superintendent who places more importance on statistics than individual cases. Most notably there's the skunk growing gutter trash who sell Harry the inevitable hand guns, a hoodie who films the murder on his mobile phone, and the repellent irresponsible mother of vicious gang leader Noel (excellently played by Ben Drew). Then there's Harry himself. A vulnerable pensioner living amongst the intimidation and violence of the estate; too scared to take a short cut through the local subway because of the skunk smoking, knife wielding scum who loiter there. Harry regularly uses an inhaler for his emphysema, almost as if Barber wants to reinforce in us a feeling of suffocation at the hands of this decaying modern society.

Elsewhere the film moves at a leisurely pace with Barber clearly taking extra care to flesh out Caine's character and what motivates him to do what he does before the immanent explosion of violence. Unfortunately this comes at the expense of the gang members who despite the authentic performances, never rise above cliche. The estate itself however serves as a satisfyingly authentic backdrop and plays as big a role as any of the cast. From the grubby nicotine stained local pub, to the filthy graffiti daubed walls, and chintzy interiors. Barker's bleak palette is all dull greys, dirty sepias, and grubby yellows, as this is a world of constant gloom and filth. For unlike Clint Eastwood's similar Gran Torino; the humour in Harry Brown is only ever briefly hinted at ('make it work' Caine's inability to operate a mobile phone for example). No the emphasis here is on the hopelessness of a social problem where it seems the only answer is violent retribution. In fact the inevitable revenge is restrained only in it's unglamorous depiction, and plays out in the third act of the film. This is a far cry from Charles Bronson, Robert Ginty, or Zoe Lund's exploits in more notorious genre entries. There's no 'if you're lying...I'll be back' style catchphrase, or flamboyantly gratuitous murders. No. Harry's vengeance is laboured, clumsy, and disappointingly predictable; though well handled by Barker. The nearest anyone will come to cheering and punching the air during this movie, is at Harry's proclamation 'tell me where he is, or I'm going to shoot both your kneecaps off'.

So there you have it. A well made, extremely well acted, but sadly predictable entry into the vigilante/revenge genre. Probably worth it for Caine's performance, and the social commentary alone. Though if you've already seen a glut of these types of movies already; it's unlikely you'll find anything new beyond the UK setting.

[Fenwick]

Nice review, Matt.

Saw it myself this afternoon and was very impressed. A wonderfully noirish, chiaroscuro vision of Brown's legacy of escalating knife/gun crime.

Oh and Sleezy, good shout with Sunshine Cleaning. Lovely little movie. And I must echo your love of Amy Adams too.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Just tell me there's no 'taking the law into your own hands is not a good thing to do' moralising at the end of "Harry Brown". Please!

[Used Future]

There's no 'taking the law into your own hands is not a good thing to do' moralising at the end of "Harry Brown".

[mark f]

The Honeymoon Killers (Leonard Kastle, 1969) 2.5

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ETGCwSMltK0/TJ0dKZFpIqI/AAAAAAAABEY/dz1IsLVdGu4/s1600/the+honeymoon+killers.png

Don't let my rating fool you. This movie is one of the most unique films ever made, even though it's based on a true story which mostly took place in the eastern U.S. during the 1940s. I would say that this film is even at least semi-responsible for such films as the original Texas Chain Saw Massacre and Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. Remember that this film was made in the '60s and the director never made another flick, but it's often listed in the Top Horror films of all time, and I dare say that the hammer used in this flick is a lot scarier than the one used in Chain Saw. The basic reason I don't give this a higher rating is that it's a very low-budget flick ($150,000) and much of the cinematography is incredibly "contrasty". In other words, for every perfectly-lit shot, there's one overexposed and one underexposed, but in many ways, it adds to the immediacy and believability of the flick. After all, this was the first feature film shot by Oliver Wood, who went on to do Die Hard 2, Rudy, Face/Off and the Bourne Trilogy.

http://www.gentlegeek.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/img_tueurslune.jpg

What really sets the film apart and basically makes it a must-see for lovers of horror and cult films are the two lead performances. Shirley Stoler totally encompasses the incredibly-insecure Martha, a 40-ish nurse who weighs about 250 pounds and has never remotely ever found any kind of love in her life. She plays Martha from inside-out and totally goes off the deep end every single time she feels that her miraculous lover Raymond Fernandez (Tony Lo Bianco, in his first decent role, two years before The French Connection) pays any attention to all the other women he tries to take advantage of. You see, Ray has a job, and that job is to woo and sometimes marry lonely old women in order to get their money. Now Ray has never really gotten violent with any of his "victims/sweethearts", at least until he hooks up with Martha. For some reason, Ray has the hots for Martha and even confesses the truth to her, even while making constant love to her (which is obviously a first for Martha). Eventually, Ray allows Martha to join him in trying to flim-flam all the other lonelyheart women he encounters, and Martha brings out the murderous side in Ray and vice versa. Therefore, the couple, playing brother and sister, travel around the U.S., bilking lonely women and eventually killing them and any children or relatives they may have living with them.

http://somecamerunning.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5523026f588340133f49ece37970b-pi

I'll be the first to say that I am a "morbidly-obese" (oh how I hate that phrase since I'm never morbid until I read it) person who I hope you would give the time of day if you didn't know me. I already know that those of you who'll meet me in person will have no problem seeing me because you already know me, but there's always those superficial people out there who like to treat people as somehow lesser beings because they aren't superficially "normal". This may seem like me blowing off steam, but no, this is actually the theme of The Honeymoon Killers. Ray is Spanish and insecure about his ethnicity even though he's very happy about his bod and his overall looks. Martha is totally insecure about her looks, but once Ray proves to her that she is his woman, she gets EVEN MORE insecure because Ray is one of those damned Latin Lovers. He's great in bed and can screw all day and all night, so maybe he will cheat on Martha. In fact, no matter how real the psychology of the movie is in a dramatic sense, it works even better as a black comedy. I mean, how many different times can Ray show up to marry his latest sweetheart with his "sister" in tow? One thing's for sure though, and that's that Ray loves Martha, at least as much as he can love anyone other than himself; otherwise, he would never have tried to bring Martha along with him because he could always get as much nookie as he wanted without her. But Ray and Martha are soulmates, and that's why they share equally in what eventually happens to them. Although Martha is a whining Cry Baby when she thinks that Ray is cheating on her, it's Ray who is the weakling and needs Martha to carry out most of the murders and dirty work to get him "clean" from all the dirt he mucks around with. The ending of the film is both shocking and predictable, depending on whose perspective you share.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_CNPZ0JYfo5Y/SGwoMqryy4I/AAAAAAAABCk/_nZzo5vX0-E/s400/Honeymoon.jpg

If you watch this flick, make sure you post your thoughts where I can see them. (Movie Tab II should be good enough.)

[Used Future]

Thanks Mark, this sounds interesting so I've just ordered a widescreen copy on Amazon for a mere £2. Tony Lo Bianco from God Told Me To is in it too :cool:.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Thanks USED.
Tis all I need to know. I do like my vigilante films, but I'm very fussy (Me? Never!) over how they play out.


Excellent review Mark!
I have "The Honeymoon Killers" on my 'to watch' list (thought I'm sure I saw it years ago on TV) and have now moved it up.

[Golgot]

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/847/denirol.jpg

Angel Heart

A twist that arrives suddenly, feels deviously apposite, and yet also contrives to fall strangely flat. Perhaps it's because Rourke's detective drift into a heart of darkness itself was involving, but not entirely compelling, that lets the film down a bit? Bobby D is full of feral grace as Rourke's employer, and Rourke does convince as the raggedy dick dancing between easy street and a hard place, but there was still something missing. There are fun eccentrics, some nicely arranged shots of locations and light, and at least one sex scene dripping with symbolism, which is all fine. The 50s scenario is visually all there, but the 80s synth games with heart rates take you out of that world a bit. Their dopplering presence does provide disquiet, along with the sweaty pre-Mississippi-Burning heat our PI gets exposed to, but somehow the voodoo still didn't quite cast its spell.

3_5(+)

[Miss Vicky]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd302/XriDz/2012_movie_poster2a.jpg

2012

I want to preface this by saying two things:

1. It was not my idea to see this movie.

2. I had a free pass.

Judging by the trailer (and by the fact that, most of the time, I don't like John Cusack movies even though I like the actor himself), I expected this movie to... well... not be good. As a general rule, I don't like disaster movies. They're usually too over the top and corny. Just absolutely full of cheese but I wasn't expecting the lactose overload that I got with this one. It was so over the top that it was almost a caricature of other disaster flicks. As for the special effects - which is what this movie sells itself on - quite frankly they looked really bad to me. Like something from a video game. I just couldn't get into it at all. Definitely not worth seeing.

However, I will be generous and give it 1 1/2 popcorns because I do really like John Cusack and because Woody Harrelson was really good for the whole ten minutes he was in the movie.

1.5

[Prospero]

2012

I want to preface this by saying two things:

1. It was not my idea to see this movie.

2. I had a free pass.

Judging by the trailer (and by the fact that, most of the time, I don't like John Cusack movies even though I like the actor himself), I expected this movie to... well... not be good. As a general rule, I don't like disaster movies. They're usually too over the top and corny. Just absolutely full of cheese but I wasn't expecting the lactose overload that I got with this one. It was so over the top that it was almost a caricature of other disaster flicks. As for the special effects - which is what this movie sells itself on - quite frankly they looked really bad to me. Like something from a video game. I just couldn't get into it at all. Definitely not worth seeing.

However, I will be generous and give it 1 1/2 popcorns because I do really like John Cusack and because Woody Harrelson was really good for the whole ten minutes he was in the movie.

1.5
Thanks for the warning. You have confirmed my worst fears. Since, unlike you, I don't have a free pass, I'll have to give this one a...well, a pass.

[Golgot]

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/7788/rockwellmoon2.jpg

Moon

A nicely paced reverie on a near future juiced by moon fuel. Rockwell's well at home as the angry but playful miner going slightly stir crazy, while Spacey's alternate-Hal character explores another form of limited AI. To the extent that it touches on real issues, beyond generic corporate greed, there's a glimmer of 'ages of man' preoccupations, a smatter of relationship challenges, and some short talk of men being more than machines, even if we might use ourselves as such. And there isn't much extrapolation beyond that, or need for it, as the film is confident enough to let its scenarios do the talking.

Not sure if this rating is cold or not, as it's certainly a warmly acted, succinctly presented, enjoyable film.

3_5++

[Classicqueen13]

http://s12.bdbphotos.com/images/120x156/x/v/xvzt0chswyynyw.jpg

Excellent Drama! I didn't go into this with very high hopes even though I am a big Cary Grant fan. I was very impressed. He was great in his role. I thought Carole Lombard gave a very good performance. Perhaps, most memorable for me was Kay Francis' down right cold-hearted character. She was superbly evil. The story leaves you wanting the characters to wake-up already and see how she's manipulating them. But I think that creates a great deal of suspense. Romance throughout with some top-notch dialouge.

In Name Only: 4


http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2d/DreamWife_.jpg/200px-DreamWife_.jpg
Part of a Grant double feature I was so lucky to have. The script in this one really impressed me and there were many laugh-out-loud moments despite some silly gags that didn't quite work. Debra Kerr is flawless and Grant is charming and funny. Betta St. John was perfect as the princess. The storyline is quirky and it's just kind of a fun little movie.

Dream Wife: 4


http://web3.seventymm.com/Images/MoviePoster/202728.jpg
My whole family got together to watch this favorite of my aunt's. A tragic love story turns into a hilarious comedy. The cast was all very good, and even though Minnie Driver was okay, I thought someone else might have done better. Jim Belushi does a lot with a small role. The script is great and the movie is loaded with laughs. While the storyline is pretty unrealistic, it doesn't take away here. This definately belongs in the category romanic comedy, but the romance isn't too mushy and doesn't overwhelm. I had a lot of fun watching this one.

Return to Me: 4.5


http://www.ertx.com/imdb/images/tt0469903.jpg
Very inspirational story. This one wasn't my pick, but I enjoyed it alot. I thought Rob Brown was excellent as the lead. I thought Dennis Quaid was perfect in his role. I don't know how closely the film follows its true story base, but it was a very entertaining story. The dialouge was pretty good, holding a few moments of comic relief when needed. I thought Fleder should've found a different way to do some of the shots during the games. When the action broke out, the angles seemed kind of choppy and made me almost dizzy. I loved the musical score though.

The Express: 3.5

[meatwadsprite]

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:UICo7Ua3MI-PVM:http://www.scifiscoop.com/wp-content/gallery/movie-posters/9_final_movie_poster.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:20Q9oxM9gYh1UM:http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_9hdu_7-nT0k/SW5r7CTGL6I/AAAAAAAAAME/Jy9UbRbzUI8/S660/movie-9-stills-456578716.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:d-CCpXAC8j92eM:http://lh5.ggpht.com/_gf2y0p7flJA/SrHUBiZBEYI/AAAAAAAAAjE/1tT_XcANgWo/2009_9_001.jpg

9 2009

Entirely uninspired, from the extremely tight limited animation to the flimsy apocalyptic setting. The cold characters, mathematical writing, there's really no redeeming factor here other than the premise.

1.5

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:qeBP9yOYy2wP4M:http://www.scificool.com/images/2009/09/ink-movie-review-2.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:McDUM03EiWAgVM:http://www.scifiscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/ink-7.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:PRDd3BEuUb2hXM:http://www.scifiscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/ink1.jpg

Ink 2009

A very ambitious sci-fi story with B-movie restrictions set upon it. Even for the prohibitively low budget it gets by on neat camera tricks and homemade special effects. The acting is a mixed bag of no-name actors, the overall cinematography often uses annoying blur effects to mask it's not so brilliant framework, the action scenes are cut and pasted together through editing which sort of works. It's a treat to see an idea come together with such an apparently small amateur team behind it.

3

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:b6ANYcSDjfYqtM:http://mississippilearning.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/black_dynamite_ver31.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:xQu_vCXhQXMfJM:http://blogs.bet.com/entertainment/whattheflick/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/black_dynamite.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:8oaxlv0kooMdtM:http://chud.com/articles/content_images/0NICK2/BlackDynamiteMovieStill.jpg

Black Dynamite 2009

A collection of hilarious ideas, although Black Dynamite doesn't entirely transcend it's own bad-movie imitations, it becomes one of the best pieces of crap of all time. Awesome performances and a theme song that will be stuck in your head for the rest of your life.

"TAKE THIS YOU D**K SHRINKING ISLAND!"

3

[undercoverlover]

i always think that minnie driver gets cast when andie mcdowell turns the part down

[Classicqueen13]

http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/94/214694.jpg

A wonderful story! I chose this one because my English class is about to read the novel and I wanted to have some idea of what was going on. I don't know how closely the film followed the novel, but I greatly enjoyed it and am looking forward to reading the classic. The film is filled with gorgeous props, locations, costumes, and set pieces. A polished script from Francis Ford Coppola has no flaws.

The acting is superb down to the smaller supporting roles. Mia Farrow is excellent as Daisy and Robert Redford is a perfect match. Think how beautiful their children would've been! You couldn't find a better choice than Bruce Dern for his part, and Sam Waterson is very impressive in one of his early roles.

The storyline is a love story but also has many twists and turns to it that keep you very intrigued. I'll definately be revisiting this one day and I'll be seeing the remake. I'm certain it couldn't hold up to this classic!

The Great Gatsby (1974): 4+

[Harry Lime]

What I watched this week:
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/1ministryoffear.jpg
Ministry of Fear (1944, Fritz Lang) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/2manisnotabird.jpg
Man Is Not a Bird (1965, Dusan Makavejev) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/3takeaimatthepolicevan.jpg
Take Aim at the Police Van (1960, Seijun Suzuki) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/4redpsalm.jpg
Red Psalm (1972, Miklos Jancso) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/5dreams.jpg
Dreams (1955, Ingmar Bergman) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/6afaceinthecrowd.jpg
A Face in the Crowd (1957, Elia Kazan) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/7ballast.jpg
Ballast (2008, Lance Hammer) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/8revolutionaryroad.jpg
Revolutionary Road (2008, Sam Mendes) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/9kingsoftheroad.jpg
Kings of the Road (1976, Wim Wenders) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/10funnypeople.jpg
Funny People (2009, Judd Apatow) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/11fanboys.jpg
Fanboys (2008, Kyle Newman) 2
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/12monsieurverdoux.jpg
Monsieur Verdoux (1947, Charles Chaplin) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/13thegreatsilence.jpg
The Great Silence (1968, Sergio Corbucci) 4

[mark f]

The Stepfather (Joseph Ruben, 1987) 3.5+

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_PPgU44tBL8E/SX5SNKzQ-HI/AAAAAAAAAYc/ZvQm8brOXbs/s400/The_Stepfather.jpg

Since the remake was recently released to theatres, they finally got around to releasing this cult classic on DVD. I don't know why it took so long because although The Stepfather was not a moneymaking film, it quickly developed a huge cult following, and my friends, family and I are all happy to be card-carrying members of the cult. If you like straight horror films, thrillers or flix which are very self-aware about all their blood, gore and sex (without reducing themselves to straight camp), The Stepfather should be right up your alley. As with most cult films, the more times you watch it, with the more people in the room with you, the more you'll probably appreciate it. In fact, the hardest thing for me to decide on was a rating to give the film. Depending on my mood and who I'm with, I can give the flick anywhere from 3 to 4, but I decided that my rating above is appropriate after 20+ years of mostly oblivion and a recent mass release to a newer generation.

http://media.elasticpop.com/images/Stepfather.jpg

The Stepfather is about a man (Terry O'Quinn) who desperately wants the American Dream and does everything he can to seek it out. Now, in this character's mind (he's called Jerry throughout most of the film), if he has to destroy his latest imperfect family to seek out a better one, he has no problem with that. Jerry does seem to realize what he's doing most of the time, but there are other times where he seems to have completely blocked out his violent past in his pursuit of trying to create the perfect family. Jerry basically has no background. We never learn about his childhood at all, but we do know that he apparently has no criminal record or has ever been part of the military since no one has a record of his fingerprints. Jerry is a good salesman though, so that allows him to pull up stakes, move and find a new job very quickly because he is very good at what he does. He can sell real estate and insurance equally well, especially since he's so proud of helping out so many families by doing so.

http://pic.ipicture.ru/uploads/091004/WCCgvzbcnz.jpg

After a highly-memorable opening scene where Jerry leaves his latest family, we see him a year later living very happily with his new wife Susan (Shelley Hack) but not so pleasantly with his teenage stepdaughter Stephanie (Jill Schoelen) who seems to irrationally blame Jerry for the death of her father. Stephanie has a father figure she likes in the form of her psychiatrist (Charles Lanyer), but Jerry refuses to meet with the doctor even after Stephanie gets expelled from high school for inappropriate behavior. Meanwhile, the brother (Stephen Shellen) of Jerry's last wife is on a crusade to get the local press and police to reopen the murder case and begins his own investigation into who Jerry could possibly be if he repeats his previous modus operandi. As things come to a head with Jill and her burgeoning sexuality, Jerry seems about ready to snap and move on to greener pastures to find a more perfect family.

http://photos.ifmagazine.com/graphics/Unsorted/thestepfather_-_1987-_dvd.jpg

The Stepfather rises up to the cream of its genre for many fortuitous reasons. The entire cast is earnest but Terry O'Quinn gives one of the best genre performances ever. Even after we see his incredibly-destructive side, he comes across as an empathetic villain. On top of O'Quinn's scary sincerity, he has several chances to garner needed laughs when he gets that gleam in his eyes and says something as innocent as "Are you OK, sweetheart?" Donald E. Westlake's script is a model of the rise-and-fall school of plot development, as well as the slowburn build-up. Things take their sweet time to come to a boil, but what a wonderful boil they become. Joseph Ruben, who made several thrillers in the middle of his career and claims to hate scary movies, did his finest, most-controlled work on The Stepfather and walks a thin line between out-and-out thrills and yell-at-the-screen laughs. The Stepfather was an audience participation film when I watched it several times at the theatre in the '80s, and it still seems like a participation film today in my own living room. It contains many memorable lines of dialogue and gestures and facial expressions by O'Quinn for all to groove to and pass on to their unsuspecting friends. Long live The Stepfather and hopefully it will not disappear again now that we have the DVD release to enjoy over and over again.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PPgU44tBL8E/SX87eZKgMwI/AAAAAAAAAZs/oPX4DFmPe3o/s400/stepf.jpg

[Sedai]

The Entity (Furie, 1981)

3_5

http://static.squidoo.com/resize/squidoo_images/-1/draft_lens2359846module13283622photo_1230946332entity.jpg

Part thriller, part exploitation film, I remember this film causing quite a stir when it first hit the streets back in the early 80s. I know that once it hit video, The Entity was the coveted film by all the boys my age, as we heard they was all sorts of nasty stuff in it. Tame by today's standards, it's still pretty effective.

[42ndStreetFreak]

The Great Silence (1968, Sergio Corbucci) 3.5

What about that ending then?!
Still utterly astonishing even today and not just because of what happens...but the utterly uncompromising and cold blooded way it happens.

Corbucci must have had balls the size of watermelons.

[Yoda]

Saw a couple flicks over the weekend

Appaloosa
2.5

http://z.about.com/d/movies/1/0/c/y/R/appaloosapic12.jpg

I sure do find myself liking westerns more and more over time, but I was a little let down by this one. I like the setup and both Ed Harris and Viggo (no last name; he's just Viggo) in their respective roles. I kinda like that the gunplay was so fast and (presumably) realistic. But I wasn't nuts about how quickly certain things fell into place; particularly the relationship with Allie. It all just feels a little short of what I'd hoped, I guess. I can't really fault any one thing about it. I think it's one of those movies that is perfectly reasonable and realistic, but both in the ways it makes it more authentic, as well as the ways that make it less interesting.


Swimming to Cambodia
3.5

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2395/2245689430_5e87dba614.jpg?v=0

Saw Gray's Anatomy not long ago, and decided to rent Swimming to Cambodia, which seems widely regarded as the superior of the two, and from what I can tell is probably what Gray's most famous for. For those who don't know, it's basically just a monologue. Spalding Gray sits down and tells a long, winding, sprawling story. This time, he has a small live audience, and a couple of maps to illustrate a few things, which he pulls up and down without leaving his seat.

I liked it fine; the production was simpler and less intrusive than Soderbergh's effort (Swimming was directed by Jonathan Demme, another versatile filmmaker).

I like Gray's delivery; it's an obvious thing to say, but he's a gifted storyteller. Where he usually loses me is when his stories become more surreal and talk more about warped perception than actual events or people. At one point he describes a drug trip, and while I'm sure some people find it amusing or interesting, I found it kind of dull. Where he really shines, for me, is in speaking as other people he's met, like a South African on the film set (The Killing Fields, which the monologue is kinda-sorta about), or a veteran he meets on a train. He switches them on and off in a flash with subtle changes in expression and delivery (and a little help from multiple camera angles). It's good, engaging stuff, and it works best when it sounds the most plausible.

Had one small political observation (sorry): he talks about the Khmer Rouge and their slaughtering of Cambodians, and it's interesting to see how the liberalism of his day, 22 years ago, was so human-rights oriented even about foreign affairs. He doesn't take much of a stance, but there's a clear interventionist implication to what he's saying. It's a more classical liberalism that is literally the opposite of what it usually stands for today, where such foreign excursions are regarded as sticking our nose where it doesn't belong. Whatever the merits of a given war's timing, execution, etc., it's always interesting to glimpse into the not-so-recent past and see how movements and ideologies have shifted.

There are, of course, plenty of dark observations here, and Gray's hints of nihilism are a little unsettling when one considers that he later committed suicide. Still, it's a bold exercise, even if it's bound to end rather abruptly. Worth viewing for its originality and energy alone.

[42ndStreetFreak]

"The Mummy" (1932) - 2

Iconic make-up, top notch performance by Boris Karloff, some nice set design and cinematography...and quite frankly not much else.

Out of all the 'Classic Universal Monster Movies' "The Mummy" has not only dated the most, it's also the least entertaining and theatrically stodgy.
The Mummy himself famously only appears looking like an actual Mummy (Im-ho-tep) during the opening, most effective part of the film as far as any horror aesthetic goes, scenes where he comes alive, steals a scroll and sends the only witness into lala land upon the soundwaves of much superbly over the top mad laughter.

From here though the film falls into a slumber deeper than that of it's bandaged icon. Only Karloff (now playing a talking and un-bandaged Mummy, but given a lovely 'wrinkled' make-up by the great Jack Pierce) and a surprisingly less hammy than usual Edward van Sloan give us anything interesting to focus on as a ridiculously fast, soppy as hell, romance and much talk now dominate the movie.

No more Mummy action is forthcoming and the 'love across the ages' plot involving Karloff's Im-ho-tep and (the very theatrical but fun) Zita Johann as his reincarnated Princess is less than thrilling.
But it lacks any real horror, has little action, soppy support characters and is quite simply not much fun.

Wonderful 2 disc DVD though with lots of good extras, including excellent "Universal Horror" documentary.



"Miracle Mile" - 3

Nothing can compare to how I first saw this film many years ago.
It was an unknown entry into a UK, all night, Horror film festival and none of us knew what the hell we had been given during the light comedy romantic opening as we meet Anthony Edwards and Mare Winningham
Then a phone call happens...and suddenly Anthony Edwards' character, and the audience, are propelled on a very different course as we, like Edwards, have to deal with the knowledge that perhaps, just perhaps, World War 3 has broken out and the missiles will soon be flying.

From here on we are expertly moved from romantic comedy, to black comedy, to deadly serious drama and epic tragedy as what Edwards' character may know sets off a chain of events that engulfs many, well played, support characters as he tries to get back to his new love Winnigham and escape the coming apocalypse that may or not be coming.

Mixing harsh language, romantic voiceover, love story, violence, light comedy and action "Miracle Mile" is amazing enough for the fact it got greenlit at all, let alone completed and released (no matter how small that release sadly was) and this mix, plus the about turn the film does from its opening 10 minutes, took the hardcore horror crowd I watched it with by surprise and I will never forget the sight of two leather clad biker types in the row in front of me wiping away the tears at the end of the film! Where normally there were hoots of appreciation, or howls of derision, from any hardcore crowd of horror fans at the end of a film..here there was only a bizarre silence, broken only by hushed whispers of surprise and praise.

As such, the film benefitted from that introduction in a way that I felt was missing on this DVD viewing and the film does lose something away from such a memorable projection setting.
But it does remain effective and is quite unlike any other film on the way it handles its subject.
Shamefully obscure and unloved...this is certainly a must see film for anyone at least once and will remain fondly in my heart because of that wonderful first exposure i had to it so many years ago.

[mark f]

I agree that The Mummy is the creakiest of the early Universal classics, although Dracula is only a hair away from winning the Most Somnambulant Award. I believe there are quite a few fans of Miracle Mile around here and that Holden is probably its biggest flagwaver on this side of the Atlantic.

[Used Future]

I love Miracle Mile too. It's wonderfully offbeat and has a great sense of urgency about it. I also agree the supporting cast are all great. This film is one good reason why you should never answer if you hear a public phone box ringing.

[mark f]

Swimming to Cambodia
3.5

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2395/2245689430_5e87dba614.jpg?v=0

Saw Gray's Anatomy not long ago, and decided to rent Swimming to Cambodia, which seems widely regarded as the superior of the two, and from what I can tell is probably what Gray's most famous for. For those who don't know, it's basically just a monologue. Spalding Gray sits down and tells a long, winding, sprawling story. This time, he has a small live audience, and a couple of maps to illustrate a few things, which he pulls up and down without leaving his seat.

Ah... so you still have Nick Bloomfield's Monster in a Box to catch up on... http://img.infibeam.com/img/4105ee2b/391/7/9780679737391.jpg

[42ndStreetFreak]

Nice to see some "Miracle" love!


The Wolf Man (1941) - 3


Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr), the long estranged son of Sir John Talbot (Claude Rains) returns home to Britain, from America, after the death of his brother.

While exploring the local village Larry meets Gwen Conliffe (Evelyn Ankers) who works in an antique shop. To get to know her better Larry purchases a silver headed cane in the shape of a wolf and arranges a date to go and see a troop of Gypsies who have recently set up their carnival outside the village.

Along with a female friend, Jenny (Fay Helm), Larry and Gwen go to the Gypsy camp and Jenny goes to see the fortune teller Bela (Bela Lugosi) who scares her with his attitude towards her.
Jenny runs away into the woods and is suddenly attacked by a savage wolf.
Vainly trying to save the doomed girl Larry beats the wolf to death with his new cane but is bitten in the fight and passes out.

Awakening the next morning the head of the local Police, Colonel Montford (Ralph Bellamy), informs Larry that they only found the bodies of Jenny and the Gypsy Bela (who suffered a crushed skull), but no dead wolf.
Learning about the legends of Werewolves from Bela's mysterious mother, Maleva (Maria Ouspenskaya), and how a person bitten by one will become a Weerwolf themselves, Larry is convinced that he will turn into a bloodthirsty beast at the next full moon....



Chronologically coming last in the line of 'classic' Universal monsters (Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, The Mummy and The Invisible Man), The Wolf Man soon joined his already established brethren of icons to become an influential part of horror film history.
Thanks to the truly superb scripting by Curt Siodmak (taking over from, and completely re-writing, an abandoned original script) "The Wolf Man" has in fact become the most culturally influential of all Universal's monsters.

Siodmak's famous 'folklore' prose...
'Even a man who is pure in heart and says his prayers by night,
may become a wolf when the wolfbane blooms
and the autumn moon is bright'.
...has become almost mythic in itself and was often wrongly thought to be an actual European folk saying and would be repeated in numerous films over the following decades.
What Siodmak also famously gave us is the belief that only silver can kill a Werewolf, something that would become so deeply implanted into any Werewolf entertainment that it almost took on scientific validity!

But it's not only mythic folklore that Siodmak offers up here, he also delivers a tight plot, interesting characters and effective set-pieces.
We can indeed bemoan the fact that another 5 minutes could not have been added, to the typically short Universal running time, to give us one or two more attack sequences (certainly The Wolf Man is underused compared to Dracula and the Invisible Man, but is given vastly more to do than The Mummy) but there is so much going on in the film that it holds the interest we can overlook, if not forget, this rare fault in the otherwise effective screenplay.
A screenplay that, as he covers the tragedy of a man fated and cursed for no reason, owes much to Siodmak's flight from Nazi Germany where, as a Jew, he was similarly fated to have his life suddenly changed as his very DNA became a curse upon him as far as being able to live his life peacefully in Germany would go.

Claude Rains yet again does a wonderful job as the intelligent, caring, grounded father, Bellamy is great value as the delightfully no nonsense Colonel (his clipped orders, while looking at the bodies of Bela and Jenny, to his scared assistant are a hoot, "Take a note Twiddle"!), the unforgettable Maria Ouspenskaya helps to create one of Universal's most iconic non-monster characters as the wise but mysterious foreteller of doom and a sadly underused Bela Lugosi (now obviously being pushed out of any kind of leading man status) does an enjoyable job as the first Werewolf.

As for Lon Chaney he does everything that needs doing as far as essaying a likeable character caught in a web of tragedy. But his general hulking physicality and distinctive drawl do not remotely work as far as him being a credible, (estranged or not) son of the slight, very English, very sophisticated, Claude Rains. He basically seems like the son that was dropped on his head at birth. It is telling that this relationship to Rains was not actually in Siodmak's original script.
As The Wolf Man though, Chaney does a wonderful job and his bulk and physicality, that are ill-suited to him being the son of an English Sir, are a bonus here.

Larry Talbot/The Wolf Man is perhaps the most tragic of all Universal's monsters as he is basically a good man who, while doing a good deed, gets cruelly inflicted with a curse that will see him (throughout the sequels, with Chaney always playing him) desperately trying to die, to finally give himself peace.
This tragic desperation and suicidal quest of the character must have been pretty strong stuff for audiences at the time, and the bleakness of such a tragic existence for someone who is basically a human being for much of his screen-time (unlike, the still tragic, Frankenstein's Monster who is always just that...a monster) means that The Wolf Man films become perhaps the most consistently serious of all the Universal cycles.

For all it's classic status I have to say though that the design of The Wolf Man is for me the least successful of make-up legend Jack Pierce's creations.
Pierce does manage to keep some nice facial expression in the Wolf Man for Chaney to work with, but the dog snout nose and rather comical bouffant hairdo that the Werewolf sports have dated badly and take away some of the viciousness of the creature, despite the effective looking fangs. The obvious one piece boots used for the feet are also a letdown as we can clearly see that Talbot's toes are all connected with no gaps between each of them.
Although not as influential or popular the more simplistic looking Werewolf make-up, used on Henry Hull in the earlier "Werewolf of London", makes for a more savage and scary beast.

So we have some faults, and a few logic holes in the plot, but basically thanks to the otherwise effective screenplay, wonderful monster lore, generally very fine acting, good support characters, wonderfully atmospheric sets and cinematography, tight direction (by the great silent German cinematographer George Waggner) and genuinely effective and tragic lead character, "The Wolf Man" manages to retain much of its classic status historically speaking, and also manages to be an enjoyable fright film in its own right.
I'd still put this behind "Dracula", "Frankenstein", "Son of Frankenstein" and especially "The Invisible Man", but Larry Talbot/The Wolf Man manages a very respectable placing in Universal's classic monster canon.

The Universal DVD is a fine release with some great extras, including a wonderfully entertaining, gossip filled, commentary track by Tom Weaver.

[Prospero]

Nice to see some "Miracle" love!


The Wolf Man (1941) - 3
Nice review, 42ndStreetFreak. Two of the reasons I love this movie so much are the performances by Claude Rains as Larry's father, and Maria Ouspenskaya as the old gypsy who delivers those famous lines.

I'm looing forward to the remake, and expect Anthony Hopkins to do well in the Claude Rains role, but to me Ouspenskaya is irreplaceable.

[mark f]

El Cid (Anthony Mann, 1961) 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCqjq7oN2sg&feature=related

Gargantuan epic, filled with romance, action, beautiful Spanish landscapes and castles and what may well be Miklos Rozsa's greatest musical score is also crammed with love won. lost and returned. A young man named Rodrigo (Charlton Heston) is on the way to his marriage ceremony to the beautiful Chimene (Sophia Loren), but he finds himself enthrusted into the middle of Spanish/Moor political struggle/war when he allows two Moor nobles free, and one of them [Moutamin (Douglas Wilmer)] becomes Rodrigo's greatest ally in his never-ending battles against both the Moors and the Spanish kings who seem to hate him as much as possible until they need him. Rodrigo is named a traitor and his marriage is off, especially when he chooses to do hand-to-hand combat with the Spanish King's champion, who just happens to be Chimene's father. Rodrigo is triumphant but is banished from Spain and his fiancee hates his guts and vows that she will get someone to avenge her father's death.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I5ZcHJzBWw&feature=related

El Cid shows Anthony Mann already fully transitioned from his down-and-dirty westerns into his epic filmmaking style. He had already made the 1960 remake of Cimarron which basically transferred him from western to epic, but this film pushed him so far over the top that it's almost impossible to compare El Cid to later movies. For example, El Cid most resembles such modern epics to me as The Two Towers and The Return of the King, but this film has no CGI and the familial and love relationships are presented in an incredibly-human manner. El Cid has an incredible action scene in the joust/duel between Rodrigo and Chimere's dad. Watch this to see why El Cid was loved by so many and hated by almost just as many.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rwknh4c1MtY

El Cid is three hours long but it has to cut a lot out of the story of Rodrigo, Chimere and all those who loved and hated him. During the filming, Heston and Loren apparently hated each other, so that added a lot of truth to the first half of the flick where she honestly does seem to hate him. The thing about El Cid which I love the best is that it shows Christians and Muslims living together in peace. True, they are fighting all the way to the end of the flick, but that one Muslim King whom El Cid saves early on stays loyal to him throughout the remainder of the film, no matter whether El Cid is fighting the Spanish or the Moors. There are numerous scenes in El Cid which qualify as classics and it's amazing that at least half of them seem to be those which show all the Spanish fighting with each other and all the Moors banding together. As I said previously, if we lived our lives in our current wars in Asia regarding terrorism anywhere near the same way that El Cid did, we'd have already won the Hearts and Minds of at least half of all the known terrorists out there. Unfortunately, we now seem to live in an unfortunate world where it's all or nothing, and with those odds, we get WAY TOO MUCH NOTHING.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlpmcbA1Fcc

I like this "video essay" but I would take the author(s) to task for making fun of Chuck Heston. I honestly believe that although they occasionally apologize that they think they're so far above the wooden Chuck Heston that they really do think that they understand the concept of epic films better than the filmmakers and knowledgeable actors such as Heston from 50 years ago. They probably still think they know better, but they're probably the same kind of "historians" who believe that James Dean outacted Rock Hudson in Giant (not in a thousand years, my dear.)

Certainly one of the greatest endings ever... even if it was slightly ruined by the cretins in the last video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5e1L5ocXUw

[Prospero]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:qeBP9yOYy2wP4M:http://www.scificool.com/images/2009/09/ink-movie-review-2.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:McDUM03EiWAgVM:http://www.scifiscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/ink-7.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:PRDd3BEuUb2hXM:http://www.scifiscoop.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/ink1.jpg

Ink 2009

A very ambitious sci-fi story with B-movie restrictions set upon it. Even for the prohibitively low budget it gets by on neat camera tricks and homemade special effects. The acting is a mixed bag of no-name actors, the overall cinematography often uses annoying blur effects to mask it's not so brilliant framework, the action scenes are cut and pasted together through editing which sort of works. It's a treat to see an idea come together with such an apparently small amateur team behind it.

3

Thank you, MWS, for bringing this gem to my attention. I just watched this on Netflix streaming, and full-out loved it. It has a great, multilayered story with some depth and, most importantly, heart. Granted the acting isn't all great, and the visual effects could have been better, but the sound design was pure genius, and the soundtrack was very nice as well.

Watching this was a great experience that I might never have had without your recommendation (clearly I loved it more than you did, but hey, I'm a softie from way back). :)

4.5

[zedlen]

http://www.shockya.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2012_movie_still_john_cusack.jpg

2012 Roland Emmerich 2009

All I was think for the first half was why John Cusack? Why ? You use to be a respectable actor.
Anyone above the age of twelve was either put to sleep by this film (more then two hours) or laughing at the sheer BS Emmerich throws at you again and again and again and again.
Two stars for the CGI department and their beautiful explosions/waves.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/../images/popcorn/2box.gif

[Golgot]

http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/791/791481/angel-a-20070524045913898.jpg

Angel-A

Besson seeks out the 'fifth element' of love again, this time with overt 'guardian angel' trappings, a soupçon of self-help, another leggy model-actress (who occasionally kicks some ****), and a tiresome lathering of pointless pontification. I really don't know if it's a translation thing, but a lot French flicks that aim for the 'arthouse' seem to contain dialogue that's as subtle as someone hitting a barn door with a banjo. Either way, Besson's script is pretty awful, with only a few wry giggles illicited, plenty of groans, and a peculiar insistence on truth from his flailing wheeler-dealer lead (in circumstances that would normally lead to his death). Not so much cathartic as annoying, if kinda pretty to look at.

2_5

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/8849/31058616.jpg

[Yoda]

Ah... so you still have Nick Bloomfield's Monster in a Box to catch up on... http://img.infibeam.com/img/4105ee2b/391/7/9780679737391.jpg
Indeed; hadn't even heard of it until now! Thanks for the tip.

[Holden Pike]

https://cache.trustedpartner.com/images/library/000285/image_Spalding%20Gray%204.5.07.jpg http://www.stopsmilingonline.com/uploads/photos/story/20070110.jpg

Spuddy Gray is one of my favorite people...ever. I'm very happy to see that Soderbergh's long gestating documentary about him is apparently nearing completion. Because his monologues were autobiographical I really had the illusion of "knowing" him in the way you don't get to know most celebrities or even authors. When he offed himself it was sad, yet knowing his work so well I can't say it was totally unexpected. The constant pain he was in following his accident was ultimately too much for him to bare, even though he had finally settled down and made a family after so many decades. Very sad. But I love that guy. I have read, listened to and watched all of his monologues many, many, many times.

Terrors of Pleasure, where Gray talks about buying "the little house that cried" in the "crotch of the Catskills" and the Hell that follows, is probably my very favorite of his monologues (only available on VHS), though "favorite" is a tough call as they're all wonderful and different. The HBO filming of "Terrors of Pleasure" is OK, but unfortunately it was truncated a bit to fit into a one-hour format (the full monologue runs about seventy-five minutes and was released as an audio CD). Plus, of the four "films", it is the least stylized, basically just a video tape of the performance with few editorial touches or flair. The other three filmmakers who've tackled his monologues added some style to their productions. Soderbergh's Gray's Anatomy is the most elaborate.

But all four films are terrific, and for me Gray's self-chronicle is extremely addictive. I saw him perform live twice, with It's A Slippery Slope and Morning, Noon & Night. Seeing the performances in person was truly a treat. Most of his works can be found on audio, though sadly many are long out-of-print and may be difficult to locate. At the very least, go down to the library and find them in book form - though his performance really brings them to life. I absolutely love them all.

Spalding also wrote one novel, Impossible Vactaion, which is a thinly-veiled autobiographical account of his Mother's suicide and its long-lasting impact on him (the writing of the novel is the main subject of Monster in a Box). Her suicide, at the age of fifty-two, was a long-standing topic of his monologues, and his own thoughts of suicide at various points in his life were addressed time and again by the neurotic and self-aware storyteller. He even took the acting role in Soderberg's King of the Hill because his character gets to commit suicide (by slitting his wrists), and he wanted to live out the fantasy of it without the pain or death of actually doing it, and hopefully exorcise some of those demons (talked about that in Slippery Slope).

Of his screen acting gigs, my favorites are King of the Hill (1993), Revolution #9 (2001) and True Stories (1986).

[Harry Lime]

Looks like I'm going to have to seek out some Spalding Gray now considering all the kudos.

[Used Future]

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww335/GialloFunk/2946lee.jpg?t=1258582474 http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww335/GialloFunk/Stone1.jpg?t=1258582573

Stone (Sandy Harbutt, 1974) 3.5
I've been wanting to see this since stumbling across the UK dvd (pictured) in Fopp a few months back. Reading up on the film I discovered it to be a cult Australian biker movie which bore some influence on George Miller's 1979 classic Mad Max. As a huge fan of Miller's film this got me more than a little curious, as not only is Stone considered a minor classic of the 'biker movie' sub-genre, but also features two cast members from Mad Max; namely Roger Ward (unrecognisable in a small role) and most notably the wonderful Hugh Keays-Byrne (better known as villainous biker leader Toecutter from Miller's flick).

Stone refers to the title character played by Ken Shorter (pictured below left); an unorthodox looking (but nevertheless whiter than white) cop who goes undercover with a satanic biker gang called The Gravediggers, after an an unknown assassin starts bumping them off. This is the result of one of the gang (Byrne), who witnesses a sniper assassinate a local politician whilst stoned out of his mind on LSD. The rest of the film revolves around Stone's induction into the Gravediggers' culture, his struggle for acceptance, and the mutual respect that gradually develops. A burgeoning respect ultimately tested during the inevitable showdown with the killer/s...

http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww335/GialloFunk/Stone8.jpg?t=1258582550 http://i733.photobucket.com/albums/ww335/GialloFunk/Stone-02.jpg?t=1258584033

I loved this film. It's as much about idealism as it is about violence and roaring engines, as director Harbutt (who also stars as Gravediggers' leader, Undertaker) focuses heavily on the ethos behind the biker way of life, and the larger than life characters who populate it. Much of the film plays out in a stoned out haze of psychedelic music, gang fights, bike races, marijuana (something Shorter's character continuously refuses), and anti-establishment philosophy. It's very low budget, but Harbutt injects some visual style into proceedings with the aid of Graham Lind's creative photography, and conjures that same weird (all be it much colder) atmosphere that so permeates Miller's later Mad Max. Stone is far from perfect though. The plot for example is very simplistic and predictable; some of the supporting performances are amateurish to say the least (though Byrne is fantastic - especially the scene in which he playfully intimidates a couple of suits drinking in the Gravediggers' local bar), but the film nevertheless remains compelling, charming and oddly effecting. This is cult stuff through and through, and the influences on Miller's film are undeniable. The funeral procession/convoy pictured above was homaged in Mad Max after the death of the Nightrider, and the scenes between Stone and his girlfriend at home feel very familiar indeed. Though you could also make obvious comparisons to earlier biker films like The Wild Angels, Easy Rider, and Five Easy Pieces (to name but a few).

Elsewhere there's a generous helping of gritty 70's violence, most of which is confined to the second half of the film, and is relatively tame by today's standards; though the downbeat climax is satisfyingly gruesome. Overall I'd recommend this to anyone into cult cinema willing to look beyond the obvious flaws and see Stone for what it is; a highly watchable film, filled with endearing rough and ready characters, and made with a lot of love. Take the trip.

[Prospero]

Looks like I'm going to have to seek out some Spalding Gray now considering all the kudos.I've only seen Swimming to Cambodia and Monster in a Box, but I highly recommend both. While both are very good, I personally liked Swimming better.

[beelzebubbles]

I've only seen Swimming to Cambodia and Monster in a Box, but I highly recommend both. While both are very good, I personally liked Swimming better.

I love Spaulding Gray's monologues. I saw him perform his last one live.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Pretty much agree with most of the views expressed about "2012".
1.5

****HERE BE VARIOUS SPOILERS****


The CGI FX went from the ho hum to the outstanding and 'fun in destruction' time was had.
But even that felt strangely 'local'.
The film basically just followed the main characters around so we only saw destruction when they saw it, as such this 'global' apocalypse was almost entirely shown to have just hit America, a patch of India and a monk on a mountain in Tibet!

Much of the action is very very silly and unlikely and was also very repetitive, with a vehicle/plane escape sequence then being followed directly by another vehicle/plane sequence.

Elsewhere all was pretty much dire. And as hypocritical, two-faced and confused on what its stance is as you could imagine.
Cookie cutter characters made less than compelling cinema and anyone could have written this stuff as we have seen it all before.
We have on the roll call of tedium......

Ex-Spouses still in love.
Short end of the stick new love/step dad.
Angst-ridden kids.
Comedy kids.
Ruthless (White American only) politicians.
Ruthless and contemptible rich people.
Noble and perfect anyone who wasn't a white American politician.
A self-sacrificing 'people's President' (seems disaster only strikes when America has a Black President as well!)
An eccentric profit of doom.
A dumb, heart of gold, blonde.
A cute dog.
A Government guy (Black) who sees the wrong and ensures those naughty White people come to their selfish senses.

All dull, all very predictable and full of hypocrisy. Some of which it takes on but only unintentionally I think.
Much is made of not being selfish...and yet the 'Ark' and all the thousands on it are nearly destroyed because a bunch of good guys tried to sneak on and thus mess the door up!

And as for all the bleating about people being chosen...well many people would indeed have to be certain types of people with certain skills and knowledge to rebuild things.
The screenplay though throws cheap shots at this actually understandable plan by mentioning the picking of 'best breeding types' (where did THAT come from?) and people who have paid to get on.
But then it also back tracks on these criticisms....

Oliver Platt's much maligned character takes all this criticism but in a throwaway line he states that actually NO ONE would be going anywhere if those 'rich scum' had not paid billions to get on the 'Arks' and thus fund them.

And when the achingly hand-wringing Chiwetel Ejiofor moans that all the 'Ark' builders are being left behind (the good honest working Communist Chinese man) Platt, wonderfully, declares that he is free to give away his pass TO one of those good honest Chinese Communist working men if he so wants...he does not want!
So much for that bit of bleeding heart posturing then.

And really it does (in a film full of it) go too far into Capitalist, Western self-loathing when the rooms on the 'Ark' are shown to have enough room to house far more than just the one person allocated to them (they even include silver goblets!).
Sorry, but I find it offensive (and not remotely backed up in any way) that the makers assume that those evil White, Western, Capitalist pigs would care about the silverware having room than people having room!
Where and when was this film written, on a 60's Hippie commune?

Hypocrisy, racism, blatant socialism and confusion rule everywhere.
The film has anyone in positions of power or authority who are deeply religious (the one and only get out clause for White authority figures) be braver and more noble and yet then proceeds to wipe them all out with great gusto! The Pope/Vatican scene is a hoot!

It then has ALL non-White characters ALL be the most honest, noble and correct (from Tibetan monks, Chinese workers, betrayed by the Americans Indian scientists, mixed marriage sons with racist white Fathers, Black Presidents, and Black Government workers) and has ALL White characters (with any real screen-time)in any position of authority be scheming, self-serving and always wrong.

That (like poor picked on Mexico and The Middle East being the one and only places left for those Western Imperialists to live in "The Day After Tomorrow") the only place in the entire world left above water in "2012" is Africa seems telling!
So civilisation returns to its cradle as all that was decadent and corrupt is wiped away and so dear people...at last...we are ALL Africans now.

The final shot in the film looks like a poster Robert Mugabe and the Black Panthers would have on their walls.

And oh yeah...For all it's oh so noble and caring stance for film does the most ruthlessly cynical, down right immoral, thing out...
It makes sure the now unwanted other man and love rival (the BEST "I've only had 2 lessons" pilot in the World!) is routinely killed off before the 'we're a loving family again now' finale!
oh, very nice and noble!

If this is the end of the world...count me out.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Oh yeah. Anyone notice that in "2012" the Apocalypse was actually worth it in the end because a 7 year old girl would no longer be in training pants?!

[Used Future]

You didn't like it then? :laugh:

[42ndStreetFreak]

"Kiss, Kiss, Bang Bang" - 4

A damn mini masterpiece!
Funny, exciting, surreal and dramatic mixture that features two wonderful lead turns by Downey and Kilmer and equally good support turns by the whole cast.

Despite the purposeful homages, light parodies and cutting observations on other films this manages to be quite unlike any other film in that Tarantino way...but with a far less fanboy attitude (not that I mind that).
Shane Black shows he can handle directing chores as well as he can handle the writing ones.

Took me a foolishly long time to see this, so if you haven't yet...don't be a chump like moi...See it!
Hell, OWN IT!

[TheUsualSuspect]

I love KKBB and wished that it gave Kilmer the career resurgence that it gave RDJ.

[Prospero]

"Kiss, Kiss, Bang Bang" - 4

A damn mini masterpiece!
Funny, exciting, surreal and dramatic mixture that features two wonderful lead turns by Downey and Kilmer and equally good support turns by the whole cast.

Despite the purposeful homages, light parodies and cutting observations on other films this manages to be quite unlike any other film in that Tarantino way...but with a far less fanboy attitude (not that I mind that).
Shane Black shows he can handle directing chores as well as he can handle the writing ones.

Took me a foolishly long time to see this, so if you haven't yet...don't be a chump like moi...See it!
Hell, OWN IT!Yep. Great flick. Glad you liked it, 42ndSt.
Highly recommended. :yup:

[Holden Pike]

Took me a foolishly long time to see [Kiss Kiss Bang Bang], so if you haven't yet...don't be a chump like moi...See it!

You rush right out to see 2012 but wait four years to see Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. You need to reexamine your priorities, Bro.

[honeykid]

Amen to that... Though I didn't care much for KKBB myself.

[Iroquois]

I love KKBB and wished that it gave Kilmer the career resurgence that it gave RDJ.

It's okay, there's still hope in the form of Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans.

Anyway, recently seen...

http://www.lifeinpencil.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/serious-man.jpg

A Serious Man (Coen brothers, 2009) - 4

Yet another strong effort from the Coens. I'm pretty sure this is the closest the brothers have come to doing a genuinely down-to-earth story of ordinary people, though it's still full of things both big and little that are very reminiscient of their other films. I'm not entirely sure if this is a plus or a minus for the film - leaning towards "plus", though. Loved the acting, everything was played well (if occasionally a little too histrionic) - and man, that ending...

[jrs]

Thank you, MWS, for bringing this gem to my attention. I just watched this on Netflix streaming, and full-out loved it. It has a great, multilayered story with some depth and, most importantly, heart. Granted the acting isn't all great, and the visual effects could have been better, but the sound design was pure genius, and the soundtrack was very nice as well.

Watching this was a great experience that I might never have had without your recommendation (clearly I loved it more than you did, but hey, I'm a softie from way back). :)

4.5


I watched Ink and posted my thoughts in this thread over a week ago.....





Ink 5 - So visually compelling and geniusly creative, the film is like Matrix, Dark City, and Donnie Darko all rolled into one. It may be a little confusing at first, but that's the glory of it. It gets your mind wandering and your juices flowing. I recommend this to everyone.

It just was released on DVD and Blu-ray (which I STRONGLY suggest you pick up that version - if you have a BR player that is) today. I unfortunately don't so I have the DVD version...which I enjoyed immensely nonetheless.

Synopsis:

As the light fades and the city goes to sleep, two forces emerge. They are invisible except for the power they exert over us in our sleep, battling for our souls through dreams. One force delivers hope and strength through good dreams; the other infuses the subconscious with desperation through nightmares. John (Chris Kelly) and Emma (Quinn Hunchar), Father and Daughter are wrenched into this fantastical dream world battle, forced to fight for John's soul and to save Emma from an eternal nightmare. Separate in their journey, they encounter unusual characters that exist only in their subconscious. Or do they? Ink is a high-concept visual thriller that weaves seamlessly between the conscious and the subconscious.

Below are both trailers for Ink...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBGeErufQdY&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5I1SavGyA&feature=player_embedded


http://fdaward.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/ink_poster.jpg

[42ndStreetFreak]

You rush right out to see 2012 but wait four years to see Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. You need to reexamine your priorities, Bro.

No no...My Wife rushed out to see "2012" (buy get one free Wednesdays) I just did my Husbandly duty and kept her company during her 'DESTRUCTION' fix. :p

[Prospero]

No no...My Wife rushed out to see "2012" (buy get one free Wednesdays) I just did my Husbandly duty and kept her company during her 'DESTRUCTION' fix. :pMan, the things we do for love...

[Prospero]

I watched Ink and posted my thoughts in this thread over a week ago.....Thanks.

[Used Future]

http://northshoremovies.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/zombieland-poster.jpg http://frontrowreviews.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/zombieland.jpg

Zombieland (Reuben Fleischer, 2009) 3.5
I was almost disappointed when this got good write-ups because it meant I was going to have to plonk my backside down in front of yet another zombie movie. When I first saw Romero's Dawn of the Dead back in the early nineties I couldn't get enough of them. I wanted to see every gory zombie flick ever made; I was obsessed. How times change. Now it seems there's a new one coming out every week, and most of them are just variations on the same old theme. I've seen so many they're all starting to blur into one, and my eyes are beginning to glaze over like a zom-arrgghh!!! In short folks I'm fed up to the back teeth of zombie films, and can't wait for the current fad to blow over so we can move on to something new like slimy reptilian aliens disguised as humans, what? Oh forget it.

Surprisingly Zombieland is savvy enough to know how I'm (and I'm sure many others) are feeling. It's a smart satirical take on the genre that lets the zombies take a back seat, and instead focuses on it's four protagonists; geeky neurotic Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg who comes off like a cross between Woody Allen and Simon Amstell from Never Mind the Buzzcocks); Trigger happy zombie killer extraordinaire Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson who effortlessly steals the movie), and two conniving sisters, love interest Witchita (Emma Stone) and the deadpan Little Rock (Abigail Breslin). The clue here is in the title; Zombieland suggests a kind of twisted theme park and that's exactly the metaphor for contemporary America that Fleischer effectively (if unsubtly) rams home. It's a witty, engaging take on the genre with a knowing indie feel, and one immensely likable performance from Harrelson. The zombie action is there too, but this is as much about friendships and trust as it is about the blood and guts. I liked it well enough, but was glad of the short (by today's standards) running time. Oh and I loved the worst kept cameo secret in movie history too.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_f_L7SqT41i4/SaiUQop_76I/AAAAAAAAANI/5e0vnI-3INw/s320/pontypool_poster.png http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rjRyOMDTYLg/SrcCC-tsEfI/AAAAAAAADMk/TIux4_cVobU/s400/liihe.png

Pontypool (Bruce McDonald, 2008) 3+
No it's not a promotional film for the Welsh tourist board, but yet another zombie variant (apologies for making that joke again). Yup if you can't beat the hordes of undead then inevitably you end up joining them, and that's exactly what happened to me last night. I actually enjoyed this Canadian slow burner a lot more that Zombieland, even if it is deeply flawed, and well, pretty ridiculous really.

This one nods John Carpenter's The Fog with Stephen McHattie turning in an excellent performance as a gravelly voiced radio DJ (Grant Mazzy) who unwittingly finds himself reporting on a bizarre series of violent riots from his studio. Accompanying him are his uptight producer Sydney (Lisa Briar - think Helen Hunt with darker hair), and her plucky young assistant Laurel (Georgina Reilly). Soon the BBC are contacting Mazzy for updates as the Canadian military quarantine the town, and it becomes clear a major crisis is taking place...

Set entirely within the confines of the radio station, Pontypool is an incredibly tense affair for the first hour, as events unfold in the form of telephone calls Mazzy receives from his eye witness weather man. It's well written, gripping stuff that sent a shiver down my spine on more than one occasion as the epidemic spread slowly closer to the studio...then the 'infected people' show up. Without giving too much away we gradually learn that symptoms of the plague involve people babbling incoherently and speaking gibberish. Yes these zombies literally spread by word of mouth; the English language to be exact. If it all sounds a bit daft, that's because it is, and things go steadily downhill from there. This being Canadian we get Mazzy and co speaking in French to stave off the inevitable, and an ending ripped directly from another apocalyptic (and far superior Canadian film) Don McKellar's Last Night. This is still well worth checking out though, because to be fair it doesn't play like a traditional zombie film at all, and the first hour really is compelling stuff. Shame, as Tony Burgess' script just seems to write it's self into a corner really.

[mark f]

Iron Monkey (Woo-ping Yuen, 1993) 3.5

http://media.elasticpop.com/images/Monkey.jpg

Completely-fun kung-fu action-comedy-fantasy from master choreographer Yuen follows the exploits of a Chinese Robin Hood-type figure (Rongguang Yu) who thwarts a dastardly governor (James Wong) by stealing from him and giving to the local peasants to help them with just surviving. Early on, we learn that the Iron Monkey is actually a good doctor and he's aided and abetted by his nurse (Jean Wang) whom he earlier rescued from rape and abuse. Meanwhile, another doctor (Donnie Yen) comes to the Iron Monkey's town to try to capture him and he's accompanied by his young son (Sze-Man Tsang), but as the Governor's violent tactics increase, the "good guys" band together to fight the Governor's men and a group of Shaolin monks and nuns led by the super evil Hiu Hing (Shi-Kwan Yen). This Hong Kong fairy tale not only displays great bursts of wuxia action and some wonderful comedic elements, but it has a strong romantic theme throughout and certainly believes in the triumph of good over evil. The youngest character in the film, the second doctor's young son, is actually played by a girl and is set up to have a whole new series of adventures.

https://developer.mozilla.org/presentations/eich-ajax-experience-2007/images/iron-monkey.jpg

Note - For those of you who don't like "wire fu", remember two things. What these characters can do is basically no different than what Gandalf can do in The Lord of the Rings or the characters in Star Wars do using the Force. Secondly, this is a solid action-comedy, so although some nasty things happen here and there, it's prime mission is to entertain you for 90 minutes, which it certainly did me.

Fighting Elegy (Seijun Suzuki, 1966) 3

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t203/bejmaf/Fightingelegy.jpg

Borderline-insane, black-and-white Suzuki satire set in 1935 Okayama where Japanese male teenagers spend their final two years of high school in a military school setting where Kiroku (Hideki Takahashi) learns from older student Turtle (Yûsuke Kawazu) to break as many school rules as possible and get into as many fights and riots as he can start. It's only in this way can he learn to be a true Japanese man. Kiroku boards with a Catholic family and is in love with their daughter Michiko (Junko Asana), but he has to repress all his sexuality in order to gear 100% of his physical and emotional efforts towards fighting. As time goes on, Kiroku becomes more-and-more unruly and has to change schools where he gets some good beatings of his own, but eventually Kiroku's thirst for blood and violence grows to seemingly-unhealthy extremes as he threatens to kill half the school's student body and staff.

http://www.sarudama.com/movies/images/fightingelegy.jpg

I honestly believe that this is Suzuki's most-outrageous film, at least of those I've seen. It almost makes Tokyo Drifter seem like a documentary, but it packs a lot of entertainment into its brief running time. First of all, the dialogue is full of outrageous lines about sex and violence, the kind of things nobody would share with even some of their closest friends, let alone people they barely know or want to beat up. Then there's the actual fights and rumbles themselves, which are quite over-the-top violent, and of course, it's here, maybe about an hour into the movie, where it becomes clear that Suzuki is actually making a serious point about how Japanese Imperialism develops and is taught to its youth. The strange thing about this film though is that it implies that Imperialism rose from NOT following orders but by being as anarchic and violent as possible, especially concerning your superiors, so it's up to you to decide whether this film is more of a satire or a farce.

Gate of Flesh (Seijun Suzuki, 1964) 2.5+

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t203/bejmaf/aSeijunSuzukiGateofFlesh.jpg

Set in Tokyo in the Summer of 1945, just after the end of WWII, Suzuki shoots this film in impressionistic color imagery to make up for the fact that he had a claustrophobic setting and almost no budget. The film was one of the first Japanese flicks which had nudity, and probably the most-striking scene in the flick is when the pimpless group of sweaty prostitutes seems to take almost sexual-pleasure in whipping and torturing their newest member Maya (Yumiko Nogawa) for violating one of their major rules by falling in love with petty thief Shintaro (Joe Shishido) who's hiding out from the American M.P.s and gradually taking control of the women and their way of life. The film was made with the intentions of it being a Japanese Adult film, but even so, there were numerous censorship issues Suzuki had to get around, and he does a good job of making a film which presents some extreme situations in a way which could still somehow be shown in 1964 while definitely pushing the envelope in some sexual and violent ways.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3596/3530755622_6643c2b808.jpg

Besides the above-depicted whipping scene, there are a few other directorial flourishes which Suzuki provides. Three or four different times he superimposes a character reacting to the scene shown on screen. In other words, instead of editing, he'll keep his intense scene going, but show a slightly-diluted scene of another character reacting to the scene. It's actually a very strong cinematic style which I would use myself if given the chance. It's sorta reminiscent of what was popular in the '60s American films of John Frankenheimer, used especially effectively in The Manchurian Candidate, The Birdman of Alcatraz and The Train: the pan and slow fade-out to the fade-in of the next scene where you could see both images emotionally contrasting with each other. In Gate of Flesh it's very impressively used and I don't recall Suzuki using it in any of his other films I've seen. Another standout scene is the bizarre one where a steer enters the bombed-out residence of the women, and the hedonistic Shintaro decides to kill it then and there so he can cook and eat it.

Up (Pete Docter & Bob Peterson, 2009) 4

http://i43.tinypic.com/103aiwm.jpg

Most people already know about and/or have seen Up, so I'm not going to spend too much time discussing the plot any more than I'd like to mention that it covers about 70 years and involves friendship, love, marriage, family, adventure, dreams, trust, flying, children, pets, doing the right thing, believing in yourself, growing up, inner strength, fearlessness, and teaching old dogs new tricks, amongst many other great subjects.

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/6774/26622au2.jpg

Another thing I love about Up (and this can be said about most Pixar flicks just with different details) is that they love movies just as much as we film buffs do because after all who are these filmmakers? They're just film buffs like you and me who are lucky enough to make their own dreams come true by creating films which pay homage to those that we all grew up with and love. Up seems to pay homage to The Lost World (1925), Hell's Angels, King Kong (1933), The Wizard of Oz, Buck Rogers, The Red Balloon, Sleeper, A Boy and His Dog, Star Wars (I was laughing my butt off at that one!), Raiders of the Lost Ark, Fitzcarraldo, The Witches, The Rocketeer, Jurassic Park, The Incredibles and several more.

http://www.celebrityportal.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/up-2009-2.jpg


Michael Giacchino, the composer of Up's beautiful score and haunting theme, is quickly becoming one of my fave current musical score composers. He now has done The Incredibles, Ratatouille, Star Trek and Up in the last five years. :cool: As far as a few other personal comments I have to make, irrelevant of whether others have shared them, Up has got to be one of the best titles of any movie ever made. Not only does it describe how the film transports itself from one setting to another, but it also describes how it transports most of its characters and hopefully all its viewers from beginning of the film to its conclusion. Up is a definite "feel-good" movie which should make people feel happy to be alive, so I hope you find it an "Up" because although I know there are millions of people out there who actually prefer "downer" movies because you see them as more realistic and a maturing of the cinematic ethos to rise above "fairy tales" and just tell it like it is... you know, you're going to die, get used to it; what matter does it make if you have a chance to be happy now and then? Movies need to tell the truth, and the truth is a downer! Sorry, but I don't think that a movie which has a happy ending (LIES?) is good and one that has an "unhappy" ending is bad. I just think that you should allow movies to work their magic on you no matter what they seem to represent, and perhaps more importantly, no matter how you feel about what constitutes a "real" movie and a "fake" movie. Up is just about as real as movies get, and there's no allegedly "real" person ever seen on the screen. HA!

[Yoda]

Great stuff, Mark. Any chance I could bug you into elaborating on some of the references in Up? Particularly Sleeper -- that one's escaping me, at the moment, and I'm pretty curious about it.

[mark f]

Sleeper - "Woof, woof, woof. Hello, my name is Rags. Woof, woof, woof."

"What does he do? Leave little doggie batteries behind him wherever he goes?"

[Prospero]

Zombieland (Reuben Fleischer, 2009) 3.5



Pontypool (Bruce McDonald, 2008) 3+
Two great reviews, Uxsed Future. I loved Zombieland, but have never even heard of Pontypool. After your review, though, I'll be sure to seek it out.

[Classicqueen13]

http://www.moviespack.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Meet-Joe-Black-1998-205x300.jpg

Watched this one on a recommendation from my grandmother, but I was not impressed. My dad, sister, and I found ourselves mocking a lot of it. I wasn't impressed with the cast that had been ensembled and the dialouge seemed terribly weak. I found that I did like the direction though. Overall, we decided to use our 3 hours otherwise.

Meet Joe Black: 2

http://i15.tinypic.com/4xz7wra.jpg

hadn't heard much but praise about this classic. There were so many great things about this film. First, the acting. James Stewart gives a very impressive performance, and I don't think he could've been outdone in his role. Kim Novak did an excellent job portraying the terribly confused Madeliene. Also, Hitchcock's fantasic visuals. Hitchcock once again uses playful direction techniques that please the eye and impress. Another detail that interested me was the surprisingly small amount of dialouge throughout the film. The musical score gives it an extra creepy edge. But I felt the plot fell slightly short somewhere after the first hour. It seemed too unrealistic and too complex for its own good.

Vertigo: 3


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rY2jntS-iQ8/Snmg-K1RPgI/AAAAAAAAA5o/wJK9iKBbNLU/s320/last_action_hero.jpg

A somewhat spoof of movies itself, Last Action Hero very much an action comedy. The opening is very suspenseful. Then, when we meet the young boy, it adds a touch of sensitivity. Finally, the comedy really begins. Loaded with wit as well as some good old corny action dialouge. Arnold is the perfect person in this role, and the little boy gives a very good performance. Not to be taken too seriously, a movie that's just plain fun.

Last Action Hero: 3.5


http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/88/116488.jpg

I didn't find anything completely original about this western. Cagney is great for the lead character, but the personality isn't exactly a change for him. Dobbins does a nice job as the kind kid who comes to work for him. What stood out to me about this movie was the character Jo. I liked her a great deal, and she seemed to add a little something special to the film. The script is interesting, and the storyline is a classic cowboy one. If you dislike westerns, this probably isn't one you will enjoy. But otherwise, a very enjoyable film. At 95 minutes, far from a complete waste of time.

Tribute to a Badman: 3

http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/images/665hour.jpg

A fascinating drama that even kept me in suspense. The Children's Hour held my attention every minute. The cast couldn't be better. Shirley MacLaine gave a terrific performance. She really captured Martha's temper and confusion perfectly. Audrey Hepburn, who perhaps had the easiest of the three lead roles, was flawless. James Garner did an outstanding job, and had amazing chemistry with Audrey. All three of their characters eventually had breakdowns that really showcased the talent. Even the little Mary, who I wanted to slap that ugly look right off her face, was portrayed perfectly. The storyline is one that was very different for its time and that shows a great deal in the film. The sad ending will tug at heartstrings.

The Children's Hour: 4

[Used Future]

Two great reviews, Uxsed Future. I loved Zombieland, but have never even heard of Pontypool. After your review, though, I'll be sure to seek it out.

Thanks Prospero:)

Let me know what you think of it; I hope you like it.

[Yoda]

Sleeper - "Woof, woof, woof. Hello, my name is Rags. Woof, woof, woof."

"What does he do? Leave little doggie batteries behind him wherever he goes?"
Ah, yes! Thank you. That was bugging me. :)

[Harry Lime]

Vertigo: 3
Last Action Hero: 3.5


Ouch!

[Yoda]

Well, I'll defend the Last Action Hero rating, if not on a relative level.

[Harry Lime]

It's definitely not as bad as some will have you believe. That tends to happen though when a movie bombs at the box office.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Trick ‘r Treat - 4.5

Dir: Michael Dougherty


Tis Halloween night and most of the residents of Warren Valley, Ohio are celebrating it in style!
Dancing in the streets, partying in the bars and clubs and ‘trick or treating’ through the pumpkin-lantern lit suburbs.
Let’s take a look at just some of those wrapped up in Halloween’s spell;

We have Principal Steven Wilkins (Dylan Baker) who just loves to offer his very special treats to the kiddies who come-a-knockin’ on his door…

And look there! It’s the lovely Laurie (Anna Paquin), and she’s with her big sister Danielle (Lauren Lee Smith) and some girl friends, all dressed as buxom Princesses.
But lovely Laurie looks worried in her Little Red Riding Hood costume as big sis just has to keep on and on about Laurie being a virgin.
So lovely Laurie decides she needs to finally find a man this Halloween night…

Who’s this coming down the street? Ah, it’s some children by the names of Macy (Britt McKillip), Schrader (Jean-Luc Bilodeau), Sara (Isabelle Deluce) and little Chip (Alberto Ghisi). They are after 8 Jack-O-Lanterns for a very special Halloween ritual.
You see years ago there was a terrible event involving 8 children, their school bus and a big drop into a deep pool. And Macy has decided they should offer up a lantern for each of the poor drowned children.
But they still need more pumpkins, so they head off to see shy, ’special’ little Rhonda (Samm Todd) who has plenty of pumpkins in her garden.
And off to the drop they all go….

Look out! It’s grumpy old Mr Kreeg (Brain Cox).
He lives in that scary looking, run down, house and he just hates Halloween and all those pesky kids who keep knocking on his door wanting things!
But grumpy Mr Kreeg will have another, all together different, visitor tonight….

So there we are, four different groups of people, all doing their own thing, and all will have a very special Halloween this year.
And a very unusual little fella named Sam (Quinn Lord) will always be there, somewhere, to ensure they all do……



Welcome to the world of bad judgement and just plain stupidity!
No, not the world of Michael Dougherty’s “Trick ‘r Treat”, but to the world where his film sat on a dusty Warner Brothers shelf for a couple of years barely seen by human eyes.
Recent international festival screenings though have ensured that, at last, the public can see what the suits at Warner’s could not see…A truly marvelous little cinematic Halloween treat!

Opening with a couple, Emma (Leslie Bibb) and Henry (Tahmoh Penikett) arguing that Emma should not mess with Halloween‘s little customs, Michael Dougherty’s wonderful, clever and always entertaining screenplay starts us off (after some great ‘comic strip’ style credits) on a one night journey that weaves its stories though time and place as each tale crosses with another.
Some very subtly, others far more explicitly.

This cross cutting, intertwining, shuffling time frames, style of delivering what is basically an anthology film is a stroke of genius. Bringing a small portion of “Pulp Fiction” aesthetic to the Horror film.
Whereas other anthologies almost always tend to keep their tales very much separate (despite the wrap-around story that joins them up, here that wrap-around is cleverly the character of Sam) and stays with each tale until its end, “Trick ‘r Treat” has all of its tales eventually reach a conclusion only after returning to each one, in little bite sized pieces, throughout the film’s tight running time.
This not only makes for some clever and intriguing moments, where the people in one tale will appear in another tale simply in the background or in a prominent though smaller capacity, but it also ensures that we are kept on our toes and never get bogged down in one specific tale.

As such this means that “Trick ‘r Treat” not only stays fresh during the first viewing, but it also means it should retain a very healthy shelf life as, unlike other anthologies, you never have to sit through all of one story you may not like waiting for your favourite to come along (not that there are any remotely poor stories here anyway) and although they all have some kind of twist they crucially never just rely on that twist to entertain.
Something is always happening in the tales for our delectation and you should never feel like you’re just waiting for the sting in the tail. A trap too many films (anthology or not) fall into, made worse when that twist we have sat, often bored, waiting for was never worth it anyway.

Not only are all the stories very well cast and brilliantly played by that cast (with Dylan Baker, veteran Brian Cox, youngster Britt McKillip and “True Blood” star Anna Paquin being the stand-outs) but they are also brimming with Halloween atmosphere and packed full of obvious love for this now too often maligned or forgotten time of year.

Halloween itself has indeed never been served better as it is here.
The truly breathtaking location/set dressing (by Rose Marie McSherry), art design (by Tony Wohlgemuth) and crisp cinematography (by Glen MacPherson, “John Rambo”) capture an almost fantasy land version of the festival.
Never have you seen so many people in costumes or so many Jack-O-Lanterns.
The lanterns in fact are almost a character in themselves. They adorn almost every scene in the film and radiate that wonderful orange glow over everything from house porches, gardens, woodland paths to crowded streets and lonely fog-enshrouded vistas.
Most certainly this ranks right up there with Carpenter’s original “Halloween” and “Halloween 3” as perhaps the best examples of a Halloween set movie that actually feels like it was shot during that period.
A triple-bill of these three films should fill anyone up with the ghoulish joys of the season.

The effects are all very well done and nicely old school, with little or no CGI enhancements bar some clever location tinkering, and offer up a few gruesomely effective moments.
The occasional creature FX are also lovely with many a delightful surprise awaiting the unsuspecting viewer as each story slowly reveals its true, often supernatural, self.

Despite mixing some very black humour, a smattering of welcome nudity, pretty strong violence and the odd splash of gore “Trick ‘r Treat” still manages to feel like an old school, even charming, Horror movie that you used watch on late night TV when a kid.
It has a nostalgic sensibility but wraps it up in some excellent, modern film making techniques and effects and this pretty much means the film slips into that very, very rare category indeed…that of near perfection.

Highly recommended then and along with the original, seminal, “Halloween”, Michael Dougherty’s labour of love, “Trick ’r Treat”, should become the staple Halloween movie from now on… for generations to come.

[meatwadsprite]

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:GwpLMCOCT2A92M:http://www.impawards.com/2009/posters/up.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:NCdMVkoD3QfudM:http://msnowe.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/up-movie-11.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:e5oBwf4GWRHcTM:http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/05/29/arts/29up_600.jpg

Up 2009

After having seen this three times now, the better effects have worn off on me and I stop and think ... this is a movie with talking dogs, one with a chipmunk voice. The bulk of the story seems to borrow from the garbage Disney dishes out in massive quantities, it's just covered up by the more mature humor Carl brings. Stupid dog plot device aside, Pixar's mark is evident with beautiful artistic display.

3.5

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:GIetrtWCGF159M:http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/10/05/bugsy_wideweb__470x352,0.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:bl-T6j7xzvcMsM:http://cinematicpassions.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/bugsy-1991-09-g.jpg

Bugsy 1991

This movie is a mess, it's writing goes in a hundred different directions and there is no big picture in mind. There are very few set-pieces and for a gangster movie, there isn't a whole lot of violence either. Even if an unconventional, episodic gangster love story could be a great film, most of Bugsy's episodes are stale. The performances however, are magical.

2.5

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:JtCiQUygK8zi_M:http://www.impawards.com/1991/posters/l_a_story_ver1.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:dh8_iPXN2T1kZM:http://www.howwedrive.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/signpost.jpg

L . A . Story 1991

Martins' love story plays out semi-seriously in a completely off-the-wall Los Angeles. If only his love story had the energy and rambunctiousness of his exaggerated city, director Mick Jackson doesn't bring enough visual aesthetic to do as much justice to L.A. as I'm sure Martin dreamed when he was writing it. The humor is there, but it's missing two important keys.

2.5

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:XrccXnXWzoT4uM:http://www.aintitcool.com/images2009/Rope3.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:FwpeQzQXXIkg1M:http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_OCwKhyxai2s/RiaI7vfCmrI/AAAAAAAAAa0/qG2AqyuB1hA/s400/rope.jpg

Rope 1948

I really appreciate simplistic premises and their executions often meet with great results, although Rope dissolves much too rapidly. Instead of cleverly pulling the answer out, Stewart grinds these murderers down (which is fun in it's own right). The mystery is gutted, but the John Dall/Stewart face off is something.

3

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:8qK1MYL7W9KfuM:http://wanderlustandlipstick.com/blogs/traveltracks/files/2009/04/rachel-getting-married.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:llnWsLISaW2alM:http://kalafudra.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/rachel-getting-married-1.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:KTHDscnkVLZ20M:http://img2.timeinc.net/instyle/images/2008/parties/090108_rachel_400X300.jpg

Rachel Getting Married 2009

A movie busting at the seams with great actors and performances, it's character exposition is limited, but it's a successful event film with awesome technical design - it continues to lure you in with a family secret while you are experiencing this massive wedding.

4

[mark f]

Nice write-ups, but I love Bugsy, especially the dialogue. Most of the best lines would have to be censored here though. :cool:

[sarah f]

Which reminds me: Bugsy, I've never seen that... Maybe we can watch it when I come home later this week...

[jrs]

Pandorum 3_5

http://i49.tinypic.com/2568zk0.jpg

[Classicqueen13]

Ouch!


If you had told me a week ago that I would've rated those two as I did, I never would've believed you.

[Harry Lime]

Going back to work (again) so next week the list should be much shorter.
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/1breach.jpg
Breach (2007, Billy Ray) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/2accattone.jpg
Accattone (1961, Pier Paolo Pasolini) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/3homicide.jpg
Homicide (1991, David Mamet) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/4django.jpg
Django (1966, Sergio Corbucci) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/5bruno.jpg
Bruno (2009, Larry Charles) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/6thetakingofpelham123.jpg
The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (2009, Tony Scott) 2
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/7distant.jpg
Distant (2004, Nuri Bilge Ceylan) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/8thethinblueline.jpg
The Thin Blue Line (1988, Errol Morris) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/9takecareofyourscarftatiana.jpg
Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatiana (1994, Aki Kaurismaki) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/10thedraughtsmanscontract.jpg
The Draughtsman's Contract (1982, Peter Greenaway) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/11inlandempire.jpg
Inland Empire (2006, David Lynch) 4
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/12roccoandhisbrothers.jpg
Rocco and His Brothers (1960, Luchino Visconti) 4.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/13inglouriousbasterds.jpg
Inglourious Basterds (2009, Quentin Tarantino) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/14theprofessionals.jpg
The Professionals (1966, Richard Brooks) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/15toliveanddieinla.jpg
To Live and Die in L.A. (1985, William Friedkin) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/16pepelemoko.jpg
Pepe le Moko (1937, Julien Duvivier) 4

[mark f]

This is only an opinion.

Inland Empire 1 (benefit of a doubt because I'm leaning towards a 0 the longer I type.) It's only an opinion though, but I firmly believe that my opinion has to be expressed here, and I hope everybody else agrees with me about freedom of expression. If you can express yours, I can express mine, and neither of us are the worse for wear, I hope.

I watched it three times in three days, as well as all the quinoa special features. It's definitely Lynch's ugliest film and made up of scenes which he admits have nothing to do with anything else in the film. He just used them and confesses it. But, my God. It's three hours long. "The humanity... "

[Harry Lime]

The three hours just flew by for me. It also left me with three alternate theories on solutions to the film, plus another which has no solution.

"The humanity..." Then again I didn't watch it three times in three days. What was that you were saying in another thread earlier today about masochism when it comes to rewatching films you don't like?

I knew you were going to reply to that rating, Mark. That's why I wrote a five page essay on the film to respond with. Unfortunately, I accidentally deleted it. My bad.

[mark f]

"Accidentally", huh?

Now I have to watch you like a hawk! :D

[Harry Lime]

I actually went in thinking I wasn't going to like Inland Empire and that it was going to be a really long three hours.

[meatwadsprite]

I have absolute hatred for it :mad:

[Harry Lime]

Yes Meat, but you keep forgetting that your opinion doesn't really count.

[meatwadsprite]

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:MToBzRNnom-A_M:http://www.popsucker.net/images/popsucker/lynch.jpg

[Sedai]

I really dig Inland Empire. I just watched it twice in a row though, so maybe that is why! ;) I love Lynch and Inland Empire is just STELLAR visceral cinema, IMO. As usual, I totally see why people would hate it.

Meanwhile:

Hardware (Stanley, 1990)
3

http://slaytime.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/hardware01.jpg

I am having trouble rating this flick. I had seen it before, when it hit theaters back in 1990. I remember I went with three friends, and one walked out. The film is an odd duck with a bit of an identity crisis, as well as being a victim of its time. I must say the writer/director had great vision, but I feel like something was lost in the execution. The metaphor is muddled and some of the pieces don't fit the puzzle. Its one of those films during which I found myself really liking it during certain scenes, and shaking my head during others. Although fine in smaller roles, McDermott doesn't have the chops to play a lead, and the director used the George Lucas method of directing, clearly not spending a lot of time working out kinks in the performances. HE also lifts a great deal from films like Blade Runner, which makes me grin and frown at the same time.

All told, I liked it. It's hard to recommend though, as it really is sort of a cult genre piece, and not really the most accessible fare.

Oh, and I really liked the music in this flick...the minimal synth stuff gets me every time!


Also:

Star Trek (Abrams, 2009)
4

http://www.seanax.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/star_trek_2009.jpg

This film is paced so well! Had a blast seeing it again.

[Caitlyn]

Angels & Demons (2009) ~ I enjoyed seeing Ewan McGregor and Stellen Skarsgard in this... and the story was pretty interesting with enough of a twist to hold my attention... so 4


Dillinger (1973) ~ interesting movie... but I caught it on tv and really would like to watch it on DVD before I rate it... and I'm thinking it would be interesting to watch it and Public Enemies (2009) together...

New Moon (2009) ~ as I stated earlier... I survived taking cousins to see this and, for what it is, it's not that bad.... but if the young'uns are going for Edward eye-candy, they might be a little disappointed as he looks pretty rough ... which goes along with the book, IMO. Some of the special effects were pretty cool... and I like the soundtrack... so... 3

[42ndStreetFreak]

Yeah..."Hardware" is a truly unusual film. Stanley was a unique talent (even though I never much cared for "Dust Devil") and perhaps this is why his career was basically stillborn.
"Hardware" continues to fascinate though for all it's explicitly schizophrenic aspects and style.



"Dracula" (1979) - 2


A pretty unique version of the story (based on the old Hamilton Deane play as well as Stoker's novel itself) sees the entire Harker/Transylvania portion of the plot removed.

This is a mixed bleesing though.
Unlike any other version we actually have a lot of time to cover Dracula's 'stay' in England. But it comes at the expense of perhaps the best portion of the story that contains some of the most memorable, effective and atmospheric set-pieces.

The screenplay does cover a few of the Transylvania moments by inserting them throughout the English sequences and changing their context;
Like the wall climb, the cut finger, the mirror, the fed upon baby and the (strangely altered) "Children of the night' speech.
But they lose much of their mysterious, scary, atmospheric power by not happening in Dracula's castle to a stranded and frightened Harker.

The less said about some of the cheesy seduction visual effects (a notorious sequence) and the soppy 'romance' scenes between Lucy and Dracula the better though.

But we have some very good moments here.
The shape changing aspect of Dracula is used well (even the bat looks not too bad, though it's stupid to have him change back from being a Wolf and be wearing clothes!!), the SFX and matte work is very good, Dracula has some good conversation sequences and sly manipulation scenes (at last 'The Count' part of Dracula is given a vital chance to shine), there are some effective scenes in the asylum and the sets are wonderful (even if Carfax Abbey has the most over the top cobwebs in cinematic history).

Some of the changes to the novel (you can edit Stoker's novel, but only idiots try to change it and do so at their peril) are interesting but some are annoying.
Why on Earth switch Lucy with Mina? It's a needless and silly change that grates having Mina be killed and turned instead of Lucy.
Making Mina the Daughter of Van Helsing is pointless artistically but gives a quicker way the get Abraham Van Helsing into the story.
Sadly not much is made of the father/daughter aspect though...not even when Van Helsing has to despatch his own undead child.
And the big finale change as far as Van Helsing goes works okay as entertainment amazingly...but again to any fan of the story it does grate.

Olivier is pretty good, if rather hammy, as Van Helsing (a million times better and less hammy than Anthony Hopkins though!), Donald Pleasence is fun as a very much changed Dr Seward, Trevor Eve makes a pretty poor Harker and as 'The Count' Frank Langela is actually very, very good (hair aside) but is rather a damp squib as far as being a scary Vampire goes (much like Louis Jourdan in the more faithful UK TV version from 1977).

The ending though (after a pretty exciting finale fight with an effective, rare indeed, change as far as Dracula's 'demise' goes) is thrown into the toilet with a nonsensical, stuck with unintentionally funny visuals, 'twist' that seems like it was shoe-horned in to make way (though Director John Badham denies this) for a sequel.

It's directed with lots of style by Badham, but also at a rather leaden pace which is not helped by the strong emphasis on the 'romantic Count'.
At least we are spared the God-awful 'love though the ages' garbage of the mostly awful "Bram Stoker's Dracula" though.

Some good things, some weak things, some bad things. But it is a better film than its often thought of and what it does good it actually does better than most other "Dracula" films.
So, not as remotely good as it really should have been, but a pretty nice try.

[inthecornerdunce-]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_uB-0D-gV8mY/SCybSlWjcfI/AAAAAAAAI0A/6ugR3f6_J_o/s400/rocknrollswindle.jpg


The Great Rock 'n' Roll Swindle ( Julien Temple, 1980 ) - Julien Temple's inaccurate depiction of the rise and fall of British punk pioneers the Sex Pistols is nevertheless an entertaining tale of life in the music industry. Told from the perspective of the group's erstwhile manager Malcolm Mclaren, it charts the creation, development, hyping and subsequent implosion of the Sex Pistols, up to early 1979, when bass player Sid Vicious committed suicide.

Drawing on archive footage (not all of which is authentic), mixed with animation, newsreels and Mclaren's narration - the film is often as haphazard and random as the genre it speaks of, but, bolstered with music by the Sex Pistols (And peculiar partnerships of the group with odd guests, such as Great Train Robber Ronald Biggs), the film trundles along at a cheerful pace.

Much of the film is in exceptionally bad taste (The nude teenager "Sue Catwoman" - whose underwear was visibly chromakeyed in when the censors refused to pass the scene, the pedophile music boss, Martin Boormann singing "Belsen Was A Gas", for example), and its rambling plot bears testimony to the numerous rewites needed over the three years it took to produce, during which time the director was replaced (Russ Meyer was originally to direct), the financial backers changed more than once, the Sex Pistols formally split up, the film was retitled from "Who Killed Bambi?", and Sid Vicious died having (allegedly) killed his girlfriend.

In real terms, the film is not brilliant, and its factual inaccuracies have since been proven in court, but as an artistic statement and a chronicle of the punk scene in London in 1978, it's very enjoyable, and should form part of any serious music-fan's "History" section.

[42ndStreetFreak]

I have "The Great Rock 'n' Roll Swindle" on VHS and must get around to watching it as i've not seen it for years since its old TV screenings.

I'm a fan of poor Mary Millington (RIP) and I can't remember her in it.
All i really remember is the Tempole Tudor "Bambi" scene, the 'friggin in the riggin' animation and the 'My Way' sequence.

[honeykid]

I recommend seeing Julien Temple's Sex Pistols documentary, The Filth And The Fury, to any and all fans.

http://student.unifr.ch/cineclub/media/upload/images/the-filth-and-the-fury.jpg

[Prospero]

http://www.legendsofhorror.org/images/dracula/dpic5a.jpg
Dracula (1931)
Dir: Tod Browning

I'm not as much of a hater as some hereabouts, but I'm the first to admit that the 1931 film version of Bram Stoker's classic vampire novel Dracula is not all that scary. Despite that, it's still a good movie with a nice dark mood throughout. The performances are great all around, especially from Dwight Frye as Renfield, and Helen Chandler as Mina. Edward van Sloan's van Helsing was a bit overblown, but the biggest disappointmenr for me was Bela Lugosi in the title role. Yeah, he did emanate a charming menace from time to time, but in general he was as bland as bland could be, which is too bad, because the man had talent, as was demonstrated in some later movies (The Black Cat (1932), The Body Snatcher (1945), and a superb turn as Ygor in Son of Frankenstein (1939)).
All that aside, the movie did provide some good moments; especially when Mina attacks Jonathan, and Renfield's death. If you're looking for scares, steer clear, but if you want a dark, moody classic, this one's pretty good.
3

http://exclamationmark.files.wordpress.com/2006/09/horror-of-dracula.jpg
Horror of Dracula (1958)
Dir: Terence Fisher

Hammer's Films' version of Dracula takes some huge liberties with the source material, but if you can get past that, this is a pretty darn good movie. The performances are good from the whole cast, but especially from the two leads: Christopher Lee is great as Count Dracula, providing both charm (in the beginning) and menace (in the rest of the film), being as evil as evil can be; and Peter Cushing makes an excellent Van Helsing as a pillar of strength against Dracula, and supporting the other hero Arthur Holmwood (Michael Gough, who is also great here, 31 years before his turn as Alfred in Tim Burton's Batman).
Terence Fisher's direction is also good, providing some decent scares and real tension and suspsnse for the whole movie. My one complaint is that at times James Bernard's score was a bit too over the top, especially right at the end, and in this version Renfield is nowhere to be seen. But this is a Dracula that I can heartily recommend. It's both scary and suspenseful, and that's what we're all looking for, isn't it?
4

[42ndStreetFreak]

Dracula (1931)
Dir: Tod Browning

I'm not as much of a hater as some hereabouts, but I'm the first to admit that the 1931 film version of Bram Stoker's classic vampire novel Dracula is not all that scary. Despite that, it's still a good movie with a nice dark mood throughout. The prformances are pretty good all around, especially from Dwight Frye as Renfield, and Helen Chandler as Mina. Edward van Sloan's van Helsing was a bit overblown, but the biggest disappointmenr for me was Bela Lugosi in the title role. Yeah, he did emanate a charming menace from time to time, but in general he was as bland as bland could be, which is too bad, because the man had talent, as was demonstrated in some later movies (The Black Cat (1932), The Body Snatcher (1945), and a superb turn as Ygor in Son of Frankenstein (1939)).
All that aside, the movie did provide some good moments; especially when Mina attacks Jonathan, and Renfield's death. If you're looking for scares, steer clear, but if you want a dark, moody classic, this one's pretty good.
3



Horror of Dracula (1958)
Dir: Terence Fisher

Hammer's Films' version of Dracula takes some huge liberties with the source material, but if you can get past that, this is a pretty darn good movie. The performances are good from the whole cast, but especially from the two leads: Christpher Lee is great as Count Dracula, providing both charm (in the beginning) and menace (in the rest of the film), being as evil as evil can be; and Peter Cushing makes and excellent Van Helsing as a pillar of strength against Dracula, and supporting the other hero Arthut Holmwood (Michael Gough, who is also very good here, 31 years before his turn as Alfred in Tim Burton's Batman).
Terence Fisher's direction is also good, provoding some decent scares and real tension and suspsnse for the whole movie. My one complaint is that at times James Bernard's score was a bit too over the top, especially right at the end, and in this version Renfield is nowhere to be seen. But this is a Dracula that I can heartily recommend. It's both scary and suspenseful, and that's what we're all looking for, isn't it?
4


AH! You beat me to 'Universal' "Dracula" mate.
I think I pretty much agree with all that.
Nice review. :)

As for 'Hammer's' version though...I really dislike this film away from the (then) more violent Vamp part of Dracula, and Cushing's new take on Van Helsing.

HATE all the changes especially the stupid, destroys the point of the part (and makes a huge 'why did he ignore Dracula in his coffin' plothole) changes made to Harker and the utter and complete removal of every single great set-piece/moment from the novel...which were replaced with nothing except fangs 'n' blood. Which may have been a HUGE, historical step forward then...but isn't now.

Lee is great as the Vamp, castrated as the almost mute Count.
Cushing is a gem.
Sets look like a brightly lit play.
Music is trite.

Historic...but weak as paper fangs now imho.

[Prospero]

AH! You beat me to 'Universal' "Dracula" mate.
I think I pretty much agree with all that.
Nice review. :)

(and makes a huge 'why did he ignore Dracula in his coffin' plothole)Yeah, at that point I was like "this idiot deserves to die." LOL

At first I was really bothered by all the changes, too, but I decided to look at it as just a different movie, completely separate from the novel and the films that came before it, and that helped a lot. I agree though, that if they had stuck closer to the novel it could have been even better.

[honeykid]

It's easily my favourite Dracula film, the 1958 one. I was disapointed to see both the 1931 and 1992 versions on the horror 100 list, but not this one. :(

[Caitlyn]

I'm not as much of a hater as some hereabouts, but I'm the first to admit that the 1931 film version of Bram Stoker's classic vampire novel Dracula is not all that scary.


One of my great aunts saw this in the theater when she was a kid and said it scared the 'crap' out of her... and just about everyone else in the audience... they'd never seen anything like it before... She never would watch anything else to do with vampires... :)

[42ndStreetFreak]

It's easily my favourite Dracula film, the 1958 one. I was disapointed to see both the 1931 and 1992 versions on the horror 100 list, but not this one. :(

Well i certainly agree that the 1992 turd should only ever lie at the top of a 'worst of' list.
Awful film in almost every way. The finale chase is good...and...er....Nope, that's it!


At first I was really bothered by all the changes, too, but I decided to look at it as just a different movie, completely separate from the novel and the films that came before it, and that helped a lot. I agree though, that if they had stuck closer to the novel it could have been even better.

Ah....Now if they had replaced what they removed with something as good, I could just about take it. But they didn't.

I don't know. I guess i'm very much a 'Dracula' snob. Especially when it comes to the great opening 3rd of the novel.
There is just so much great horror writing here, with some wonderful moments, that a fail to see why anyone would change anything.

"B(ull) (S)hit Dracula" had a good go at doing it, but then messed it up by the WAY it did it!
That Godawful stupid wig for Dracula, the truly, truly destructive performance by Reeves and the crass and silly 'bendy Brides' sequence all ruined it.

Best opening 3rd adaptation is still a mixture of "Nosferatu" and the BBC TV version from 1977 (which has a pretty good, and extremely rare, recreation of the 'baby food' sequence).

I especially hate people changing, or doing wrong, the opening because of the removed chapter "Dracula's Guest" which, even more so than the superb stuff in the novel, really shows just how damn creepy and drenched in atmosphere the opening is.

Without a doubt the most STUNNING recreation of "Dracula's Guest" (and indeed "Dracula" full stop as far as that little bit goes) is a disgustingly hard to find Vinyl reading by JOHN STUART ANDERSON.
It was called "Stereorrific" on Columbia/EMI, 1968. Backed with Anderson's own (super creepy) "The Werewolf".

Just one listen to this genuinely scary and just olde world/gothic atmosphere drenched adaptation (with sound FX, organ music) will make you very nearly, literally, weep for what Coppola and Reeves did to those stunning Diary Entries, and Stoker's prose in general.

In fact, as the recording pulls away from "Dracula's Guest" it goes into some of the Harker stuff in the novel. And you have simply never experienced the superb Brides/baby in a sack sequence until you have heard Anderson do it!

And boy! How we miss Stoker's words from the movie adaptations.
Just check out this stuff after Dracula bursts in and forbids his Brides from 'kissing' Harker before tossing the grotesque sack towards them to feed on;

'Bride' - You yourself have never loved! You never love.
'Dracula" - Yes, I too.. can.. love. You, yourselves, can tell it from the past.

Wonderful!
What a simple, superbly written, passage can convey. There is more character development and just 'character' to Dracula there than in anything ever said in any "Dracula" movie.
And Anderson delivers the lines magnificently.

Damn! It's a disgace that so many people can see and hear that piss-awful Coppola garbage, and yet you just can't find this definitive reading of Harker's Diaries and Stoker's prose.

[42ndStreetFreak]

In fact you want to see how rare this recording is?
THIS is a listing for a copy in a CHARITY SHOP!
£299!!
ttp://www.oxfam.org.uk/shop/second-hand-music-and-movies/353655

Crazy!

A more real world price here;
In fact this is a bargain. If you can play vinyl and you're in the UK. Get it.
http://www.netsoundsmusic.com/nsdsii/6/389876779/1/Anderson%2C%20John%20Stuart||||||||||1|1||2|1|1|1|1|1|1/1/9999.html

Seems Anderson died in 2002 - http://www.johnstuartanderson.sphosting.com/page2.html

If you can get to hear this...Do so!
Best damn "Dracula" no one has ever heard of.

[mack]

Star Trek 2009 - 4/5
Very enjoyable film - no major screwups with the timeline, and I liked how they gave the young Kirk his arrogance, but didnt make him a complete horse's rear. Also LOVED the use of Zachary Quinto as Spock, and glad to see him make the jump onto the big screen - here's hoping he stays there.

The Devils Tomb - 0.5/5
This movie was so bad it was an absolute laugh festival. I want to like Cuba Gooding Jr., but lately he's been heading the way of Steven Segal with the straight-to-DVD B list movies. I had seen the trailer for this one, and was willing to mush through B-movie plot/acting just for the psychological horror element. I however, would not recommend this at all. I knew we were on for a cheesy ride when the professed "biblical scholar" incorrectly cited her very first scripture reference. We then moved on to other major world religions, but by this time, all credibility the plot had was completely shot. I mean, if the writer and director dont take their movie seriously, how can we? From that point, the entire film viewing experience for me was about whether the next scene would be more incredulous than the last. I was not disappointed! The shocker at the end almost left you believing they actually took their movie seriously. This writer and director go down in infamy for me. I guarantee that even the Mutant Chronicles is more believable - because at the least it is exactly what it purports to be - fiction! Do watch for entertainment value, though.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Currently watching the 1931 "Dracula"...So review soon(ish).
BUT...

What do people think of the re-issue print with the Philip Glass score?
I had no idea this even existed.
As "Dracula" had no music score recorded for it (bar 'Swan Lake' used on the credits) Glass and the Chronos Quartet have given it one.

As for the score, I am torn...Sometimes it's great and really enhances a scene. Especially the great 'rising up from the coffins' sequence in the cellar.
And the 'Brides' scene with renfield.
It also adds gravitas to Dracula's staircase entrance.

But sometimes it's just too leading..almost saying 'LOOK! SCARY MOMENT THIS IS...BE SCARED, BE SPOOKED".
And that is plays almost non-stop, over every sequence, really does make the film feel like a silent movie for much of it...which is a big change to how the film plays out.

So sometimes it's a great improvement...sometimes not, because it can 'lead' and sometimes quiet is actually better.

Anyone heard it?

[Prospero]

Currently watching the 1931 "Dracula"...So review soon(ish).
BUT...

What do people think of the re-issue print with the Philip Glass score?
I had no idea this even existed.
As "Dracula" had no music score recorded for it (bar 'Swan Lake' used on the credits) Glass and the Chronos Quartet have given it one.

As for the score, I am torn...Sometimes it's great and really enhances a scene. Especially the great 'rising up from the coffins' sequence in the cellar.
And the 'Brides' scene with renfield.
It also adds gravitas to Dracula's staircase entrance.

But sometimes it's just too leading..almost saying 'LOOK! SCARY MOMENT THIS IS...BE SCARED, BE SPOOKED".
And that is plays almost non-stop, over every sequence, really does make the film feel like a silent movie for much of it...which is a big change to how the film plays out.

So sometimes it's a great improvement...sometimes not, because it can 'lead' and sometimes quiet is actually better.

Anyone heard it?When I watched it I didn't have the score turned on. I]'ll have to give that a try.

[Golgot]

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/8052/mitws3.jpg

The Man in the White Suit

Liked the premise of this, if not the way a lot of it played out. Guinness sashays through the requisite pratfalls with a certain style, but he's pretty much a cipher for blinkered 'blue sky' science, leaving us with a somewhat clouded over and one dimensional character.

The idea of how society and industry would react to a zero-maintenance utilitarian product is left nicely open-ended, and painted with not too thick a brush. The industrialists have their craven crow-like leaders, but also moral qualms. The unionists are given most of the luddite protestations, but leven it a little with folksy care for their fellow man.

The unfortunate fact is that, with the exception of a few lively and lovingly realised scenes like the one above, far too much of the film involves watching curled glassware (which belches out the main score) repetitively do not very much at all.

3-

[mark f]

But what about all the lovely explosions?

[Golgot]

Farts in a slightly frothy bath?

(;))

[mark f]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGu_aNbYvi4

[Classicqueen13]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xgQV4twLZME/SR4NyR2zhmI/AAAAAAAAGJc/jhdiY28afZI/s320/Witness+(1985).jpg

Excellent thriller with nice direction from Peter Weir. Great script that adds moments of comic relief amid the tension. The thrills aren't non-stop in Witness, but it never lost my attention. I expected it to be more romantic, but learned that this was based on the romantic tension. Kelly McGillis captured the quiet Amish woman who falls for Harrison Ford, who was great for the character. Very likable film that I would definately reccomend.

Witness: 4


http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/amg/classical_albums/cov200/cm100/m107/m10789m5dk8.jpg

A bland, early Indiana Jones type tale. Less than thrilling adventure with a predictable storyline. The romance plot could be seen clear through within the first twenty minutes of the already short movie. Nice cinematography somewhat overshadows the rather poor special effects. The jokes pretty much fall flat I'm afraid. One classic that didn't impress me.

Valley of the Kings: 2


http://www.mikescaife.btinternet.co.uk/jason10.jpg

This film was the fourth version of this plotline I've seen. However, it still always manages to make me laugh. Robert Armstrong and Edward Everett Horton are an excellent comedic pair. They provide quite a few good jokes, but also come through with a heartfelt touch. The dialouge is fun and snappy. Sybil Jason was adorable, but at times she seemed to be trying a little too hard to be Shirley Temple. A sweet, short film.

Little Big Shot: 3.5


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VRME60-RLag/SqPig3xVY5I/AAAAAAAAIoA/q5lmE2y6fsE/s320/Copy+of+TOWERING+INFERNO,+THE+-+blu-ray.jpg
A typical 70s disaster flick. Much like when I watched Posiden Adventure, I looked for goofy things that either didn't make sense or stupid moves by the characters to make me laugh. This one had plenty of them. The cast is of course star studded and impressive. The acting really wasn't bad. There are characters you can't wait to see die and ones you cheer for. It's a guessing game of who makes it out alive for the viewer. I didn't find it worth the two and a half hour watch.

The Towering Inferno: 2

[Used Future]

I've been watching films like a trooper this week and catching up on more recent stuff, but don't really feel like writing much at the moment.

If anyone wants me to elaborate further on any of these feel free to ask:)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_X0iQk_x-mo4/Sj5UWY_EoII/AAAAAAAAAzA/-RqOnMCPVLM/s320/splinter-poster-full.jpg

Splinter (Toby Wilkins, 2008) 3+
Decent splicing of Carpenter's The Thing, and Romero's Night of the Living Dead is nicely acted and imaginatively handled on a budget. An escaped convict on the lamb and his girlfriend take a couple of yuppies hostage, but end up trapped in a gas station after coming into contact with an unknown organism. Hugely satisfying if unoriginal film has a well thought out creature, competant effects, and tension on tap. Recommended for fans of monster movies and body horror.

http://static.omdb.si/posters/active/432250.jpg

Deadgirl (Marcel Sarmiento & Gadi Haaga, 2008) 2.5-
Ugghh. Not my bag at all this. Original but unrelentingly grim zombie effort about a pair of teenage boys who discover 'a girl who cannot die' chained up in an abandonned mental hospital. One's a sadistic pervert who uses her as his sex slave; the other a morally decent, but lovesick (not to mention unsympathetic) wet fart, too wimpy to stop him. Blah blah blah. Slow, overlong, morally dubious, and tasteless. Sorry PW.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cudK8MwW64I/SuwPRJS9tyI/AAAAAAAAYP0/wYP36J6LNXc/s320/poster_house-of-the-devil.jpg

The House of the Devil (Ti West, 2009) 3+
Derrivative but extremely suspenseful shocker with a great cast. This 80's set variation of Rosemary's Baby, and Soavi's The Sect (not to mention a host of similar films) has hard up college student Samantha (Jocelin Donahue) taking a baysitting job from Tom Noonan's overly polite but squirm inducing oddball (never a good idea considering Noonan's masterful turn in Manhunter). What follows is an hour of crackerjack tension and suspense as a reluctant but desperate Samantha tentatively undertakes the job oblivious to the danger (made horrifically obvious to us thanks to West's clever handling). Adding suppport are the wonderful Mary Woronov (delightfully creepy as Noonan's sinister wife) and Dee Wallace who cameos as a kind landlady at the beginning. Not one for fans of all out action and gore; this is relatively quiet and uneventful, but nevertheless very effective stuff. Loses a point for the duff ending though.

http://static.omdb.si/posters/active/431946.jpg

The Thaw (Mark A. Lewis, 2009) 2
Strictly by the numbers body horror/creature feature with Val Kilmer's Arctic research expedition discovering a deadly parasite in a thawed out Woolly Mammoth. Before you can call in Mulder & Scully they've become human hosts for the little critters, and his angsty daughter is up for a visit with the dimmest bunch of college eggheads you've ever seen. Cue plenty of vomit worthy gore and itch inducing CGI bugs as virtually everyone goes the way of Eli Roth's Cabin Fever dimwits. Entertaining enough, but way too predictable and derivative (even the poster looks like Carpenter's The Thing), with a heavy handed 'ecological message' ending, and a thoroughly (barring Kilmer who's better than this) unlikable cast.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rX0DO9cng-M/SftKqr5-GeI/AAAAAAAAFvw/7mraYvGnCnU/s320/outlander_poster+%28Small%29.jpg

Oulander (Howard McCain, 2008) 2.5+
Amiable enough genre mishmash, with Jim Caviezel crashing his space ship into a fjord and accidentally unleashing an unstoppable monster cargo on the Vikings who live near by. Stupid but very likable blend of The Spaceman and King Arthur (1978), Dragonslayer (1981), No Escape (1994) and even Mad Max 2 (1981), has plenty of swordswinging action and decent support from the likes of John Hurt (pitch perfect as Viking king Rothgar), Ron Pearlman (on autopilot as a hammer weilding beserker), and Cliff Saunders (who almost steals it as the genuinely funny comic relief, Boromir). No great shakes, but a likable enough time filler that will no doubt satisfy fans of sword and socery films.

http://lapommeduciel.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/District-9-Poster1.jpg

District 9 (Neill Blomkamp, 2009) 3
I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here, but the first time I put this on I didn't get past the ten minute mark thanks to Blomkamp's (in my opinion) forced, mockumentary style. On the second attempt I made it through, but whilst I 'got' the apartheidist social commentary/allegory; the overall style and performances did absolutely nothing for me. I wont bother outlining the plot as most of you have already seen it, but my main issue was with Sharlito Copley's lead performance as Wikus who irritated me no end (maybe that was Blomkamp's intention). As such I couldn't give a monkey's about him, and found it equally hard to warm to a CGI alien (Chris). Perhaps I'm just being cold hearted (I'm honestly not), but this removed virtually all the tension leaving me with an intelligent yet uninvolving story. Half the time I couldn't decide whether Blomkamp was aiming for broad comedy (which I didn't find funny) or if it was just the South African 'way'. All the right ingredients are there but the film looks rushed, and hangs together awkwardly in my opinion. Maybe that's because the project started out as Halo, but whatever the reason Blomkamp got the tone all wrong for me. Sorry.

[inthecornerdunce-]

http://thecia.com.au/reviews/1/images/24-hour-party-people-poster-0.jpg


24 Hour Party People ( Michael Winterbottom, 2002 ) - The scenes of drugs-and-sex-excess on the Monday's tour bus and the re-creation of the Hacienda club nights are superbly portrayed.

There are some brilliant acting performances, punctuated by cameos from real members of the Manchester music scene (such as Howard Devoto and Mark E. Smith). The merging of legend and reality may make it difficult for people unfamiliar with events to work out what actually happened, but, this is no accurate, austere documentary. It's a touching, sometimes surreal, and often very funny, anarchic portrayal of a time and a place and it's music.

[Iroquois]

Just re-watched a few things this week...

Dirty Rotten Scoundrels - 4
Stand By Me - 4
The Big Lebowski - 4.5

[beelzebubbles]

"Oklahoma, Oklahoma, Oklahoma!"

[meatwadsprite]

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:YDWkXFKsXRrK3M:http://thereelworld.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/high_school_musical_3_poster.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Wg9CdKw_3bxo-M:http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/Previews/High-School-Musical-3-movie-06.jpg

High School Musical 3 2008

With each viewing of this movie, a matching story of terrible coincidence and misfortune is sure to follow. Even for what it is, it isn't catchy/flashy/energetic. If anything it's an interesting look into a world run by Disney, although whoever penned this work of art has a genius for pure absurdity.

0.5

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:aD7PKnjxxowYaM:http://g.sheetmusicplus.com/Look-Inside/covers/HL-313241.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:_nNIKTlrgz8NDM:http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc56/dreiser900/100_favorite_films/velma-kelly-chicago-the-movie-29459.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:KfSTFIFhlW6v7M:http://hollywoodjesus.com/movie/chicago/32.jpeg

Chicago 2002

The story is incredibly short and crams songs into every scenario it gets, but it's packed with energy and gets by on that (and steaming hot women). Checked this out to prove to myself that musicals aren't actually a tool of torture conjured by Satan, but mostly because Rob Marshall's Nine is looking brilliant.

3

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:BIS5bNVwk8L6WM:http://www.impawards.com/1999/posters/south_park_bigger_longer_and_uncut.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:_JqJ87MHZpyh8M:http://www.filmjunk.com/images/weblog/anothersouthparkmovie.jpg

South Park : Bigger, Longer and Uncut 1999

In this movie America goes to war with Canada for no reason, which in turn causes the devil to rise from hell to take over the world with his gay lover Saddam Hussein - this movie has the best story of the three mentioned so far. Even if the premise is flimsy, the songs are all brilliant - probably because they are parodies of a dream collection of musical numbers.

4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvaSSLQpPxA

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Yd-jcOJs21_6nM:http://cinematropolis.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/the-hurt_locker.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:5SXVxARDWI9tLM:http://fandangogroovers.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/from-the-hurt-locker.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:LKWDGUeTXQK0LM:http://www.aceshowbiz.com/images/still/the_hurt_locker23.jpg

The Hurt Locker 2009

Enjoyed this one a lot more the second time around, even if it's ending execution seems very rushed - especially aside the patient nature of the action in the film.

4

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:maPV-vFLa0fXVM:http://lodim.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/a-serious-man-poster.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:XJ-JAfhlpROJ6M:http://febriblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/a-serious-man-trailer.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:XBpVd_OKpb1eWM:http://trailertracker.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/a-serious-man-01.jpg

A Serious Man 2009

Still one of their better films, but it only takes two viewings to see the full picture and it's ultimately a little too simple to be the ultimate understated battle of morality it strives to be.

4

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:WdCrgNs43LH02M:http://gonet.cz/~tri65dnigalerie/porad_booklet/600/7/79f5238406c4ca64cf63b5a60df361e6.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:pnu3FgddEpEFoM:http://topidol.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/the-big-lebowski-3.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:GoSuS6wTA4waUM:http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l27/Sdtriple/The_Big_Lebowski2.jpg

The Big Lebowski 1998

If the Coen's go on to make another several amazing films, they will still never be able to touch the wisdom or magnificence of The Big Lebowski. It's a perfect movie, where each collaborative part fits perfectly in the puzzle. Frame-for-frame masterpiece.

5

[Iroquois]

Dude, did we watch Lebowski at the exact same time or something?

Still waiting on The Hurt Locker - it doesn't come out here till February and even then I'm not sure if it'll be a theatrical release or a straight-to-DVD release. Bastards.

[mack]

The Goods - 1/5
Hard to define this film. Funny? Not quite, but it was meant to be. Its almost as if they excessively focused on sex in order to make up for the fact that the movie itself was....not that great. It does have some humor if you can get past the gratuitous sexual vulgarity. If that's the funny you're looking for, this is the film for you. I will give it that it added a real humor to the whole "slimy used car salesmen" idea, and for that reason, it got 1.

Janky Promoters - 1/5
Another miss, and a surprising disappointment from Ice Cube and Mike Epps. Given their ample talents, the movie should have been as funny as Friday / Next Friday / Friday After Next, but instead their humor this time went over like a lead balloon. Odd. The only reason I can give is that perhaps going back to the crude ghetto humor, is exactly that for Ice Cube - a step backwards. A painful step backwards. The movie literally seemed as if it was written to place enough swear words & T&A in it to make it R-rated. It felt forced, and it lacked chemistry or real humor - it was AWFUL to watch. Ever hear the saying that Preacher's Kids, once let out of the sheltered environment are worse than everyone else? The adage expresses the idea that the PK's, in an effort to obtain street credibility, often go above and beyond what is necessary to prove they are "as hard" as their unsheltered friends. This is what watching this movie felt like - it was like Cube had gone soft (with his family movies - practically inching into huggable Will Smith / Denzel Washington territory), and was using this movie to prove he was still capable of hardcore adult humor. We got the point. Cube is still hard. But somehow, he seems to have misplaced his Funnybone in that journey back to the hood, and adding Mike Epps to the cast list wasnt enough to buoy the movie into safe waters.

The Taking of Pelham 123 - 4.5/5
I waited quite awhile to see this film, as I'm off of Denzel Washington lately for some odd reason. However, it was a great watch, and thoroughly enjoyable. The supporting cast was star-studded and did outstandingly, and as far as the plot - I'm glad that things werent as black and white (no pun intended) as they seemed.

[inthecornerdunce-]

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/monster_a_go_go.jpg


Monster a-Go Go ( Bill Rebane, 1965 ) - Bill Rebane started a sci fi horror flick called Terror At Halfday in the early 60s. The money ran out, and Rebane shelved the project. Then along came Herschell Lewis, in need of a cheap B-picture to fill out the bottom half of a double bill deal. He snapped up Rebane's footage, shot some of his own, added a voice-over, changed the title, and thus was Monster A Go-Go.

Just how much extra material Lewis filmed to 'complete' this cinematic train-wreck is open to dispute, though the addition of the almost totally pointless 'go-go dancing sequence' about halfway in and the irritatingly strident voice-over narration are dead certs. What is for certain here, though, is the released picture is about as incoherent and illogical as any film could ever be and still be called anything but 'rough cuts stuck together with sellotape'.

To list Monster A Go-Go's flaws would be to detail every second of the flick.

Gloriously, mind shatteringly awful. Absolute Z-grade gold. One of the worst movie of all time. Makes The Creeping Terror look, well, not as bad.


http://www.itsonlyamovie.co.uk/COVERS2/MOTEL%20HELL.jpg

Motel Hell ( Kevin Connor, 1980 ) - By sparingly using shock tactics and graphic effects, ‘Motel Hell' plays up the more satirical aspect and keeps the viewer interested and entertained. In fact, the movie easily equals the number of shocking moments with a variety of funny and charming sequences which range from heckling televangelists to a hilarious send-up of the lives of swingers.

Thanks to some usually good scripting, above average performances and some truly side-splitting situations, ‘Motel Hell' succeeds at what it sets out to be - great fun for cheesy horror lovers!

[TheUsualSuspect]

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:YDWkXFKsXRrK3M:http://thereelworld.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/high_school_musical_3_poster.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Wg9CdKw_3bxo-M:http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/Previews/High-School-Musical-3-movie-06.jpg

High School Musical 3 2008

With each viewing of this movie, a matching story of terrible coincidence and misfortune is sure to follow.

Each viewing? :p

[mark f]

Too many films and not enough time. I hope these are pithy enough. :cool:

Bullfighter and the Lady (Budd Boetticher, 1951) 2.5 http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/80/130880.jpg

Boetticher's bullfighting epic has been restored to two hours and the pluses are the cast [Gilbert Roland, Katy Jurado, Joy Page (Casablanca) and a blond Robert Stack], as well as some stunning neorealist photography. The downside is that although the film now shows the director's original intentions, it feels too long for the slight story, and some people may just not like the subject matter.

Viva Maria!(Louis Malle, 1965) 3+http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/35/240535.jpg

Bridget Bardot plays an Irish terrorist and Jeanne Moreau is a French circus entertainer, and when they begin work together, they accidentally invent the striptease dance. After that, they become embroiled in a Central American revolution where their enemies are the wealthy landowners, and who do you think is the wealthiest landowner of them all? Yep, the Catholic Church. This is basically a popcorn entertainment although the religious/social satire occasionally resembles BunuelLand. George Hamilton has a brief appearance as a revolutionary who romances Bardot.

Hour of the Wolf (Ingmar Bergman, 1968) 2.5 http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/38/218338.jpg

Bergman's follow-up to Persona is also the first teaming of Max von Sydow and Liv Ullmann. They live on a seemingly-remote island where he's an artist suffering from visitations of ghosts or vampires, although it's probably all in his head, and his wife tries to comfort him although he keeps drifting further abd further inside his own world of paranoia and insanity. The film is shot in luxurious black-and-white and contains some amusing homages to other horror films, as well as a seeming intent by Bergman to partially reconstruct film after his deconstruction of it in Persona. It's certainly not for everyone, and it can seem boring and pointless in one viewing and scary and satirical on the next. However, it's a definite watch for Bergman fans.

Easy Rider (Dennis Hopper, 1969) 4 http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/48/2667148.jpg

There's not much more for me to say about this film which still packs an amazing amount of truth for me after 40 years. It's hilarious, powerful, beautifully-photographed, has a wonderful rock score, contains Jack Nicholson's breakthrough performance, and utilizes technique and imagery which has been assailed as being dated several times over but to me seems fresher and more-human than what I find in most current films. The acid trip (shot in 8mm) is still a miracle to me, and it's definitely got one of the greatest endings of all time.

The Exorcist (William Friedkin, 1973) 4 http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/coverv/48/143848.jpg

Whenever I rewatch this film, I always watch the original 1973 release. Friedkin may prefer his newer, longer cut, but I find that it adds irrelevant scenes which completely throw off the perfect pacing and tight interplay of all the tension which is inherent in the original release version. This is one of those films which has passed into legend for me (see also the above flick). It's a scary movie about the unknown. The Iraq scene at the beginning is a perfect mini-movie, as is the shattering exorcism scene at the end. In between, Ellen Burstyn and Jason Miller deliver two of the bravest, most-honest performances in film history as Friedkin and scripter William Peter Blatty tighten the screws on the characters and the audience, almost defying them to breathe. If you've only seen the "Version You've Never Seen", try to find the original 121-minute version and tell me what you think.

Gervaise (René Clément, 1956) 3+ http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cd/Gervaise_1956_film_poster.jpg/200px-Gervaise_1956_film_poster.jpg

Emile Zola's masterpiece L'Assomoir is filmed in a very intense manner, with all the violence and drunken madness intact in a story about Gervaise (Maria Schell) who breaks free from one useless male only to get married to someone even worse, if such a thing is possible. The film shows the French lower-middle class as pretty destitute of morals, especially the men, although Gervaise herself is a good mother and able to run her own laundry business, at least until her first lover, the good-for-nothing father of her two children, returns home and something resembling a ménage à trois is attempted by the men without Gervaise's consent. What makes Gervaise rise above the average French period melodrama is the power which the big, brutal set pieces display, as well as the perfect social satire shown in the holiday feast scene. François Périer's big drunken rampage near the end resembles nothing less than Jack Lemmon's awesome scene in his father-in-law's greenhouse in Days of Wine and Roses.

Brand Upon the Brain! (Guy Maddin, 2006) 3 http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/object/903/903977/poster_BRAND_1boxart_160w.jpg

Utterly-insane, wildly-cinematic "silent movie" about housepainter Guy Maddin who's called home by his missing mom to a remote island lighthouse where he's supposed to give the old building "two coats of paint". All Hell breaks loose in a sometimes-horrific, but always amusing film which mixes the reanimation of life, a non-burial funeral, a sister in love with a boy who's really (and obviously) a girl, the import of dozens of orphans, a mother who grows younger and later grows back older, an obsession with Romania, vampirism, a scientist-turned-hamster (or is that vice versa?), a mother with a seemingly-unhealthy fixation on her "little boy", and dozens of other things which seem to have no relationship with each other. The DVD has Isabella Rossellini (from Maddin's The Saddest Music in the World) do the narrator duties and there are numerous sound effects, a couple of songs and a full-blooded musical score, so calling it a silent movie is a bit disingenuous. However, the film was meant to be shown silent at select theatres with an in-theatre narrator, a band of 11 instruments, and three foley artists. I find Maddin's My Winnipeg a step up from this, but that's mainly because he felt secure enough to have some silence on the screen during that newer film.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's see. My daughter and I are going to watch the USC-UCLA football game now, so I have to cut it short. I have several more good films to discuss, so I'll save those for later and just finish up here with a few slighter films and ratings (if anybody cares... )

Shooter (Antoine Fuqua, 2007) 2.5 - Mark Wahlberg, Michael Peña, and Kate Mara are good, and the action/comeuppance scenes are enjoyable, but the flick is overlong at two hours. Still, fans of similar conspiracy thrillers will enjoy it.

Planes, Trains & Automobiles (John Hughes, 1987) 3 - Many people's fave Thanksgiving flick is really not all that funny to me, at least other than in the comedy of pain and hopelessness. It does tie everything up nicely at the end, even though that ending reveals even more levels of pain, but at least it does make what came before seem almost unimportant compared to the concept of male bonding.

I Found Stella Parish (Mervyn LeRoy, 1935) 2 - A melodrama along the lines of Stella Dallas with a good performance by Kay Francis who's matched by Ian Hunter and Paul Lukas.

Cast a Dark Shadow (Lewis Gilbert, 1955) 2 - Dirk Bogarde is pretty good as the young man who likes to "read" muscle men mags as much as he enjoys marrying older women and killing them for their money. The chief problem with the flick is that it's pretty ridiculous, especially the closer it gets to the ending, although Margaret Lockwood (The Lady Vanishes) gives Bogarde a run for his money.

Johnny Eager (Mervyn LeRoy, 1942) 2.5 - I give the film an extra-half rating for the cast: Robert Taylor, Lana Turner, Edward Arnold, Paul Stewart, Henry O'Neill, Glenda Farrell, and Van Heflin in his Oscar-winning role as a drunk philosophiser-type guy who doesn't seem all that interesting anymore in this overly-talky gangster flick.

Cobra Woman (Robert Siodmak, 1944) 2.5 - Camp classic with Maria Montez playing good and evil twins on an island where "King Cobra" (no, not the malt liquor) is worshipped and the fire mountain must be appeased. Jon Hall, Sabu and Lon Chaney, Jr. are the Good Guys, and Edgar Barrier is the other chief nasty along with the Evil Maria. Finale involves scenes which inspired the sacrificial ritual in Temple of Doom. Richard Brooks (Elmer Gantry, In Cold Blood) co-wrote the script, insuring that some of the lines are intentionally humorous.

[Miss Vicky]

http://behindblondiepark.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/new-moon1.jpg

New Moon

Just like 2012, I must preface this by saying two things:

1. It was not my idea to see this movie.
2. I didn't pay for my ticket.

Within the first five minutes I found myself groaning and leaned over to my friend to say "I hate it already." My groaning and torment continued for a good 45 minutes or so, until I told myself to stop looking at it as the teen romance/drama it tries to be. Instead, I looked at as if it were a comedy and was able to find amusement in the overly melodramatic "acting" (if you can call it that), angsty poses, horrible makeup and laughable CG wolves. All in all, not unbearable, but not good either.

2

Incidentally, my friend has insisted that I watch Twilight with her tomorrow at her apartment. I agreed. But only on the condition that she allow me to expose her to a film of actual quality. I have chosen Milk.

[B-card]

The Final Destination(David R. Ellis 2009)-it kind of looses its effect when you dont watch it in 3D but still I dont think it was that good compared to the first and second part 2

http://images.zap2it.com/movies/76079/76079_ba.jpg

[Golgot]

http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/5778/tokillaking420.jpg

To Kill a King

A right royal topic that ends up as a rabble of elements, despite it's attempt to streamline history. I wanted to like this personalised take on the English civil war, but found Dougray Scott couldn't quite sell a project he also associate-produced. As the conflicted ex-royalist general Thomas Fairfax he's not bad, but gets put in the shade somewhat by Roth's enraged-weasel of a Cromwell and Everett's joyfully insane portrayal of king as Rasputin (crossed with irate child). The main problem though is that the script, despite parcelling out blame to both sides (or perhaps because of it) seems to have oversimplified a fair bit. Events are all viewed totemically through Fairfax's attachment to the old order via his wife, and to the new via his tempestuous relationship with Cromwell. At the heart of that tug of war Scott's performance seems to lull into an ongoing grimace, as we jump through time to various iterations on the theme. Some cheap motivational music, stolid narration and general signs of budget restrictions and troubled production also detract a bit from the fine locations, occasional acting highpoints, and essentially potent subject matter.

3(-)

http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/5930/169qqdt.jpg

[TheGirlWhoHadAllTheLuck_]

A Place in The Sun

http://nighthawknews.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/placesun.jpg

A pretty dull, heavy melodrama. Shelley Winters plays her role as the poor girl that Montgomery Clift leaves for rich girl Elizabeth Taylor very well, but Clift and Taylor are both boring and unconvincing in either their love affair or his greed for money. Whatever moral points about the American Dream it could have made have been destroyed- I believe that it's based on a novel called An American Tragedy, the tragedy being that the protagonist pays for his greed. This film skews the moral points to create a dull unconvincing melodrama.
1

Kiss Me Kate

http://cdn.springboard.gorillanation.com/storage/dvdfile.com/upl_images/kiss_me_kate_3_D.jpg

This is a great colourful 50's musical; great in its own right and great as a version of The Taming of The Shrew (in the film, the two squabbling actors are putting on a musical version of the play). Wonderful songs as well as good acting; my only quibble is that it's bowdlerised. 'Too Darn Hot' is no longer sung by the black dresser but by Ann Miller's character; however she does do a great tap sequence and so that's forgiveable. The lyrics and insults are toned down which makes it less believable but the dancing is fabulous.
4

[Pyro Tramp]

The Men Who Stare At Goats - 2_5

Thought it would be more Coen-esque with constant wry humour, didn't expect all best bits to have been in trailer

Thirst - 3_5

Interesting but ultimately confused vampire yarn that lacks consistency in characters and pacing

Pontypool - 3

Confident in it's intriguing idea but let down with weak execution of actual horror elements

Dazed and Confused - 4

Decent teen movie with lot of heart and annoying lead kid

Lilya 4-Ever - 5

Sad and moving film about a young film, very recommended- top 100 stuff

Unbearable Lightness of Being - 4

Long but never boring, good performances as well

Silent Night, Deadly Night - 3_5

Fairly average slasher film, with cool Santa costume gimmick and actually liked development of the killer

The Howling - 3

Was ok but not really much tension, some effects were good but some ham

Rififi - 4_5

Although it's pretty much a perfect film in most aspects, could have done with bit more excitement

Moon - 4

Great use of budget and Rockwell is always watchable but hoped be more ambiguity

Intacto - 4

Nice little film with some good ideas and decent execution

Splinter - 4

Surprisingly effective horror with some great effects and doesn't lag itself out

Hardware - 2_5

Choppy film that has as many bits that work as those that don't, couldn't really decide what it wants to be

Maniac - 3_5

Think I liked this study of a killer more than most others, including Henry, Savini always does well with effects and liked ending

l'appartement - 4

Twisty French film about 4 lovers intertwined without knowing, gets marks for Cassel and Belucci alone

Max Payne - 2

Don't know why i bothered, though Marky Mark does better than expected

Black Sabbath - 3_5

Was good, but not very memorable

Kill Baby, Kill - 2_5

Didn't think that much of this one, bad pacing, ineffectual horror

Killer Klowns from Outer Space - 1_5

Absent script, just seems like one joke dragged out to film

In the Loop - 4_5

Excellent satirical companion to TV's The Thick of It, one better films this year

The City of Violence - 3

Solid Korean crime/martial arts thriller that does well with obvious budget, can't avoid odd cliche though

Munich - 3

Thought tried bit too hard but Spielberg handles events in usual finesse

Paranoid Park - 4

Smartly scripted little film

Synecdoche, New York - 4

Liked the premise and performances but stretching time scale left it feeling a bit emotionally empty

Peeping Tom - 3_5

A lot of what made the film infamous has diminished over time but still worth watching

Sunset Boulevard - 4_5

Great all round

The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover - 5

Fantastically use of sets and colour, with powerful performances and nice bit of nudity. Amused me that with Gambon's bastard and Mirren's lack of clothes, they've respectively been Dumbledore and The Queen. Top 100 potential

Che: Part One - 4

Was good as was del Toro but preferred Motorcycle Diaries

Angel Heart - 4_5

Loved this one as well, not seen much of young Rourke but want to now. Fresh ideas and clever use of genre

The Tattooist - 2

Very average ghost story trying to make spin on standard Asian Horror's

Black Sunday - 5

Best Bava seen so far, cinematography stand out and maintains eerie atmosphere

Up 3D - 5

Could be Pixar's best film to date but not favourite

[Harry Lime]

http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/1angelsanddemons.jpg
Angels and Demons (2009, Ron Howard) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/2zombieland.jpg
Zombieland (2009, Ruben Fleischer) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/3publicenemies.jpg
Public Enemies (2009, Michael Mann) 2.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/6thehurtlocker.jpg
The Hurt Locker (2009, Kathryn Bigelow) 3.5

[mark f]

Come to the Stable (Henry Koster, 1949) 3

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v491/stinkylulu/posters/cometothestable-poster.png

For those interested, I saw this film while sitting in on a lecture in my daughter's history of film class at USC. We watched a beautiful 35mm print, but it also is available on Hulu. (http://www.hulu.com/watch/103169/come-to-the-stable) It's a heartwarming tale about two nuns who come from France after WWII to build a children's hospital. The opening scene almost makes it appear that the nuns have arrived to witness baby Jesus in his manger. This is because the nuns have come to New England to the home of a religious painter (Elsa Lanchester) who lives in the small village of Bethlehem. One (Loretta Young) of the nuns is a transplanted American and the other (Celeste Holm) is a French native who was once a highly-successful tennis pro. The property they wish to buy belongs to a gangster (Thomas Gomez) and abuts the property of a popular songwriter (Hugh Marlowe). Everything seems to be against the nuns ever having a chance of making their dream come true, but as the local bishop says, "An irresistable force has been let loose in New England!", and one of the weird coincidences seems to involve how many people shared something with the nuns in France during WWII. There are some nice laughs here and a few tears to be shed while watching this simple pleasure which may upset a few Scrooges but will make even the hardest of other hearts melt at least a little bit. Dooley Wilson (Casablanca) is also on hand to lend credible and welcome support.

A Small Circle of Friends (Rob Cohen, 1980) 3.5

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4_hu17vzSYg/SqSDdDRawlI/AAAAAAAAAFM/tm1iKuBU1UI/s400/small_circle_of_friends.jpg

I believe that this flick has far more assets than it does debits, but sometimes it's difficult to tell. The cast is excellent in this tale of what it was like to go to Harvard during the late 1960s and the Vietnam Era. Brad Davis gets most of the big laughs and the histrionics while Karen Allen and Jameson Parker are expected to anchor the film into reality as much as possible. Although much of the flick comes across as cliched, it's amazing how entertaining the right collection of cliches can become if done in the proper spirit. The fourth most-important character is the wonderful John Friedrich (The Wanderers) who becomes the biggest radical of them all, and Shelley Long also has a major role. Yes, it's true, this was the first film directed by the auteur of The Fast and the Furious, xXx and Stealth, and it's got an annoying soundtrack by the composer who later wrote "Total Eclipse of the Heart", but as I said, while watching all the Vietnam protesting, the draft physicals and the birth of head shops, it seems to matter little. The film should be watched at least once for you to decide if it's just a pile of fake, overheated melodrama, or, if you agree with me, that it's one of the better melodramas about the era just because much of it is so over the top.

Last Holiday (Henry Cass, 1950) 4

http://www.classicflix.com/images/lastholidaycriterion.jpg

The year after Alec Guinness delivered a tour de force in Kind Hearts and Coronets, playing eight different characters in the same family who were all killed off by the "hero", he played someone resembling the meekest and friendliest of that family in a very simple, very excellent comedy-drama about a man named Bird who's told he has a rare disease and only months to live. Since he has no family or friends, Bird quits his job and takes all his money to go live at a posh resort where everyone finds him a man of mystery and wants him to invest in some big deals. Besides that, several women take an active interest in him, and soon Bird becomes the most-popular person at the resort, although no one knows anything about his circumstances. Last Holiday was remade a few years back as a Queen Latifah flick, but I've never bothered to watch it because this J. B. Priestley scripted-gem is one of my absolute fave films and the one which I always try to show people who are unfamiliar with Guinness's career in the '50s. As I said, it's amazingly simple and low-key, but at the same time, it becomes magical, and the violin theme is one of the most-hauntingly beautiful I've ever heard. Last Holiday is one of the few films I can think of which earns every single laugh and tear it gets, especially because the twist ending is played to perfection. It's the kind of film which makes it clear why it's both a blessing and a curse to actually be alive, and one of the few which can actually deliver a sting in its tail and still make you want to rewatch it over and over again.

Magic (Richard Attenborough, 1978) 3.5

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4pmUNQE7llI/SQcFKAEF2jI/AAAAAAAAEBU/xgQpPIN2mpI/s400/magic1978.jpg

I read the novel Magic and although the film adaptation didn't quite reach its heights, it does have plenty to recommend it, and it may surprise you when I tell you that I believe that Jerry Goldsmith's musical score is right at the top of the list. Anthony Hopkins plays ventriloquist Corky who seems to be out of control and possibly possessed by his Dummy Fats, and the best scenes in the film to me involve Fats, Corky and Corky's agent "Gangrene" (Burgess Meredith). Those scenes are spectacularly done, and it's too bad the rest couldn't match them, but even so, the locations, as well as the performances by Ann-Margret and Ed Lauter, are also very good, as well as the jealousy exhibited between Corky and Fats when it comes to who is more responsible for being able to get into Ann-Margret's pants. Hopkins is able to showcase Corky's vulnerable side, but he's even better at showing what a jerk he is by having Fats say anything terrible he wants to at any time. For those who have seen Michael Redgrave's hair-raising turn as Maxwell Frere and his dummy Hugo in Dead of Night (1945), Magic will always keep you guessing about who's in charge. Overall, I'd say the film is a solid B and as an adaptation, it's probably a low B-.

Conrack (Martin Ritt, 1974) 3+

http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/86/Conrack1974.jpg/200px-Conrack1974.jpg

Pat Conroy wrote four novels of varying autobiographical details which were turned into films: Conrack, The Great Santini, The Lords of Discipline and The Prince of Tides. This is the first one he wrote and the first to be filmed. It's a solid entertainment about a long-term substitute teacher who goes to work on an impoverished and segregated South Carolina island during the Vietnam War where his class of 5th through 8th graders (basically 10-14 years old) are all poor, ignorant black children, many of whom cannot spell their name and do not know what country they live in. Conroy, or "ConracK" (which is easier for his kids to pronounce) uses unorthodox techniques to get through to the kids and try to show them that they are capable of learning no matter how much they seem to be part of an institution which goes out of its way to keep them unenlightened. The problem eventually becomes that Conrack succeeds all too well, so the residue of the Southern racist infrastructure tries to find ways to get rid of him for helping to make the "colored kids more equal". Ritt directed this after his critically-acclaimed Sounder, and Paul Winfield even shows up in a small role, but it's really Jon Voight's movie, and he, along with his students, are the ones which show that the buzz one can get from learning and education is hopefully at least as intoxicating as any other kind of buzz out there in this world.

Bugsy (Barry Levinson, 1991) 4

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_qEz74ZyRBZk/So8NClCBh8I/AAAAAAAAALU/qX59g4Fssk4/s400/1991_Bugsy.jpg

Wonderfully-quirky character study, laced with brilliant dialogue by James Toback (which Tarantino would kill for), tells the true-life story of Bennie Siegel (Warren Beatty) and how he romanced Virginia Hill (Annette Bening) and actually succeeded in creating his dream oasis in the desert of Las Vegas where he and his fellow gangsters could dare to call themselves "legitimate". The film tells the straightforward story of "Bugsy" who was actually happily married with two daughters but he could never keep his pants zipped, and one day while visiting his actor friend George Raft (Joe Mantegna) on the set of Manpower (1941), he meets and falls in love with extra Virginia Hill who also has mob connections and seems to have balls as big as his own. Director Levinson feels very comfortable filming the Hollywood milieu and this increases the entertainment value of the flick by at least twofold. The supporting cast is incredible, especially Harvey Keitel as Mickey Cohen, Ben Kingsley as Meyer Lansky, Elliott Gould as Harry Greenberg and director Richard C. Sarafian (Vanishing Point, Man in the Wilderness) as Jack Dragna. This flick is full of tension, sex, some big laughs, several awkward scenes where the lead characters threaten to be offed by each other or their best friends, and one of Ennio Morricone's most low-key, yet incredibly-haunting musical scores. I dig it.

Brewster McCloud (Robert Altman, 1970) 2.5

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_jCtQBPsvASY/Sgnq-Qz6nRI/AAAAAAAAAkc/CDQR0SJzejk/s400/brewster_mccloud.jpg

On the other hand, we have Robert Altman's follow-up to MASH which can also be considered quirky, but unlike Bugsy, it's also immature, maddening, and almost one-note. It's a bizarre mixture of a film involving man's attempt to retro-evolve towards becoming a bird, an almost fetishistic spoof of Steve McQueen and Bullitt (for God knows what reason), a serial killer mystery, and a collection of characters who seem to have no relationship to each other even when they're sharing what appears to be "deep thoughts" (Bud Cort and Sally Kellerman). Even the characters who seem to be the ones you might want to cheer on to their dubious deaths by bird dung [horrible national anthem singer Margaret Hamilton (The Wicked Witch herself) and phony long-hair, wheelchair-bound preacher Stacy Keach] come across as ad-libbed throwaways. Shelley Duvall is borderline-endearing in her film debut as a tour guide for the Houston Astrodome, but even the wonderful Bud Cort is given so little to do that his character is identified by how many half-assed pull-ups he can do along with his weird eyeglasses. Even the usually-reliable Rene Auberjonois comes across as a fool while explaining why birds and humans share such things as mating rituals and an apparent need to sound deathly-ill when acting beyond their normal realm of behavior. Hey, look here. I'll be the first to say that the flick's a mess, but eventually, it's got just enough charm to make it just about worth watching if you can handle all the crap which is also in this flick, which even ruins a nice chance to make it have some form of honest, human meaning at the end. Still, there are enough prima donnas here to make it worth more than a smile to see them offed with fatal doses of bird poop.

[meatwadsprite]

Each viewing? :p

Yes all 7 views internationally.

[Used Future]

The Howling - 3

Was ok but not really much tension


:shrug:I don't know what film you were watching, but The Howling is plenty tense, and Bottin's effects were groundbreaking. One of the best horror flicks of the 80's. Fact.


Hardware - 2_5

Choppy film that has as many bits that work as those that don't, couldn't really decide what it wants to be


:rolleyes: Hardware is a film you grow to love. I've seen it over a dozen times now and it gets better every time. Don't understand why everyone's bashing it on this site all of a sudden. I know loads of people who recognise it for the cyberpunk classic it is.


Maniac - 3_5

Think I liked this study of a killer more than most others, including Henry, Savini always does well with effects and liked ending


Lustig's Maniac better that Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer?:laugh: You've got to be kidding. Maniac is bottom of the barrel garbage by comparison; a real chore to sit through. Sheesh.

Man, our tastes couldn't be further removed from each other.

[Golgot]

http://i47.tinypic.com/imsapi.jpg

Sunshine

Finally got to watch this on a non-poxy tele, and it is definitely a lush visual experience. The story still has a few too many hanging points for me tho (with the end not selling it's 'singular' story that well to my eyes, despite a lot of promise). Kind of like a modern Event Horizon, and including many of the staples of the space-faring disaster genre (a composite crew that can't make you care about all of them, tough decisions that often involve diving through safety locks etc). I think there were just a few too many blunt bits of exposition at the beginning and dropped bits of character development along the way for the tone of fragile human isolation to pervade in the air (although it was well evoked by a couple of the 'wide-screen-visored' spacesuit scenes etc, and some of the interactions). Loved a lot of the broiling, seething, glimmering visuals all told (even if they did boil over from vapourish fever to a strange crystalised glitchiness, full of odd beats, where the nemesis figure was concerned).

And talking of the skin-stripped baddie, was there meant to be ambiguity about whether he'd actually survived, or somehow phantasmically reformed? The visuals suggested the other-worldly element, but much of what he did suggested he could have just been a space-ravaged nutter. It somehow made him an unsatisfying, if 'occludidly visceral' evil. Just the way he was circumnavigated at the very end, made irrelevant by the delivery of the payload (meh, maybe I'm hankering after a classic "kill him 3 times before he's dead" staple scenario?). Also it felt like it had become some kind of 'science vs superstition' scenario, which seemed a bit cumbersome.

3_5(+)

[TheUsualSuspect]

HA Markf is a thief.

[Golgot]

:rolleyes: Hardware is a film you grow to love. I've seen it over a dozen times now and it gets better every time. Don't understand why everyone's bashing it on this site all of a sudden. I know loads of people who recognise it for the cyberpunk classic it is.

I've got fond memories of Hardware (despite seeing it nigh on decades ago). I do remember thinking it was pretty uneven, but then liking a lot of that unevenness too (except perhaps for the peeping tom stuff, which overstepped some line i now can't remember). You can't take a film too seriously that uses the final solution i seem to recall tho. Not sure if it was the atmosphere they achieved on a clearly limited budget, or whatever, but I'd definitely watch it again.

[honeykid]

... Kind of like a modern Event Horizon

That's a backhanded compliment, isn't it? :D I'm definately not seeing this now. Event Horizon was all kinds of horrible.

[Sedai]

Who was ragging on Hardware? I definitely liked it, and had to immediately grab a copy of the special edition with my Amazon gift card :D

Meanwhile:

Trick R Treat (Dougherty, 2008)

3

http://witneyman.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/trick-r-treat-1.jpg

I didn't expect much from this, but was pleasantly surprised. A fun lil horror flick with some real creativity. Sort of like Creepshow for Halloween...

[Pyro Tramp]

:shrug:I don't know what film you were watching, but The Howling is plenty tense, and Bottin's effects were groundbreaking. One of the best horror flicks of the 80's. Fact.



:rolleyes: Hardware is a film you grow to love. I've seen it over a dozen times now and it gets better every time. Don't understand why everyone's bashing it on this site all of a sudden. I know loads of people who recognise it for the cyberpunk classic it is.



Lustig's Maniac better that Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer?:laugh: You've got to be kidding. Maniac is bottom of the barrel garbage by comparison; a real chore to sit through. Sheesh.

Man, our tastes couldn't be further removed from each other.

For the record, i actually purchased all of these and never said any were ***** so not trying to be a wind up merchant. I'm guessing my 'nonsense opinions' might be due to not seeing these films nearer their release but oh well. Am glad i watched them, so do value your recommendations.

There may be spoilers in the following

Howling- i liked it, just didn't love it. Yeah, the effects were good but some have dated. I didn't find it that tense, not much happens for most of it- her husband's turn didn't seem to amount to much, the hero was bit of a nobody and randomly there was emphasis on the killer from the beginning being a big character

Hardware- there were a lot of nice touches, like the singers introducing their own songs in character for one. Just the initial sprawling post-apocalypse setting seemed lost once the film settled into just a confined apartment space, the main character was weak as was the actor. The messages the director was aiming for didn't work fantastically but i can see the charm and liked the overall tone.

Maniac- ok, maybe being better than Henry needed more thought. I enjoyed it more, Henry isn't exactly a pleasant film and worse a lot stronger than Maniac. But i liked Savini's effects and the final zombie scene made it a bit more interesting, not as powerful as Henry though

[B-card]

2012(Roland Emerich 2009)-the worst spend 6.30 ever 3 hours of soap opera thank God there was the destruction otherwise I would have cut my wrists in the theater.Congrats Mr. Emerich you finally destroyed the world you happy?
http://newtech.aurum3.com/images/movie-2012.jpg

1.5

[inthecornerdunce-]

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2009/3/4/1236167396380/The-Birth-of-a-Nation-001.jpg


The Birth Of A Nation (D.W. Griffith, 1915 ) - The truly disturbing thing about this film isn't its racially charged content, but its reception. "The Birth of a Nation" was a runaway hit, in spite of protests. Its success reveals the disturbing mentality of America in 1915, and I suspect that White viewers unable to overcome the film's offensive content in order to understand its historical and technical value are reacting to an impulse to distance themselves from that mentality. This is probably a good thing; however, to claim that the film no longer has relevance and portrays an extinct mode of thinking is short-sighted and quite simply wrong. Jim Crow, peonage and the Reconstruction-era Klan are gone, but they have been replaced by an overwhelmingly Black and Latino prison population, project housing and a conglomerate of Neo-Nazi groups and right-wing religious organizations who continue to agitate on the grounds of race. Every time we say, "this isn't my problem," or, "those people need to learn to take care of themselves," or, "The war has been over for 150 years! Give it a rest," we become the ignorant White Southerners of "The Birth of a Nation." The film records a mentality which has been with us for hundreds of years, is still with us, and will remain with us unless we pay attention to what our films are trying to tell us, in spite of themselves.

[Sleezy]

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/up.jpg

Up (Docter/Peterson, 2009) 5

Not Pixar's best, but really nothing to fault either. Sweet story, lovable characters, and an unlikely adventure that's accentuated by wonderfully diverse visuals. The boys at Pixar are on their game.


http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/amateurs.jpg

The Amateurs (Traeger, 2005) 3_5

Great little film that's marred only by some clumsy exposition at the front end and the absence of some final editing. Once the plot gets going, the film steps smartly, keeping things quick and fun while sprinkling just the right amount of depth and charm along the way. Surprisingly innocent, given the plot, but I think that's also a testament to the wonderful cast. If only the lovely Lauren Graham had been given more to do. (And no, not in the way you're thinking, perverts. ;))


http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/underworld.jpg

Underworld (Wiseman, 2003) 2

Meh, didn't care for this. Clearly designed to sup on The Matrix fame, the film falls apart at the script, committing a number of logic errors and never really fleshing out its characters enough to draw the audience in. Everything was much too guarded, leaving most of the plot and action elements just an inkling of what they could have been. Being cool and dark doesn't buy your way into the hearts of your viewers.


http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/underworld2.jpg

Underworld: Evolution (Wiseman, 2006) 4

Wow. This one is a hundred thousand times better than its predecessor. Wiseman and crew smartly keep things simple and tight, but ballsy. There is chemistry, finally, between Selene and Michael, and Markus makes for a deliciously terrifying hunter-villain. The writers finally allow the characters to show emotion and some desire for self-preservation, and craft a narrative that's not so cut-and-dry in the "who deserves come-uppance" department. That's always a good thing. Some logic errors here, too, and it gets pretty sensational at times. But still, this sequel is leaps and bounds better than the original.

[Sedai]

Contour (2006, Jacobus)

http://www.contourmovie.com/images/ContourPosterWeb.jpg

(Ok - I watched a flick last night, by the name of Contour. I think it was made for about 85 bucks. Set in San Francisco, this martial arts film was directed and produced by a team of stunt workers. With a tongue in cheek tone, the film constantly pokes fun at itself, as the creators were well aware they were making a collection of silly filler scenes in a martial arts film. That said, this film contains some of the best martial arts fighting I have ever seen.

There was no money for wire work or flashy effects, so these guys simply choreographed several high energy, super fast fights using traditional martial arts. Anyone that has ever taken a martial art will instantly recognize the skill of these gentleman. The first fight isn't that great, but a few that are interspersed throughout the film are pretty amazing.

Watch it for the fights...if you like that sort of thing...just be prepared for what amounts to a backyard film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJqF1sFDrRE&feature=related

[Golgot]

http://i46.tinypic.com/2w4kvhw.jpg

Blood Diamond

Despite having something of a 'join the issues' plot, this is a pretty effective piece of big-name action-packed agitprop. Factual accuracies seem to pervade, from the atrocities of the RUF rebels (limb lopping, enforced diamond mining, kid soldier indoctrinating), to the price-fixing games of the diamond cartel (albeit symbolically portrayed by one pseudo company). This even seemed to extend to a Rhodesian colonel, the de facto criminal leader of Di Caprio's dodgy-dealing survivalist, having a Rhodesian Ridgeback dog. Someone here seems to know the 'red soil' of Africa, and the 'red strangers' who've spent some time amongst it.

That's not to say that you don't have to suspend your disbelief a lot, or navigate standard blockbuster cliches, but the film still comes through these weakness robustly. Hounsou is given a particularly stereotypical and slight role as the Sierra Leonean separated from his family, enslaved by the RUF, and made the centre of attention by his discovery of a giant diamond, yet he fills it up to brimming point. The confrontation with his own son, now a member of the RUF 'infantry' (as one benefactor would have it), is a rare moment where the dialogue is a match for his input.

3_5++

[Yoda]

Sunshine

Finally got to watch this on a non-poxy tele, and it is definitely a lush visual experience. The story still has a few too many hanging points for me tho (with the end not selling it's 'singular' story that well to my eyes, despite a lot of promise). Kind of like a modern Event Horizon, and including many of the staples of the space-faring disaster genre (a composite crew that can't make you care about all of them, tough decisions that often involve diving through safety locks etc). I think there were just a few too many blunt bits of exposition at the beginning and dropped bits of character development along the way for the tone of fragile human isolation to pervade in the air (although it was well evoked by a couple of the 'wide-screen-visored' spacesuit scenes etc, and some of the interactions). Loved a lot of the broiling, seething, glimmering visuals all told (even if they did boil over from vapourish fever to a strange crystalised glitchiness, full of odd beats, where the nemesis figure was concerned).

And talking of the skin-stripped baddie, was there meant to be ambiguity about whether he'd actually survived, or somehow phantasmically reformed? The visuals suggested the other-worldly element, but much of what he did suggested he could have just been a space-ravaged nutter. It somehow made him an unsatisfying, if 'occludidly visceral' evil. Just the way he was circumnavigated at the very end, made irrelevant by the delivery of the payload (meh, maybe I'm hankering after a classic "kill him 3 times before he's dead" staple scenario?). Also it felt like it had become some kind of 'science vs superstition' scenario, which seemed a bit cumbersome.

3_5(+)
I agree with both the speculation and the reaction; I do think they were going for a science-vs-superstition angle, and I just don't think it worked (and not just because I'd fall more under their "superstitious" category ;)).

I like the reveal (finding out he's on the ship based on air supply problems, even though I imagine a computer that smart would've alerted them without being asked), and I like the whole "addiction" angle, particularly in how we see its beginnings with one of the other crew members. But he's just too superhuman at the end, and I didn't find quite that level of hysteria believable.
I agree that the cast isn't terribly fleshed out, but I think they had about as much depth as possible under the circumstances. It certainly made more of an effort than your usual disaster movies do.

I guess it comes down to just how much the good outweighs the bad for each viewer, since most of us seem to agree on just what is good and bad about the film.

I gave it a 4.5 in my review a couple of years ago (http://www.movieforums.com/community/../reviews/sunshine.html), saw it a second time in the theater, and have since bought the DVD and seen it again. Personally, I find the music, mood, and execution to be near-flawless, to the point where they drown out my issues with the film. I was just grateful for a disaster film where the characters behave as if the fate of the world really is in their hands, for once, and are too terrified of that fact to crack wise or rule out agonizing choices.

[Golgot]

I agree that the cast isn't terribly fleshed out, but I think they had about as much depth as possible under the circumstances. It certainly made more of an effort than your usual disaster movies do.

Yeah, I'm being a bit unfair. It's definitely above and beyond the usual disaster movie spec in what it aims for. I was a dreading what would come when Chris 'Flame On' Evans slammed the table and said something like 'In case you've forgotten, our sun is dimming and we're on a mission to save it', but thought he actually brought his 'pragmatist' arc to life pretty well in the end, for example. There were a couple of other bits dispersed throughout the film that took me out of it on each occasion though (such as the bit where Michelle Yeoh was edited poorly, going from a jocular response to 'Flameboy' about how she knew the noises they were hearing were just metal distending, to saying in a subdued tone that it sounds like like it's in pain. It's not that the script or her delivery were bad, it's just that the overall presentation messed up for me, and when characters get precious few lines to delineate themselves, that stuff hurts the pic).

I guess it comes down to just how much the good outweighs the bad for each viewer, since most of us seem to agree on just what is good and bad about the film.

Yeah, and i'm a git both on that, and on ratings in general ;). That's still a pretty respectable rating for me tho :) (I think I'm being extra picky at points here because it's a film that is pitching for, and almost relying on, an escalation of tone, and dropped balls rattle around more noticeably in that environment)

I gave it a 4.5 in my review a couple of years ago (http://www.movieforums.com/community/../reviews/sunshine.html), saw it a second time in the theater, and have since bought the DVD and seen it again. Personally, I find the music, mood, and execution to be near-flawless, to the point where they drown out my issues with the film.

This viewing bumped up my appreciation almost purely because I saw it on a decent sized TV. I'm sure if I saw it at the cinema i'd like it even more, because it is awash with visual and aural vibe, like you say :)

[Iroquois]

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/113/003_THEMANWHOS~The-Man-Who-Wasn-t-There-Posters.jpg

The Man Who Wasn't There (Joel Coen, 2001) - 3.5

The Coen brothers are nothing if not dependable. While this is probably going to end up one of my less favourite works of theirs, it's still a treat in virtually every department. They manage to deftly capture the vibe of classic noir, thanks in no small part to Roger Deakins' strikingly monochromatic cinematography and Billy Bob Thornton's drawling voice-over. While it does get to a point where it feels like it's been going on a little longer than it really needed to, it still ticks all the boxes in making a good Coen brothers film, which puts it in the running for a good film overall.

http://www.utvols.com/blog/uploaded_images/steve-martin-jerk-782937.jpg

The Jerk (Carl Reiner, 1979) - 3.5

My initial rating for this film was going to be a 3, for while it was rather funny, there were also plenty of instances where it wasn't as funny and there were plenty of moments that seemed like they were trying to be funny but weren't working for me. However, in retrospect I can't really fault the film that hard. I'd gladly watch it again and probably laugh harder a second time around, which probably can't be good for me. Martin puts in an excellent performance, to say nothing of his supporting cast (highlights were M. Emmet Walsh and Jackie Mason), and the film was a worthwhile 90 minutes.

http://www.bnl.lu/new/nos_select/media/images/kelly.jpg

Singin' In The Rain (Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly, 1952) - 4

I don't really need to explain this one, but whatever. I was under the impression that I'd never actually seen this film from start to finish (only getting shown most of it in class a couple of years back), so I decided that I needed to give it a proper viewing. Just as well - Singin' In The Rain is just plain old-fashioned musical fun, it never drags (although stopping the main film's plot for the "Broadway Melody" mini-movie towards the end feels like a conspicuous attempt to stretch the film out, in spite of the sequence's quality), but I'm not complaining. Kelly's awesome, although I doubt I'm alone in thinking that Donald O'Connor practically steals the show (or maybe they're both equally brilliant). The writing's also surprisingly clever and funny. Basically, this is about as entertaining as you could really hope for any movie to be.

http://www.adorocinema.com/old_media/filmes/american-splendor/american-splendor-poster01.jpg

American Splendor (Shari Springer Berman and Robert Pulcini, 2003) - 4

Decided to re-watch this to see whether it was worthy of a DVD purchase. I would say it is. Damned fine film, great acting (especially when you compare the actors to their real-life counterparts appearing in the film) and the delightfully unique filmmaking approach. Probably one of my favourite films of the decade.

http://thecia.com.au/reviews/c/images/cat-on-a-hot-tin-roof-poster-0.jpg

Cat On A Hot Tin Roof (Richard Brooks, 1958) - 3.5

I hadn't planned on watching this, but I was flicking across channels and stopped on TCM just as it was starting. Needless to say, I stopped flicking for most of the movie and managed to watch. A fine little film with some great performances from Paul Newman and Burl Ives (to say nothing of Liz Taylor) and it was just a good adaptation of a great play.

http://www.orgs.bucknell.edu/hilltop/index_files/rosemary%27s%20baby.jpg

Rosemary's Baby (Roman Polanski, 1968) - 3.5

It may be a horror film that burns so slow that it makes The Exorcist seem like The Evil Dead in comparison, but to say it doesn't inspire even the slightest unease would be lying. I have some issues with it (what little music there is really jars with the film) but for the most part it's very well-made, managing not to jump headlong into supernatural craziness, and well-acted by just about everybody in the film. The ending was certainly a surprise.

http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/library/sc/posters/web/Picture72.jpg

Room At The Top (Jack Clayton, 1959) - 4

One of the things that can really determine the entertainment value of a film is how late at night I can watch it and still be gripped from start to finish. Room at the Top started playing on TV at about 1 in the morning, yet it was paced so well that I almost didn't notice just how well it managed to keep a tight hold on my interest for two hours. The writing was strong and tightly paced, and the film was shot to match, with the story moving along at a surprising speed. The photography was decent, as was the general acting. Despite coming close to delving into basic melodrama, it never quite jumped the shark and stayed a good film. Highly recommended.

[Prospero]

http://www.bnl.lu/new/nos_select/media/images/kelly.jpg

Singin' In The Rain (Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly, 1952) - 4

I don't really need to explain this one, but whatever. I was under the impression that I'd never actually seen this film from start to finish (only getting shown most of it in class a couple of years back), so I decided that I needed to give it a proper viewing. Just as well - Singin' In The Rain is just plain old-fashioned musical fun, it never drags (although stopping the main film's plot for the "Broadway Melody" mini-movie towards the end feels like a conspicuous attempt to stretch the film out, in spite of the sequence's quality), but I'm not complaining. Kelly's awesome, although I doubt I'm alone in thinking that Donald O'Connor practically steals the show (or maybe they're both equally brilliant). The writing's also surprisingly clever and funny. Basically, this is about as entertaining as you could really hope for any movie to be.
My favorite musical. Period. Yeah, Kelly and O'Connor are both great, but I don't think Jean Hagen gets nearly enough credit for her hilarious turn as the villainess Lina Lamont. I'm glad you liked it; that rating should be just a tad higher, tho. :D



http://thecia.com.au/reviews/c/images/cat-on-a-hot-tin-roof-poster-0.jpg

Cat On A Hot Tin Roof (Richard Brooks, 1958) - 3.5

I hadn't planned on watching this, but I was flicking across channels and stopped on TCM just as it was starting. Needless to say, I stopped flicking for most of the movie and managed to watch. A fine little film with some great performances from Paul Newman and Burl Ives (to say nothing of Liz Taylor) and it was just a good adaptation of a great play.
Another great movie. If you liked this, you should also check out The Long, Hot Summer, released the same year.


http://www.orgs.bucknell.edu/hilltop/index_files/rosemary%27s%20baby.jpg

Rosemary's Baby (Roman Polanski, 1968) - 3.5

It may be a horror film that burns so slow that it makes The Exorcist seem like The Evil Dead in comparison, but to say it doesn't inspire even the slightest unease would be lying. I have some issues with it (what little music there is really jars with the film) but for the most part it's very well-made, managing not to jump headlong into supernatural craziness, and well-acted by just about everybody in the film. The ending was certainly a surprise.
I agree with pretty much everything you said about this one; yeah, it's slow, but the suspense is incredible. And no, I didn't see the ending coming either.

[Iroquois]

Good call on Hagen. Definitely doesn't get enough credit for being a delightfully comic antagonist. And yeah, the rating should definitely be higher - thing is I've kind of developed a habit of giving ratings out of 4 to most movies I'm watching for the first time (got this idea from a different MoFo). Take that as you will - it's still an excellent film despite its admittedly minor flaws.

[42ndStreetFreak]

I've been naughty.
I've been neglecting my 'to watch' DVD pile in favour of roaming the post-apocalyptic wastes via the XBox in "Fallout 3: Game of the Year Edition".
But a few days of constant pain in my arm (old you know....so damn old) has forced me to stop twiddling knobs and finally get around to watching a film....So I chose.................


"Rope" - 2

Two intellectually warped young men strangle a colleague, just before holding a party for the dead man's family and friends, and hide the body in a chest in the middle of the room.
Also on the guest list is their old University Professor with a sharp eye and a sharp brain....


Famously an exercise in technicality where the illusion that (almost) all a film was shot in one long take was tried out on Joe Public.
But it never really works.

Much of the 'Stage Play/One-Take' set-up serves no purpose either artistically or dramatically and often the hidden 'breaks' in this one-take illusion are glaringly and jarringly clumsy.
When Hitchcock's roaming camera first zooms in on a guy's back to hide the cut it works fine. But repeat it 2 or 3 times more and it becomes annoying and sticks out painfully, surely even for 40's audiences.
It seems Hitch was trying something for Joe Public who may have not seen the obvious, but any cineaste would.
And (although not the film's fault) time and technique has moved on and as such these trite little tricks simply don't fool a modern audience.
So, literally, all we are left with now are 4 or so pointless and clumsy zooms into a character's back.
This is made even more bizarre in the fact that, despite all this 'hiding' of the cuts, Hitchcock makes two other clear and open cuts during the film in two scenes (one cut to Stewart the other to the maid) which make you wonder why he wobbled into the backs of people's jackets to hide the others anyway!

The film also lacks that vital Homosexual aspect to make the storyline really take hold.
Hints (like when the maid says "they got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning") are dropped here and there that the two lead murderers (Farley Granger and John Dall, based on the real Leopold-Loeb murders) are indulging in one of those achingly pretentious romps through intellectual Homosexuality, but it's perhaps too subtle (must have been even more obscure for general Joe Public in 1948) and this is made worse by the fact that James Stewart, as their old university Professor, really should be Homosexual too and have this link with the killers.
But hey, it's James Stewart!
You could not have picked a more cleaner cut, family friendly, populist actor (utterly wonderful though he was) for such a role. As such that Homosexual link, and thus perhaps even a University affair, with the killers is simply not there.
Edges are being crucially blunted.

Interestingly, according to the DVD interview with the writer, the actual seeing of the murder in the opening seconds, was a later addition by Hitchcock.
The writer had it so we never see the murder so that we are never actually sure if there even has been a murder, let alone if a body is hidden in plain sight in the room.
This would have changed the dynamic of the film massively, but it would have again added another layer to the plot and make for a bigger reveal at the end.
What you would have lost though, without this certainty, is the wonderful black humour and crucial sadistic games that are played (both visual and verbal) with the fact that there is indeed a body whose 'coffin' is being used to serve food from (to the corpse's Father no less) and that the sly remarks about the dead character being late are indeed in the worst of taste.
Things that keep the rest of the film actually interesting and entertaining even if a crucial edge of tension is lost because of it.

As far as acting goes everyone does well with John Dall really standing out. Granger though (whose career would gleefully slide down hill into astonishingly exploitative Euro shockers like "So Sweet, So Dead" and full-on gore violence like "The Prowler") seems to push it all too much.
His character is simply too unwound and uncertain to have ever actually committed the murder. That his character is a coward as far as getting caught goes is just fine if it does not get highlighted too strongly, here though it is. He also often shows a really out of place moral repugnance to the crime...Self-serving cowardice yes, but morality from someone who planned and carried out a thrill-kill murder? it does not wash.

Stewart is as watchable as always, but he seems ot be strangley mugging for the camera during his early scenes. Sometimes literally so as there are at least two occasions where he nervously glancers at and off camera.

The screenplay also seems to want to have its cake and eat it.
The shockingly explicit, uber-fascist and chillingly cold-blooded, intellectual reasoning used by the murderers for committing the crime, and for indeed not seeing it as a crime, are a kind of (only 3 years after the War) Nazi wet dream rhetoric which must have been quite strong and brutally realistic at, and for, that time.
And that such thoughts have been put into (the admittedly damaged already) minds of the killers by their Professor, played of course by Stewart, opens up some very dark and deep waters indeed.
And let us not beat around the bush here, Stewarts' views are indeed twisted and explicit and phrases along the lines of 'intellectuals and superiors have every right to commit murder' and that how 'they are the only ones really suitable to murder another 'inferior' are clear and precise.
And this is James Stewart (WW2 hero as well as clean-cut actor) saying these things, and these things have indeed been the reasoning for an actual murder.
But then we have some shoe-horned in preaching from Stewart to clear his character of any true blame, when the film has him state that the killers have 'twisted' his words and that they took them to a level that was never meant to be (step right up the same excuse used today by any and all apologists for religious crimes).
And although Stewart does take the blame for expressing beliefs that he now sees could indeed have been twisted into this crime...the film simply ignores the basic fact that his teachings never needed any twisting at all, or that they were in any way obscure or open to any other interpretation (step right up again the same excuse used today by any and all apologists for religious crimes).
The screenplay makes Stewart explicit in his words, and thus explicit in his part on the murder, but then decides to change its mind.
But this part never stands up and just seems to be there (although it may have been in the script/original play already) because James stewart could not be seen as that malignant a character.

We have some positives though.
The famous 'outside in the city' set view from the apartment window is well done and is very clever as it literally goes from afternoon to night before our eyes as lights comes on and clouds move.
The support cast is great (nice work from, a rather old looking, Sir Cedric Hardwick as the victim's Father and Edith Evanson as the maid) and some of the interplay and especially the twisted humour is wonderful in that Hitchcock way with playing with the most macabre of events.
The whole chest with a body in it set-up is expertly used by Hitchcock, though again I think for more as a black joke than for really effective dramatic reasons because we know the body will not be found yet, no matter how many sequences of the chest nearly getting opened we have.
The pace is okay (though slowed by the one-take deal) and some nice atmosphere is built up in the apartment set as well as all these (damn fine to adequate) actors play around with the macabre set-up.

But the film still comes off as Hitch using other people's money to play around in his cinematic sandpit, and with much of the essential dramatic edges honed-down there is only the black humour and macabre trickery left to truly entertain us.

[Sleezy]

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/tristanisolde.jpg

Tristan & Isolde (Reynolds, 2006) 4

Some might think I'm too kind, but this film did a lot of things right for me. The story of Tristan and Isolde, an age-old tale of the Romeo & Juliet variety, hits close to home (I was once involved with someone I can no longer have). While their interaction onscreen consists mainly of sad sentences and long glances, you get the sense that there is a rare and timeless affection at work here. Sophia Myles, who possesses the uncommon trait of seeming wise beyond her years, helps that along. And admittedly, James Franco has really grown on me: his Tristan is pleasantly low-key, confident, and yet deeply wounded.

I love that it's just on the cusp of having an Indie feel: camerawork that lolls on the film's rich, beautiful landscape of somber blues and grays, and a hauntingly quiet soundtrack that feigns innocence but knows much more. The ambience of the film is just intoxicating, if only it had been embraced more. Reynolds too often retreats to conventional shots and presentation, rather than letting his world really stretch its artistic legs.

The script itself could have been tighter, but it never supercedes the core story with overly romanticized exposition. The characters are allowed to breathe, and the camera is allowed to roam. That's good stuff.

[mack]

Blood Diamond

Hounsou is given a particularly stereotypical and slight role ... yet he fills it up to brimming point. The confrontation with his own son ... is a rare moment where the dialogue is a match for his input.

:up: for that. Hounsou is one of few men who exudes this sense that he such a stand-up guy that you can watch him play a villain and end up feeling sympathetic to the bad guy - and cheering him on. Maybe its just me. :p

I"Rope" - 2

Two intellectually warped young men strangle a colleague, just before holding a party for the dead man's family and friends, and hide the body in a chest in the middle of the room.

:up: awesome film - one of my favs. great stuff.

Tristan & IsoldeAnd admittedly, James Franco has really grown on me: his Tristan is pleasantly low-key, confident, and yet deeply wounded.

:up: on the choice, Sleeze! But dont you think that Rufus Sewell gave Franco a real run for his money? I mean, you start out with your heart breaking for Franco, and then Sewell comes in and trumps him in every way. If Franco is sterling silver, Sewell is the polish that makes it shine. The one you really feel for is the girl, because she's in an impossible situation - at least her acting shows it that way. Great movie, if a little sappy, and weird what with the nuns getting naked with Franco. ;)

_________________________________
But for me:

Far Cry - 4/5
I know, I know. Before you slay me for giving a UWE BOLL movie such high honors, know that I have never played the game before, so the movie didnt have any expectations to live up to. Add to the fact that it is nothing more than an action flick with lesser actors - and you have your basic action film. Lets not get bent out of shape - this movie is nothing more than it purports to be. All they needed to do was substitute Dolph Lundgren for the german guy who played the lead role, and it would have been comfortably B list. ... .... .... where it belonged! :D

[Sleezy]

:up: on the choice, Sleeze! But dont you think that Rufus Sewell gave Franco a real run for his money? I mean, you start out with your heart breaking for Franco, and then Sewell comes in and trumps him in every way. If Franco is sterling silver, Sewell is the polish that makes it shine.

You're right, it was nice to see Sewell play someone other than an insufferable prick for a change. :laugh: He really is a likeable guy, and in this I loved how his character created depth to keep the love triangle being so typical. Nobody is really the bad guy; it's just an unfortunate circumstance. That's far more realistic than we usually get from Hollywood.

Great movie, if a little sappy, and weird what with the nuns getting naked with Franco. ;)

Hey, they had to keep him warm, right? ;)

I have never played the game before, so the movie didnt have any expectations to live up to.

There was really nothing to live up to anyway. Far Cry is pretty much killing about bad guys, blowing stuff up, and not much else. It's an excuse for a shameless action game, and in that sense, I guess Uwe Boll hit the mark. :laugh: (Although, it's not like anything he was adapted really had any substance in the source material anyway.)

[Loner]

I've been naughty.
I've been neglecting my 'to watch' DVD pile in favour of roaming the post-apocalyptic wastes via the XBox in "Fallout 3: Game of the Year Edition".
But a few days of constant pain in my arm (old you know....so damn old) has forced me to stop twiddling knobs and finally get around to watching a film....So I chose.................


"Rope" - 2

Have you seen Swoon?

[42ndStreetFreak]

Have you seen Swoon?


No. Had to look it up even. Sounds interesting, especially the way it supposedly tackles the fact they got life not a death sentence because their Homosexuality meant they were insane!
:p :rolleyes:

[linespalsy]

Recently saw

liked all of these.

Gran Torino
Captains Courageous
Blood Tea and Red String

Rewatched (and liked)
This is England
Throw Momma From the Train 4

[Harry Lime]

Am I the only person (other than my bro) that didn't like Gran Torino?

[jrs]

Am I the only person (other than my bro) that didn't like Gran Torino?


I enjoyed it immensely. But the world's a big place. I doubt you two are the only people. lol

[Sleezy]

Am I the only person (other than my bro) that didn't like Gran Torino?

It's still in my stack to watch, but I'm thinking it might not impress me either. As a rule, I'm usually underwhelmed by Clint Eastwood's pictures. Not that I think they're bad... I don't (and I respect the hell out of Eastwood himself). I don't know, they're just too direct for me. They always shoot right between the eyes. Never much subtlety.

[meatwadsprite]

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:F8zYtXr4FdahVM:http://www.impawards.com/2009/posters/funny_people.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:H2CWCLLw8uHIeM:http://crashlanden.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/funnypeople1.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ce4XzEqLfBVRvM:http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/Previews/Funny-People-movie-u37.jpg

Funny People 2009

For the first time in Apatow's short history, the DVD release of his film is the definitive version rather than just the one with more stuff. It's only about 10 minutes longer than the theatrical one, but the added scenes don't only give some more depth into the characters but string the film together much more effectively.

4.5

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:-HMQLkRvFq67nM:http://7inch.dk/blog/modmodmod/files/2431981020a.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:-07mGLwqugoadM:http://www.coffeecoffeeandmorecoffee.com/archives/four%2520flies%2520on%2520gray%2520velvet%25202.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:x4lNl1gF994kxM:http://www.coffeecoffeeandmorecoffee.com/archives/four%2520flies%2520on%2520gray%2520velvet%25203.jpg

Four Flies on Gray Velvet 1972

Argento brings a lot of technical skill to this film and a decent script, but what the story calls for is top acting. This movie has terrible, stiff acting, and it's hard to watch and you'll guess the ending when these hilarious actors telegraph it 10 minutes in.

2

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Buoxb_pez44DVM:http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/averroes/iesmateoaleman/musica/documentos/3eso/Amadeus_verdad_o_ficcion_archivos/AMADEUS.JPG http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:yaTMcjE1_6bKRM:http://scrapetv.com/News/News%2520Pages/Entertainment/images-3/amadeus-movie.jpg

Amadeus 1984

... and now a reversal. No technical flair whatsoever, but the actors bring so much energy and fathomage that it's instantly an enjoyable film.

3.5

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:qF0TxMo-rBHctM:http://www.benortiz.com/writing/archives/hardboiled.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Rp-V0tG4QgdB8M:http://auteurs_production.s3.amazonaws.com/stills/33284/Film_09_HardBoiled.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:eM12t9A4yEkXCM:http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/protectedimage.php%3Fimage%3DMichaelSunda/HardBoiled_CE_02.jpg

Hard Boiled 1992

If only John Woo could write and tell a story as beautiful as his destructive action sequences. If you come for the shooting, prepare to suffer through the incongruity of usual action-movie logic.

2.5

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:2dg7edoIhSe8jM:http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/hot_fuzz_ver4.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:WDe47d0h9_PLCM:http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/776/776311/hot-fuzz-20070327033119365_640w.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:gMh9wHxVh3oHJM:http://www.cinemaisdope.com/news/films/darkknight/heath_ledger_the_joker.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:8P3GGAD81mLheM:http://rvivekshanmugam.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/the_dark_knight_poster1.jpg

Hot Fuzz and The Dark Knight

I am a giant fan of blow-em up, shoot-em up, intense action movies, it's a shame there only a tiny handful of quality ones. Hot Fuzz is a clever, hilarious, sensible story that feeds and prospers off the stupidity that comes with the genre. The reason for it's greatness is it doesn't halt at mocking action-movies, it shows them how it IS done. The Dark Knight is another action movie that doesn't let up it, in it's intensity or quality.

5

[Prospero]

Here's a couple of oldies I caught on TCM recently. Not first viewings, but they certainly renewed my appreciation for the films.

http://img.listal.com/image/404519/600full-the-hunchback-of-notre-dame-photo.jpg
The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1939)
Dir: William Dieterle

"I'm not a man. I'm not a beast. I'm about as shapeless as the man in the moon!" So says the deaf, horribly disfigured Quasimodo to the object of his affections, Esmeralda, who is a s beautiful as he is ugly.

I haven't seen the 1923 silent version of Victor Hugo's story with Lon Chaney, but I can't imagine it can be any better than this, with Charles Laughton giving a stupendous, heartbreaking performance as Quasimodo. In fact, everyone in this movie shines, from Maureen O'Hara as Esmerelda, the gypsy who is framed for murder by the lustful Frollo (Cedric Hardwicke), to Thomas Mitchell as Clopin, the King of the Beggars (the scene in the Court of Miracles is one of my favorites). Top 100 stuff, no question.
5


http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/cagney2.jpg
White Heat (1949)
Dir: Raoul Walsh

James Cagney always played a great gangster, and his performance in White Heat is no exception, where he portrays Cody Jarrett, a psychopatth with a serious mother fixation. Unlike The Hunchback of Notre Dame, whose ensemble cast is in no small part responsible for its greatness, White Heat succeeds mostly because of Cagney's white hot performance. Not that the rest of the cast aren't good; they are. It's just that Cagney lights up the screen with every scene he's in while never seeming to overact (although I'm sure there are some folks who will disagree with that). Margaret Wycherly as Ma Jarrett (supposedly based on the real-life Ma Barker) is especially good, too.

My only real qulam with the film is that Edmond O'Brien is miscast as Vic Pardo, the undercover cop who befriends Jarrett and works his way into the gang. O'Brien is just too sympathetic an actor to pull it off, and frankly I don't think he hold his own with Cagney in the scenes they share. Now if it had been Humphrey Bogart or George Raft in that role, that might bump my rating up considerably.
3.5++ (almost 4/5)

[Tacitus]

The September Issue (2009, RJ Cutler)

2.5/5

I've always wondered where old models went to die. In career terms, that is.

Obviously. :p

Visions of herds of equine-faced, willowy women being put out to grass on some great quorn ranch somewhere in the Elysian suburbs sprang fleetingly to mind before watching The September Issue, a look at how American Vogue is put together, brought my brain back down with a bump.

They all seem to waft around the corridors of fashion magazines.

The September Issue is proficiently enough put together and centres on Head Mistress/Editor, owner of a fierce bob and a stare that could kill a junior photographer at 100 paces, Anna Wintour. The world is a lot more clinical than my admittedly low-brow expectations (think the wondrous Ab Fab and the 20 minutes of Ugly Betty I could manage before collapsing in a catatonic stupor) had led me to believe, with Wintour's icy determination seemingly always winning over the more artistic gaze of her 2nd in command, Grace Coddington.

The flame-haired Grace is, seemingly, one of the few vertebrates to occupy Vogue Towers (or whatever it's called - Dunvogue-in?) apart from the boss herself. She's lovely, and has an eye for a shot that 90% of Hollywood directors would kill for...

Anyway, it's a decent enough doc but we learn almost nothing about what makes Wintour tick. Of course, this is probably the exact effect she had in mind. ;)

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b69/greenspagbol/SeptemberIssue-2.jpg

[Iroquois]

http://www.jewishjournal.com/images/bloggers_auto/Zombieland.jpg

Zombieland (Ruben Fleischer, 2009) - 3.5

Finally got to see this after a good few months of waiting (and trying not to learn the guest star's identity) - and was admittedly let down. I wasn't really expecting it to be scary, but I was expecting it to be funny, and while it was definitely amusing, there wasn't really anything that was laugh-out-loud funny. It's a shame, really, considering that the film's actually pretty aptly handled on most (if not all) counts, but it's not great. As a result, it stays a fairly enjoyable experience, but I just get the feeling it missed out on some seriously untapped potential.

http://streetlegalplay.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/sid_and_nancy_poster.jpg

Sid and Nancy (Alex Cox, 1986) - 3

Alex Cox's sophomore effort might be the "best" film he's ever made in terms of objective value. The film tells the story of the eponymous duo - Sex Pistols bassist Sid Vicious (a surprisingly good Gary Oldman) and his girlfriend, American groupie Nancy Spungen (Chloe Webb) - in a pretty typical "based-on-a-true-story" manner, focusing more on the relationship between the two than the rise and fall of the Pistols and Vicious himself. It's a pretty simplistic story, not just of a very irrational love story, but also a surprisingly harsh portrait of the punk scene that the characters loved so much. Honourable mentions must go to the cinematography (done by, believe it or not, Roger Deakins) and the soundtrack, which alternates between classic 70s music and Joe Strummer's original score.

http://imagecache5.art.com/p/LRG/10/1032/ETFL000Z/a-night-at-the-opera.jpg

A Night At The Opera (Sam Wood, 1935) - 2.5

I know I'm going out on a limb by giving one of the Marx Brothers' best films a relatively low rating, but that is how I feel about it. I went in expecting a full-blown comedy along the lines of Duck Soup, yet I got a lot of singing and musical performances by various characters (this shouldn't have surprised me when you consider the film's title) that, although not exactly bad, were really just distracting from the comedy. Even then, the comedy didn't really feel that funny - granted, there were some good parts but they were spread too thin. Some jokes didn't go anywhere and even some of the more basic types of humour (like the physical type, often involving Harpo in some manner) just fell flat for me. Granted, because it's surprisingly well-written and there's a couple of decent parts, plus it's the Marx Brothers, I'll grant it some leniency, but still, I was expecting a lot better.

http://www.woodyallenmovies.com/gifs/p/ma_us2.gif

Manhattan (Woody Allen, 1979) - 3

I don't really think that much of Woody Allen. Granted, he's got a fair bit of talent and his films, if nothing else, are at least something distinct and out of the ordinary. Simple answer would be that I just don't "get" him - or want to "get" him. I'm not sure. In any case, as with Annie Hall, I was left with a feeling of "this is it?". The monochromatic photography wasn't that impressive, although I thought the performances and writing were rather decent. However, I seriously doubt I'll be heading back to this one anytime in the foreseeable future.

[ravr12]

American pie: The book of love
had a laugh :D

[Classicqueen13]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_gDRC-ZB62kU/Sq2Mu5jIYaI/AAAAAAAAB-E/_t6EZqxfssc/s320/the_Big_Country-poster.jpg

William Wyler gives beautiful direction to this tale. The cast is great including a few big names. Gregory Peck gives perhaps one of his best performances, and Charlton Heston is perfect for his role. A lot of deep character development in this movie may be part of why it's so enjoyable. Like many westerns, part of the plot is a struggle over the land but there are a few other side stories as well. A few good jokes fall into the excellent script. It was a little on the long side, but I'd definately reccomend it.

The Big Country: 4

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_kRKai8rGj9w/RwYVVzTi0jI/AAAAAAAABNE/Gi7I47AdBlg/s320/The+Usual+Suspects+-+Soundtrack.jpg

A suspenseful crime drama that will probably become a little better with repeated viewings. It is true that the first time you watch this movie, you have only a slight idea of exactly what is going on. The twist ending, as someone here mentioned, has almost been repeated and used in other places too much. A superb cast that includes an incredible performance by Kevin Spacey. Some neat direction techiniques throughout and a pretty creepy musical score are also included. Liked it very well.

The Usual Suspects: 4

http://img.maniadb.com/images/album/149/149997_f_1.jpg

A very likable comedy. I hardly remember the original, but I checked this one out. Selleck is the best choice to play the quiet Peter. Guttenburg's role is pretty small, but he captures his charcter. Danson is hilarious as the goofy Jack. The script is filled with laughs even though is plot is pretty predictable. There's of course some family cheesiness but it isn't too much. Not a piece of cinematic history or anything, but a fun flick that's worth the time.

Three Men and A Little Lady: 3.5

Spent a lot of time decorating this week so I didn't get to watch as many movies

[TheUsualSuspect]

Fantastic Mr. Fox

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v118/layden/fantastic-mr-fox-3.jpg

Giving up his life of a chicken thief because of a child on the way, Mr. Fox gets a job as a newspaper writer and lives underground. Years pass, he child is older and he wants to move to a tree and not feel poor anymore. Along the way he takes in his nephew and decides to steal again, from the three biggest farmers. The farmers get wise and start a battle against Mr. Fox, his family and all their creature friends.

At first I didn't know if I wanted to see this, the animation looked really bad. But after thinking about it for a bit, I found that it fit into Anderson's style, it was something that he would do. So I gave the film a shot and I'm glad I did. This film has Anderson's signature style all over it, right down to the obvious voice casting, which has the likes of George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray, Michael Gambon, Owen Wilson, and Willem Dafoe.

A lot of people, and I'm including myself in this bunch, might think nothing of this film. After all, it doesn't have the bright, adventurous feel of the recent Disney/Pixar films that have been dominating the animation scene. I'd even throw Dreamworks into that bunch. Those films are done by people who are at ease in their field, animated director like Brad Bird and John Lasseter know their way around the animation style. Yet here comes auteur Wes Anderson, who has a unique style and sense of comedy. His transition to animation, stop motion animation no less, is smart, funny and a pleasure. Is it his best film? Of course not, but it's one of the more enjoyable ones.

The voice cast all work well, Clooney does a good job as the lead. He has that leadership tone in his voice, that arrogance that is needed for the character. Streep isn't given much to do, so her role as the wife is pretty basic, as is the character. Their son Ash, voice by Bored To Death star Jason Schwartzman was a stand out for me, as was Eric Chase Anderson, as Kristofferson. That name might not sound familiar, that's because his resume only consists of Anderson films. Bill Murray plays a badger and Fox's lawyer, who advises him not to buy the tree house. Fox does anyway and that's why he's in this mess. The animals are really small and live in this world where there are apparently small motorbikes for them to use. They can communicate with the human characters, no one seems to find it odd in this little world they live in. You won't find it odd either, you'll just be enjoying the fun.

Each chapter is subtitled, Fox's Master Plan A, Fox's Master Plan B, etc. They even tell you how time passes in human years and fox years and in a comical bit one human hour compare to one fox hour. You never know how long these hours are in comparison to each other, you don't want to know either, it just adds to the uniqueness of the film. At heart, these characters are still wild animals, as Fox even says this in the film, and the way they eat and "fight" each other proves this.

The film has that Anderson humour and might go over some kids heads. It's dark in some places, as one character dies, but I think they will enjoy it. They won't jump up and down for it like Up, or Finding Nemo. They won't want to go out and buy the latest Mr. Fox stuffed animal or toy. This feels more like a film for adults, it doesn't really cater to the kids, but they will have their bits to laugh at, like the possum who stares blankly at some people for whatever reason.

This film was made from scratch, this world Anderson creates is fun and I had a fun time being in it. The film flies by it's running time and I never found the film dragging. It was in and out. As stated before, the kids might enjoy this, but it's more for adults. There's smoking and there's even a unique way of swearing, which I found funny. The camera movements scream Wes Anderson and if you're a fan, then you will enjoy this very much.

One of my favourite films of the year.

4

Slackers

http://www.availableimages.com/images/previews/Slackers%20(2002).jpg

The film is amusing and Devon Sawa plays himself, yet again, in this teen comedy fare that takes place in College. The story centres around these three guys who cheat their way (elaborately) throughout college. This one 'loser' who calls himself Cool Ethan (played by Jason Schwartzman in a stand out role, discovers this and blackmails them in order to get a date with this hot chick that he is stalking. I use the term stalking loosely, he has a shrine dedicated to her, a video of her playing in this shrine 24/7 and he collects her hair all over campus and made a hair doll that he sleeps with/talks to and uses to masturbate. Weird right?

Formulaic script goes on and Sawa falls in love with the girl he was paid to seduce for Schwartzman. She discovers this and hates him, he has to do something romantic and win her back, yawn. Jason Segel is one of the three 'slackers' before his rise to fame and right after his role Freaks and Geeks. It's nothing big, just a supporting role.

The film is really weird and out there, even for a teen comedy. One of the slackers, the ginger one, sings to his penis...and his penis literally sings back to him. He has a sock on it and it sings, mouth moves and everything. Why is this scene here? What does it do for the film? I have no idea. This character is weird and funny though, one standout scene is when he has to finish an exam and the teacher calls for pencils down. He continues to write and flips off the teacher, the teacher yells that he has failed. When he walks up to the desk the teachers says don't even bother handing it in, the ginger asks if he even knows who he is. The teachers replies no, so the kid throws his paper in the middle of the pile of tests and throws them around, then runs away. Funny and something I can see actually happening....singing penis, not so much.

I did laugh, mainly because Schwartzman stole the film. Segel has gone on to be a part of a hit show and a regular for the Apatow crew. Schwartzman has a new show on television and has his bits with Wes Anderson. Sawa? I don't even know what he's doing anymore. He has his fame when he was younger and the girls wanted him. He got ugly and fell off the map. I wanted more of their elaborate cheating schemes and less of the love story that doesn't make sense. They love each other after two or three dates?

2.5


Fright Night

http://www.shockya.com/news/wp-content/uploads/fright_night_movie_still.jpg

After his new neighbour moves in, Charlie thinks he's a vampire.

That is Fright Night in a nutshell and the film is great eighties horror camp. Along with the Lost Boys this vampire romp is something I can watch over and over. Sarandon is Jerry the vampire is sexy and hellish. His good looks and calm demeanor is great, he oozes cool in this film. Roddy McDowall is great as Peter Vincent, Vampire Killer. The only drawback to the cast is the annoying friend Evil Ed, who is now doing gay porn. Also, to some degree Charlie Brewster himself, who I thought was an idiot.

The special effects are pure eighties and still rock to this day. I'd rather watch this film than Twilight anyday for effects....for story....for pretty much anything. Hell, even the wolf transformation is better than the stupid one from American Werewolf in Paris.

It's cheesy b-horror movie entertainment. Characters do stupid things, there's craziest effects, pure eighties soundtrack, nudity, and vampires. Good mix for a good film.

3

[ravr12]

Bad Lieutenant(2009) &The Warriors


Both awesome movies.

[TheUsualSuspect]

The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v118/layden/Bad-Lieutenant-Port-of-Call-New-Orl.jpg

If you want to see Nic Cage before he became the Hollywood money hungry actor that we've seen lately (Ghost Rider, Bangkok Dangerous, Next, The Wicker Man) then go watch this movie. It's basically Nic Cage snorting coke and freaking out for 2 hours. The thing that made us (well some of us) love him in the first place.

The trailer made the film look ridiculously bad and funny. Yet the film is seriously not. Sure there are moments where you laugh because of the ridiculousness of it all, but it's not as out there as I expected. Cage is high 90% of the film, freaks out about iguanas that might not be there, shoot a guys dead soul that is break dancing and have sex with a girl while point a gun at her boyfriend. Did I forget to mention call two elderly ladies the famous C word and cut off one of their oxygen tubes? He's nuts and it's great watching him in this role.

The rest of the cast is by the numbers. Eva Mendes is the hooker girlfriend who seems to have a little bit of a character arc near the end of the film, something that seems thrown in to add more depth to a character that had none to begin with. Val Kilmer pops up at the beginning and the end, I wanted more of him as his character was interesting.

Things go from bad to worse for Cage's character. He rightfully deserves it, after all he's a 'bad lieutenant'. There are multiple things going on around his character. He has to solve a murder of a family that was basically executed. He has to take care of his hooker 'girlfriend' after a client has a bad time with her and calls in some thugs to take care of things, his father goes to AA meetings, he has a drug and gambling habit. Tons of stuff goes on in this movie and i didn't know how it would all get resolved, but it does, in a comical way.

I would recommend it, only because people will think it will be horrendously bad and be pleasantly surprised. I sure was.

3.5

[Pyro Tramp]

I'm undecided on the flick, considering it's allegedly not meant to be a remake, there are some very similar scenes. It wasn't the disaster expected but can't decide if i liked it. Wasn't sure on the very drab 'shot-for-tv' aesthetic and the focus was too much on Cage to develop any other characters

[Harry Lime]

My viewings for the week...
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/1kingsandqueen.jpg
Kings and Queen (2005, Arnaud Desplechin) 3
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/2papillon.jpg
Papillon (1973, Franklin J. Schaffner) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/3theinternational.jpg
The International (2009, Tom Tykwer) 2
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/4thebiggundown.jpg
The Big Gundown (1966, Sergio Sollima) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/5classetousrisques.jpg
Classe tous risques (1960, Claude Sautet) 3.5
http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww56/harrylime49/6thelookout.jpg
The Lookout (2007, Scott Frank) 3

[meatwadsprite]

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ddUQsbX6dLClLM:http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/bad_lieutenant_poster.jpg http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:2e8bVKl0X8c1CM:http://www.regrettablesincerity.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Bad-Lieutenant-Port-of-Call-New-Orleans1.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:CgR8wDix1QGadM:http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2009/9/7/1252330988831/Bad-Lieutenant-Port-of-Ca-001.jpg

Bad Lieutenant : Port of call New Orleans 2009

Nicholas Cage plays an epic *******, offering a darkly humorous story about a cop who breaks every rule. Herzog doesn't really capture the addiction or any effects of longing, but even if it isn't a movie miracle, it's really fun.

3.5

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Nrkr6xIBzj_AbM:http://transracial.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/sugar-movie-poster-1.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:fXjwTHGeJLHZCM:http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0d4Zeb1bNR7Xd/610x.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:o92taoDqH6OQ_M:http://www.indiewire.com/images/uploads/iw9/movies/sugar_iw.jpg

Sugar 2009

A long story that's so real, it's almost boring. Soto keeps it interesting enough to stay though, the language barrier as well crams some laughter into the duller parts.

3

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:awjZYFdA7soK4M:http://www.acdrifter.com/Asian-Cinema-Film-Movie-Poster/114/Thirst.png http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Ql9lb4XrHkW9nM:http://www.movieroar.com/images/6-21.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:X_myNE6cM36RLM:http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/thirst.jpg

Thirst 2009

Park Chan Wook tells a story about the temptation of a priest in the cheapest way he can, with vampires. I really have no appreciation for the vampire mythology, it's never poetic in films. The reason why this is the best vampire movie, is because of how much it doesn't have to do with them.

3

[meatwadsprite]

Am I the only person (other than my bro) that didn't like Gran Torino?

Really don't care for Eastwood as a director, Unforgiven is awesome and Mystic River's fine - but the rest of his stuff is cheesy like this

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:0HgRUcLSMHcyjM:http://www.astro.uni-bonn.de/~mnord/brunost/cheese/pictures/cheese-2473.jpg

[Sedai]

Cheese just doesn't apply here. Pick a different way to rag on the guy, please. How are his films cheesy?

Meanwhile:

The Bishops Wife (Koster, 1947) 4

http://lorilynh.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c528b53ef010536254af9970b-800wi

An old fashioned Christmas tale, this was just a tad too sentimental for my taste, and I still enjoyed watching it. The cast was fantastic, of course.


Stardust (Vaughn, 2007) 2_5++

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/ginnyskywalker/stardust1.jpg

Lisa loved this flick, and was raving about it after it was over, but I never really warmed up to it. I liked it OK, but I felt that, like the Narnia stuff, they just didn't flesh out the fantasy world enough to draw me in. Some of the characters were fun, sure, and I do feel that they had a good script to work from, to a certain extent, but... I dunno, hard to put my finger on exactly what it was that sort of turned me off from this one. I did like the way it poked fun at the genre; that was some clever stuff, for sure. I really like Claire Danes, and I liked her in it...and yet....

[Tacitus]

I could see why the occasional oddbody wouldn't like Clint the director because his stuff is usually constructed in a pretty conventional manner. He's an artisan rather than an artist and has surrounded himself with a fantastic crew over the years. I'm pretty certain that he wouldn't mind a bit if the films he's directed were simply referred to as Malpaso Productions rather than have his name hanging over them.

I love the unfussiness, the simplicity of his best work and still enjoy his 'lesser' films. There's something .. well .. a bit old-fashioned about Clint (and why should he change at this stage of his life?) which I really dig.

[WBadger]

I have never seen a cheesy Eastwood film, I am fine with somebody not liking him but that just makes no sense to me how any of his films can be described as cheesy.

Carry on.

[Caitlyn]

Public Enemies (2009)

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii140/faisaljan/public_enemies_002.jpg

Historical inaccuracies aside, I liked this as long as I could get past Bale's accent... which, to me, sounded just like what it was... a non-southerner trying to imitate a southern accent...

4

[Caitlyn]

Really don't care for Eastwood as a director, Unforgiven is awesome and Mystic River's fine - but the rest of his stuff is cheesy like this

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:0HgRUcLSMHcyjM:http://www.astro.uni-bonn.de/~mnord/brunost/cheese/pictures/cheese-2473.jpg


Clint Eastwood and cheese do not belong in the same sentence unless you add a bottle of Chardonnay...

[Harry Lime]

Letters from Iwo Jima? Definitely not cheezy.

[meatwadsprite]

I've only seen Clint's latest couple films, most of them which felt completely contrived and soul-less. Million Dollar Baby and Flags of our Fathers had so little personality poured to them, I can't even remember what they were about. Sometimes he picks a great actor and gets a great performance out of them (bunch of them in Mystic River), then there's times like Gran Torino - where he picks terrible actors and turns out something really fake.

[mark f]

That's an interesting comment. I thought the acting in Mystic River was pretty lousy myself, especially by Penn, Robbins, Linney and Harden; way-over-the-top, so let's give them Oscars or at least a nomination.

[Sleezy]

That's an interesting comment. I thought the acting in Mystic River was pretty lousy myself, especially by Penn, Robbins, Linney and Harden; way-over-the-top, so let's give them Oscars or at least a nomination.

Yeah, I thought Robbins was tolerable, but the rest were definitely pushing it. But then again, much of what these characters experience - their friendships, Dave's ordeal, Sean's career, Jimmy's life of crime/relationship with his daughter - all go unseen. I hate when movies try to operate on a supposed "past" because there's almost always a disconnect, unless the film actually takes us back and shows us why these long-past memories and events are suddenly relevant today.

Otherwise it's just a character saying, "Things aren't like they used to be. You remember, don't ya?" And I'm going, "No. Hey, I wonder if Mythbusters is on."

[Iroquois]

http://reelstyle.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/puberty-blues1.jpg

Puberty Blues (Bruce Beresford, 1981) - 2.5

Puberty Blues tells the story of two teenage girls growing up in 1970s Australia, trying to fit in with the popular "surfie" crowd and enjoy your typical rebellious youth existence (and all the ups and downs thereof). This is a film that gets hailed as one of the best coming-of-age films to come out of Australia, yet when you get right down to it, it's not really anything special. I guess this begs the question as to what does make a film like this special - maybe the general lack of any other classic "Aussie teen" film, leaving this to fill the void. It goes for a sense of realism, which is sort of a double-edged sword when it comes to teen movies. On one hand, yeah, it's realistic about these kids and the ups and downs of their reality - on the other hand, so what? There are some interesting moments in the film, but overall it feels a little long for its 87 minutes and revolves around the generally monotonous day-to-day life of the characters in between the occasional "event".

http://filmstudentcentral.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/boound-movie-poster1.jpg

Bound (Wachowski brothers, 1996) - 3

What initially comes across as a low-rent softcore thriller trading off the sensationalist lesbian relationship at the heart of the film actually turned out to be a decent suspense thriller. Bound trades off some well-worn staples of suspense thrillers and crafts a film that, while derivative, is helped by the Wachowskis' attention to detail and careful plotting, making ample use of suspense while almost never delivering the predictable payoff. The film's also helped by the performances - Joe Pantoliano is the stand-out as the paranoid mob accountant, although the film's small cast all deliver decent turns.

http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/images/25kissme.jpg

Kiss Me Deadly (Robert Aldrich, 1955) - 3.5

I tend to think of classic noir as a very dependable sub-genre of film. Virtually every film is the same as the last one, but they're invariably entertaining little romps that never disappoint when it comes to a good yarn. Kiss Me Deadly is no exception, and it manages to be an exceptionally dirty noir film. The central murder mystery is great, plus the characters are great if a little reprehensible, plus the B-movie style is pitch-perfect.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Four Flies on Gray Velvet 1972

Argento brings a lot of technical skill to this film and a decent script, but what the story calls for is top acting. This movie has terrible, stiff acting, and it's hard to watch and you'll guess the ending when these hilarious actors telegraph it 10 minutes in.

2

Amadeus 1984

... and now a reversal. No technical flair whatsoever, but the actors bring so much energy and fathomage that it's instantly an enjoyable film.

3.5

I'd knock another .5 off "Four Flies".
It's pretty rubbish and is for me his worst early film, that's down there with his later crappy films.
NOT a lost gem.

But wtf? No technical flair in "Amadeus"? The film is a technical marvel.
Everything from the costumes, sets, lighting, editing, cinematography, sound editing and direction.
Yes it's wonderfully acted, but it's also a wonderous technical achievement.
The extended 'Requiem"/death bed sequence is a perfect mix of artistry and technical skill.

[TheUsualSuspect]

meat says a lot of random things that doesn't make sense. You just get use to it.

[meatwadsprite]

The film is a technical marvel.

I found it rather simple, the sound editing did stand out - but it didn't really look that great. All the colors are so dull and I can't agree at all with you on the lighting. Most of the scenes looked like they were shot in natural light.

[Golgot]

All the colors are so dull and I can't agree at all with you on the lighting. Most of the scenes looked like they were shot in natural light.

That's because they almost entirely were, including naturalistic candle light alone (as first pioneeringly pursued by Kubrick for Barry Lyndon). Ach well, it's a bit before your time ;)

[Golgot]

http://i46.tinypic.com/3586geu.jpg

A History of Violence

If it weren't for the opening scenes, revealing two demoralised but determined crims working their way through rural communities, you could be forgiven for thinking this was Cronenberg's Straight Story at first. There's a lot of coldly lit yet 'homely' time spent with Mortensen and family, but the agenda here seems to be to 'out' the violence contained in both the 'innocent' and the professionally deranged. The theme simmers away and stays with you, coloured by splashes of gore, and Mortensen shifts through shades of being with skill, but the whole experience left me somewhat cold, and even slightly bored. Was it because the 'banality of evil' was somewhat explored? Or because some of the scenarios are still fairly pat, with even amiable 69-sex feeling like an over-long attempt to hide the 'happy family' cliche being painted (even if it did serve to foreshadow a later scene).

Hurt's flamboyant turn as a hoodlum boss seemed bizarrely out of step with the pitch for realism: the previous picture of urbane isolation providing no safety from either internal or external aggression. It wasn't unwelcome, because the dowdy dailyness was kinda wearing, but seemed to undermine the patiently constructed tone none-the-less.

3+


http://i47.tinypic.com/oapsgm.jpg

Star Trek (2009)

Not much to say that hasn't been said. Lotsa fun in there, if a bit slight. Not helped by being clearly an 'intro' entry and sporting a weak baddie (mainly providing the handy way to re-imagine the franchise). Thought Urban did surprisingly well as Bones, (altho Pegg didn't make a huge impression for me - perhaps because he got lumbered with some of the more 'child end' humour?). Some of the attempts to "do what the originals couldn't" seemed to fail to me - the woman with the CGI-bulged eyes during the pregnancy bits was just distracting for example. Liked some other Abrams touches, like the 'camera tap' low-key 'organic' shakiness, and the lense flares were all fine with me. Also the 'magic' touch of getting the actors to stand on a mirror to film the free-fall scenes (altho the rubber mind bugs 'on a string' hat tip was fairly weak). Still kudos for going 'earthy' over 'CGI-blue-skies' where possible.

3_5+


http://i50.tinypic.com/zus585.jpg

The General (1926)

Despite having a ropey-seeming copy of this (very digitised & poor-seeming choice of music) it was still a pretty grand silent experience. I've seen some of the set-pieces before, which maybe took away some of the glamour, but loved the use of the trains in general - a perfect 'platform' fully exploited. Nothing on firm ground quite lived up to those 'chase sequences', although I liked the innovative-seeming 'burn hole' view of his 'second love' (the one who isn't a train), and the way weather was evoked.

The treatment of war was an intriguing side-note, with the opposition Unionists not demonised as such, and uber-patriotism on his own side getting some sideways blows (falling with the flag etc). Keaton gets to kill through misadventure as it were though, which has a strange flavour to it.

3_5++

[Caitlyn]

Der Himmel über Berlin (1987)

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm162/coll7777/WoD.jpg

Simply amazing... 5

[42ndStreetFreak]

Well, The Gods have seen fit to strike me down with much, constant, will sapping, pain running all the way from my left shoulder to my little itty bitty fingers.
As such my regular viewing write-ups (indeed viewings) have been severely compromised.
But I shall delve briefly into some recent screenings;


"Niagra" - 2

Not as good as I remembered. Marilyn Monroe makes for a rather weak femme fatale as she's far more femme than fatale.
Not much happens until the last 3rd and all of it is obvious.
But the cast, Monroe as a welcome sight and a couple of good sequences keep things ticking along.


"A Star is Born" (1954) - 3.5 (add another 0.5 if you're a big musical fan)

Previously made in a non-musical version in 1937 with Janet Gaynor and Fredric March and then later on in 1976 with Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson, this middle version, with Judy Garland and James Mason, of the well known story (about a new star discovered by a fading, self-destructive, one) is perhaps the most famous and lasting and with just cause.

As a very minor musical fan (and then mostly comedy musicals like "The Blues Brothers" or "Cannibal the Musical" or ones with an interesting story hook first, where the music is kept as a stage act, like "Cabaret"), I admit to winding through most of the 2 big musical numbers in this so what may have been a big plus in the film left me cold. Though I recognise Garland's huge talent.
But the top support cast and great acting by the leads (coupled with the real, wonderful, surprisingly self-critical, Hollywood setting) and classic storyline kept me highly entertained and rather moved.

As the destructive, waning, acting star James Mason is on top form. He gives perhaps the definitive Mason performance and essays a fascinating character who can turn on the charm and show great love one moment before succumbing to the drink and becoming a self-loathing, selfish wreck of a man the next.

Garland shows just why she remained such a beloved performer for so long and her musical skill and star power shines here during the (for me often too long, but thankfully mostly realistic stage/film set based) musical numbers and even when drink, depression and much heartache had taken its toll (ironically Garland in real life, through the passing of time, actually became very close to Mason's character) and she was reduced to belting out show tunes in seedy, gangster run, London nightclubs...Garland kept that icon status and "A Star is Born" really shows you why, because as well as the musical sequences she handles some for the later, full on dramatic, scenes brilliantly as well and bounces of the brilliant Mason with aplomb.

Any movie fan should find much to love in this, a musical movie fan even more so.



"A Night in Casablanca" - 1.5

The last of the true Marx Brothers films sees them pretty much neutered from their original, anarchist, roots and instead we have them in a far more conventional 'underdogs who save the day' roles.
now, instead of blatantly causing absolute chaos (reaching the levels of actual war in "Duck Soup") they tend to right wrongs and set things straight!
Shame.

This trend had already started a few years before in what became their most successful films, "A Night at the Opera" and the far superior "A Day at the Races" (although even then this change was not so severe) but by now the weakening of their characters was also teamed with (unlike "Opera" and especially "Races") a lack of any real classic set-pieces and sketches.
Their is simply no memorable verbal greatness from Groucho and even the slapstick from Harpo and Chico is tame.
When mixed with their now muzzled characters, this lack of classic Marx humour is crippling.
Only an, actually very funny, late in the day 'packing the clothes' slapstick sequence, where the Brother's play havoc with the packing to leave plans of the lead baddie, drags the film out of the mire and it's very well crafted set-piece, and as such stands out in the sea of mediocrity that surrounds it.
Sadly the film as a whole stands alongside the equally weak and pointless "The Big Store" and "Go West" as the worst of The Marx Brother's proper films.

Stick with "Races", "Horse Feathers" and "Duck Soup" for some truly classic Marx Brothers greatness.


"The Last Picture Show" - 3

Peter Bogdanovich's seminal work was one of the first of the 70's 'maverick' Director movies to make a splash (after 67/69's "Bonnie and Clyde" and "Easy Rider" had led the way). And it holds up very well today.

The frank for the time (less so now, but it still has an edge) sexuality and expose of small town sexual mores and hidden scandals made the film a big, if controversial, hit and showed how Hollywood was growing up, changing, and attempting to drag the audiences back to the cinema and away from TV, not with flashy spectacle and gimmicks but with an explicitness (both in sex, nudity, language and violence) and adult orientated subjects and sensibility that TV just never offered.

The stunning ensemble cast and Bogdanovich's tight, assured, direction and editing ensure that even when not much, plot wise, is actually going on there is always something on-screen to keep us entertained, intrigued and moved.
It does seem rather slight today though, with much of what was new and radical at the time being far less so now. So it does work now on two levels; It works still as a finely crafted, superbly acted, small town drama, but it's also become a bit of a time piece and some of the cutting edge fascination has been turned into simple historical interest.

But the cast (with Cloris Leachman, Timothy Bottoms, Ben Johnson, a beautiful and young Cybill Shepherd - breasts and all- and Ellen Burstyn being the stand-outs) and Peter Bogdanovich's direction ensure that as an entertaining, often deeply moving, dramatic piece the film is still well worth a viewing in 2009.

[mark f]

Gunfight at the O.K. Corral (John Sturges, 1957) 3.5+

http://static.omdb.si/posters/active/138147.jpg http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff100/Livius_photos/PDVD_001-8.jpg

Sturges fashions Leon Uris's script into a taut, thinking-man's western with an exciting payoff in the title incident. Lancaster plays Wyatt Earp as something of an athletic saint but Douglas plays Doc Holliday full of self-loathing and self-destruction. The film is divided into two halves, the first where Earp is the marshal of Dodge City and the second where he quits to go help his brothers in their feud with the Clantons and McLowerys in Tombstone. The theme song by Frankie Laine sets everything up wonderfully over the opening credits and Dimitri Tiomkin's great music is an asset throughout, accenting the various tense incidents which fill out the movie. The supporting cast includes Rhonda Fleming as a lady gambler whom Earp romances and Jo Van Fleet as Doc's woman who runs off with Johnny Ringo (John Ireland) when Doc gets too ill from drink and TB. Other interesting casting choices include Dennis Hopper as Billy Clanton as well as DeForest Kelley (Bones on the original "Star Trek") and Martin Milner ("Adam-12") as two of Wyatt's brothers. Lyle Bettger, Ted de Corsia, Lee Van Cleef, Jack Elam, Frank Faylen and Earl Holliman round out the cast in my vote for the best O.K. Corral flick ever.

Diary of a Lost Girl (G.W. Pabst, 1929) 3

http://pixhost.ws/avaxhome/13/44/00094413_medium.jpeg http://www.dvdoutsider.co.uk/dvd/pix/d/di/drylstgrl1.jpg

I find this far superior to Louise Brooks' more-famous film by Pabst, Pandora's Box. That didn't really have the guts to show all the sex and violence inherent in the story while this film is basically a sensory overload of such dimensions that it becomes one of the most erotic films ever made. Brooks' teenager Thymian is brought up in a home where her father throws out her governess when the latter becomes pregnant. Immediately, the father employs another, even-more-attractive governess, and Thymian falls victim to her father's partner, a pharmacist who rapes and impregnates her. When she refuses to marry the pharmacist, her baby is taken away and Thymian is sent to live in a reform school and after she escapes from there, she and her new friend find themselves working in a brothel. The sets, costumes and performances are all created to play up the exotic nature of unknown sex which later translates into a world of never-ending sensuality which seems to make it easier to survive in a world without any real love. Thymian doesn't really want to be a whore, but she's been abused so many times in her young life that it's almost comforting for awhile, at least until she learns better from a rich old man who seeks nothing but to treat her with fatherly affection. The resolution of the film makes it clear that despite it all, Thymian's heart is ultimately full of both wisdom and innocence, things not possessed by the socialites who try to help girls such as she. Louise Brooks is beautiful and heartbreaking in her presence and performance here.


Drag Me to Hell (Sam Raimi, 2009) 3-

http://watchordownloadmoviesonline.com/images/watch-drag-me-to-hell-online.jpg http://www.soundonsight.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/drag-me-to-hell-seance.jpg

Raimi's return to [relatively] lower-budget horror flicks is pretty good for what it is, although I'll admit that somehow I'm now more used to believing in a flying spider-man than I am simple curses and seances. The film begins 40 years ago in an effective scene which is later reproduced after our heroine Christine (Alison Lohman) receives her curse which will cause her to be dragged down to hell in three days' time. Now, the question becomes does she deserve the curse and is she the heroine? She's quite likeable and attractive, but she does treat the old woman quite poorly in an attempt to climb the ladder at her bank job, even though her boss and co-worker seem to be dyed-in-the-wool jerks. On the other hand, the old woman seems to overreact a bit by immediately terrorizing and cursing her. Well, we wouldn't have a movie if she didn't. Much of the film seems inspired by the original Nightmare on Elm Street in the way surrealism bleeds into everyday life, and Christine experiences things which no one else does, but then there are times when these violent, repulsive scenes become all too real and begin to affect others around her as well. I'd say the film was fair-to-middling, but it does get the benefit of the doubt from me because the last 15 minutes build up quite nicely to a definite "Gotcha" moment which makes much of the seeming craziness earlier on worth sitting through. Of course, I could be wrong since I basically don't watch "modern" horror films. :cool:

Love in the Afternoon (Billy Wilder, 1957) 3.5+

http://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/09_07/1957/50658/s_50658_b2b1cc7c.jpg http://www.findingdulcinea.com/docroot/dulcinea/fd_images/features/arts/movies/Five-Films-Set-in-Paris/features/0/image.jpg

Love in the Afternoon is a classic Billy Wilder romantic comedy which isn't mentioned as often as many of his other classics. There could be many reasons, including the fact that Gary Cooper appears to be too old to limn the dashing playboy in the film, but most people love Bogie's casting against type in Wilder's earlier Sabrina. Perhaps younger audiences don't get all the jokes and references at the beginning and end of the film. Wilder, who always loved to use topical humor, has Audrey Hepburn's father, private detective Maurice Chevalier, narrate these scenes as if he were doing a Jack Webb/Joe Friday impression which is hilarious to Brenda and me but may mean nothing to others. There is also the fact that the film is all rather simple for a comedy which is over two hours long, but as usual with most very good films, it's all in the details.

The simplicity involves the fact that Hepburn's Ariane lives vicariously through her father's files which are all about other peoples' love affairs. One day, she tries to save the Cooper character from violence and becomes totally infatuated with him. The details here include that John McGiver (Breakfast at Tiffany's) has a sparkling cameo as a husband who hires Chevalier and then wants to put several bullets into Cooper. One of the funniest things about this movie is that Cooper has a Hungarian quartet known as the Gypsies who play appropriate mood music for him, not only in his hotel suite, but in boats on a lake and in the sauna too. But perhaps the greatest detail which this film has (and one which tops the ending to Sabrina) is that the actual ending is deeply-romantic and movingly-filmed by Wilder in what I would call one of his best-directed scenes ever.

The Innocents (Jack Clayton, 1961) 4

http://img.amazon.ca/images/I/51KR5FDM5ZL._SL500_AA240_.jpg http://3.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kqtsmjLeld1qztxlgo1_500.jpg

I've discussed this film many places around the site, including its own thread twice, so maybe this is overkill to mention it again, but I just watched it with someone who has never seen it, so I'll try to post something new and thoughtful, if I can. The bottom line for me is that this is the creepiest, scariest, most-unsettling horror film I've ever seen. It's far-more complex than Drag Me to Hell which wears its scares on its sleeves. The Innocents is so frightening because it's open to so many interpretations, and no matter which way you interpret it, it's just as disturbing as possible. It's based on Henry James' The Turn of the Screw which tells the story of a new governess, Miss Giddens (Deborah Kerr), and her effect on two angelic children who seem to be far more mature than their ages would allow. The boy Miles (Martin Stephens) is sent home from school for being "an injury" to the other boys, and the girl Flora (Pamela Franklin) seems to realize that Miles is coming home before anyone else does. This is only the beginning of many incidents which seem to possibly have more than one explanation, and as the film progresses, it becomes more-difficult to decide what the truth of the situation is. The photography is spectacular and the sound design awesomely conveys what could either be Miss Giddens' deepening madness or a presence of unspeakable evil which threatens to possess and corrupt the children in the form of two dead servants who formally helped to raise the children while freely carrying on an open S&M sexual relationship in front of them. Since the film was made in 1961, you have to pay attention to pick up all the plot nuances and possibilities, but all you have to have are eyes and ears to be transfixed and lost in another world of a large house full of rooms of whispers and scary "games" of hide-and-seek. Make sure you watch this one after it gets dark.

Red River (Howard Hawks, 1948) 4

http://www.thecinematheque.com/poster_redriver1.jpg http://www.craigerscinemacorner.com/Images/red%20river.jpg

Spectacular western epic about the first cattle drive along the Chisholm Trail is actually a thinly-veiled retelling of Mutiny on the Bounty. But years earlier, Thomas Dunson (John Wayne) breaks free from a wagon train with his longtime friend Groot (Walter Brennan), a wagon, a bull and some horses. Dunson tells his fiancee (Colleen Gray) to continue on with the train and that he'll send for her when he's ready. By the time the two men make it to the Red River in Texas, they realize that the wagons have been attacked by Indians. After the Indians attack them at night, young Matt arrives at their camp with a cow but he's half-crazy having witnessed the Indian attack on the wagon train before escaping. Years later, after the Civil War, Matt (played by Montgomery Clift as an adult) returns to help Dunson and Groot drive the herd of almost 10,000 cattle west to Missouri, although there are rumors that there's a railroad in Abilene, Kansas, which would eliminate the danger of Missouri raiders stealing the herd and killing the men. Dunson wants to take them to Missouri though and becomes despotic on the drive, causing many of the men to grumble and question his authority. Eventually, there is a mutiny and Dunson is left behind injured and embarrassed while Matt leads the herd to Abilene. Dunson vows to kill Matt once he recuperates and comes after him. Red River is full of action, male bonding, Indian attacks, gunfights, fistfights and the recreation of a full-fledged cattle drive where all the principal actors actually are involved in transporting a huge herd. It's also a character study of a bitter man who hasn't reconciled himself to a new postwar world where he needs more help than he ever has before but is too proud to ask for it since it will make him seem weak. I'm not going to go into the details about the films ending which has been discussed here recently, except to say that it makes total sense to me and is the only ending I can think of which does in the light of the way the two main characters have been presented for over two hours of screen time. If you want to see a father kill his son in a western, go watch The Big Country where it makes sense, but don't ask an epic western about the founding of a great cattle empire to end with one of the founders dead over a stubborn old man's misplaced sense of pride.

The Battle of Russia (Frank Capra & Anatole Litvak, 1943) 3.5

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/519QFYEJ2BL._SL500_AA280_.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/Operation_Barbarossa_objective_cities_Why_We_Fight_no._5.jpg

Part Five of the Why We Fight series is the two-part The Battle of Russia which not only explains the history of invasions into Russia during the 700 years leading up to WWII but goes into detail about the major battles of Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad where the Soviet army and strategy successfully repelled the Nazi invaders. Some early scenes even use Russian movies (Alexander Nevsky) to show how the Russians have repulsed the Teutonic Knights, the Swedes, Napoleon and various others before the onslaught of Hitler's blitzkrieg. The strategy of falling back and strengthening each line of resistance is clearly explained as well as the Nazis need to invade several countries before entering Russia in order to get natural resources and land and sea bases from which to launch their attacks. The striking imagery of actual combat footage, combined with archival footage, special effects, cartoon graphics, quick editing and Dimitri Tiomkin's stirring Russian score all add up to an educational, yet fast-paced and entertaining dissection of current events almost at the time of their occurrence. This film is about par for the series although it does contain some of the more potent images, including a haunting one showing Russian villagers hanging along the Eastern Front as the Nazis retreat.

http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/3089519.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=310F5BD4C6CD10E9EA4331A62D4EB4FF

[meatwadsprite]

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:yNop0OH6SuhLGM:http://www.moviesonline.ca/movie-gallery/albums/userpics//poster_500DAYS_FINAL.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:4gF2LER8i4la2M:http://www.thefilmtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/500-days-of-summer.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Bf880Y-6iZk-DM:http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/8300000/Scenes-from-the-Film-500-days-of-summer-8397162-2560-1707.jpg

500 Days of Summer 2009

The leads are great, Marc Webb nails a style, but the story is simple and it briefly plays with time to cover it up. This is a story that takes a minute to tell, it's just not complete. Sometimes if you cover the hole, most won't notice - but a few short music montages really don't gloss over the absent character insight.

2.5

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:NEAKFz5jGQYYMM:http://thecia.com.au/reviews/m/images/mary-and-max-poster-0.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:hW01o1g7tS9c2M:http://www.timeoutsydney.com.au/film/newsinterviews/large-Mary%26Max.jpg http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:a13RKvLCnDjVjM:http://blogs.theage.com.au/schembri/MaxAndMary.jpg

Mary and Max 2009

Completely toneless, it's an ambitious effort to combine fantasy cartoon style story telling with adult themes and situations. The writing is all over the place and a narrator guides you through the whole thing (no-one else really speaks). It doesn't pick up any momentum and ends just as quietly.

Visually though, it's an amazing miniature beauty. Detailed photography spruces up the clay and creates a much more effective look, just as Coraline did earlier this year.

2

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:dP5myEgA7qK1lM:http://www.impawards.com/2009/posters/cloudy_with_a_chance_of_meatballs.jpg http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:4vIuZtx_2T7I1M:http://blog.80millionmoviesfree.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/cloudy_with_a_chance_of_meatballs2.jpg http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ZSA8WoiyGRPJ2M:http://3dguy.tv/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Cloudy_with_a-_Chance_of_Meatballs.jpg

Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs 2009

The year's most clichéd animation, is probably this year's best. The story has the lessons that are required to be jammed into any high budget 3D film, but it leaps out of the pack with truly uproarious crude humor and by tackling fearlessly huge visual feats. A very unexpected burst of ambition from Sony Animation, they may have one upped Pixar at their own game this year.

3.5

[42ndStreetFreak]

Diary of a Lost Girl (G.W. Pabst, 1929) 3

http://pixhost.ws/avaxhome/13/44/00094413_medium.jpeg http://www.dvdoutsider.co.uk/dvd/pix/d/di/drylstgrl1.jpg

I find this far superior to Louise Brooks' more-famous film by Pabst, Pandora's Box. That didn't really have the guts to show all the sex and violence inherent in the story while this film is basically a sensory overload of such dimensions that it becomes one of the most erotic films ever made. Brooks' teenager Thymian is brought up in a home where her father throws out her governess when the latter becomes pregnant. Immediately, the father employs another, even-more-attractive governess, and Thymian falls victim to her father's partner, a pharmacist who rapes and impregnates her. When she refuses to marry the pharmacist, her baby is taken away and Thymian is sent to live in a reform school and after she escapes from there, she and her new friend find themselves working in a brothel. The sets, costumes and performances are all created to play up the exotic nature of unknown sex which later translates into a world of never-ending sensuality which seems to make it easier to survive in a world without any real love. Thymian doesn't really want to be a whore, but she's been abused so many times in her young life that it's almost comforting for awhile, at least until she learns better from a rich old man who seeks nothing but to treat her with fatherly affection. The resolution of the film makes it clear that despite it all, Thymian's heart is ultimately full of both wisdom and innocence, things not possessed by the socialites who try to help girls such as she. Louise Brooks is beautiful and heartbreaking in her presence and performance here.



Red River (Howard Hawks, 1948) 4

http://www.thecinematheque.com/poster_redriver1.jpg http://www.craigerscinemacorner.com/Images/red%20river.jpg

I'm not going to go into the details about the films ending which has been discussed here recently, except to say that it makes total sense to me and is the only ending I can think of which does in the light of the way the two main characters have been presented for over two hours of screen time. If you want to see a father kill his son in a western, go watch The Big Country where it makes sense, but don't ask an epic western about the founding of a great cattle empire to end with one of the founders dead over a stubborn old man's misplaced sense of pride.



"Diary" sounds very interesting. I'm a sucker for the odd silent film and this sounds more up my alley (Whoops! Watch out Vicar!) than "Pandora's Box".
Nice write up!

Ahhh....."River that is Red".
I see where you are coming from in how the film can;t have ended with actual death.
But then I also see that the screenplay had written itself into that trap with how far it went. Perhaps a middle ground was needed.

The ending we have though simply awful. A pat, "Donovan's Reef", comedy chums all together leech that's stuck itself on from a different film altogether.
The solution is...or should have been...up to the guys who get paid to write this stuff to work out.
We may not need death at the end...but we sure as hell don't need "North to Alaska" either.

[Iroquois]

http://images.greencine.com/images/article/polish-knife.jpg

Knife in the Water (Roman Polanski, 1962) - 3

Polanski's first noteworthy film may have a title and plot worthy of some sort of low-rent thriller - married couple pick up mysterious hitch-hiker and invite him on a boat trip - but it works as a fairly decent piece of cinema. Despite being a very mundane film in terms of actual events, the characters are all played well, with palpable tension between the leads bubbling just under the surface and occasionally lashing out. There's also something to be said for the camerawork, which manages to stay inventive enough to keep your attention the whole way through. The jazzy score is hit-and-miss, more miss than hit at least.

http://blogs.ink19.com/strokeofmidnight/files/2008/10/repulsion.jpg

Repulsion (Roman Polanski, 1965) - 3

The title says it all. Repulsion is not a comfortable viewing experience for a number of reasons. It's pretty much necessitated by the story - revolving around Catherine Deneuve's introverted salon worker going steadily insane. Even though it was a rather disturbing experience, I guess that means the film - an exercise in depicting sheer psychosis - a very effective one. What makes Repulsion so effective? Various factors - for one, Deneuve's unnerving performance, which goes from merely socially inept and sexually repressed all the way through to being so wracked by terror she becomes unable to function properly. It's a performance capable of inspiring pity yet also very hard to "like", if that makes any sense. As with most of the Polanski films I've seen so far (namely the ones he made prior to Macbeth, really), it plays out veeeeeery sloooooowly, which can test a viewer's patience a bit, but it still remains an effective character piece even before things really start getting out of hand (ranging from Deneuve's bizarre behaviour to some unexpected surrealist shocks). Once again, Polanski's apparent preference for jazzy scores kind of jars with the film, at least for me it does, but the sound work in virtually every other regard is handled well, whether utilising utter silence during frenzied action or the admittedly clichéd "sting" whenever something shocking happens.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_n2C-UiNpgXQ/Rhi6F0JlsjI/AAAAAAAAACE/SXMbD35NQb8/s400/passenger+blog+1.jpg

The Passenger (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1975) - 4

This marks the first time I've ever watched one of Antonioni's films, and all I can really say is "Wow." The plot's worthy of a Hitchcock movie - Jack Nicholson's self-doubting journalist decides to trade identities with a dead arms dealer and ends up going on a journey across Europe, following the dead man's itinerary while a number of people try searching for him - yet it never truly comes across as that kind of thriller. It's a very slowly paced film, preferring to focus on character over plot (although said plot remains well-executed) and it draws a surprisingly strong performance out of Nicholson. The story doesn't quite answer all the questions in a single viewing and there is that ending (accomplished in an impressive long take) which, rather than giving off a real "What the hell, is that it?" feeling, is enough to make me want to watch the whole thing all over again. I can really see this one cracking my favourites list one of these days. Great in just about every way (except for the music, which is almost non-existent in The Passenger, but that never bothered me - in fact, after listening to the intrusive jazz music in those last two Polanski movies, I would welcome a lack of music).

[Sleezy]

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/prine1.jpg http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j38/iusreview/prince2.jpg

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (Yates, 2009) 2

I worried that as this series drew to a close, given the increasing length of the books, the film adaptations would falter. After an underwhelming Goblet of Fire, I was glad to see that Order of the Phoenix turned out to be fun, harrowing, and ultimately sensible. I credit that as much to the screenwriters and director David Yates as anybody else.

Sadly, this one disappoints. It’s not that it’s horrible, per se, but by comparison, it suffers from a few glaring issues the preceding Potter films have mostly been able to avoid.

Read the rest of the review HERE (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=588456).

[BumbleBee]

Big Stan (2007)
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/news_images/20081128/BigStan_1.jpg


All in all it's a great comedy. It Stars Rob Schneider so of course you're in for a good ride. A unique story that has some extremely funny scenes and deliverance of Lines. A character that will make you remember this movie is definitely going to be David Carradine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Carradine)'s portrayal of The Master. I definitely recommend to see this one, especially if you want to have a good laugh.

[BumbleBee]

Five Minutes of Heaven

http://rosimanopolis.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/five-minutes-of-heaven-movie-poster.jpg

I went into this not exactly knowing what to expect. It's a movie with meaning, taking part in flash backs and the present time. I don't want to give too much away with this film, but there are two interesting performances and the story line is unique. Ideally the story line is based on forgiveness and letting go. Neeson puts in a wonderful performance as per usual and as for Nesbitt, I have never experienced a movie with him in it - he also puts in a good performance. The Film doesn't seem all that high budget but its worth a watch.
http://eyeonfilm.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/neesonqe11.jpg

[42ndStreetFreak]

It Stars Rob Schneider so of course you're in for a good ride.
:eek::nope:

[Harry Lime]

Rob Schneider is a stapler...

[Iroquois]

Derp de derp...

[Tacitus]

Five Minutes of Heaven

I went into this not exactly knowing what to expect. It's a movie with meaning, taking part in flash backs and the present time. I don't want to give too much away with this film, but there are two interesting performances and the story line is unique. Ideally the story line is based on forgiveness and letting go. Neeson puts in a wonderful performance as per usual and as for Nesbitt, I have never experienced a movie with him in it - he also puts in a good performance. The Film doesn't seem all that high budget but its worth a watch.



It premièred on TV over here so that probably explains the budget. ;)

Jimmy Nesbitt is an excellent actor, I think, but he's rarely had the film work that his talent deserves. Paul Greengrass's Bloody Sunday is worth a look if you want to see more of him and Resurrection Man definitely isn't.

[BumbleBee]

It premièred on TV over here so that probably explains the budget. ;)

Jimmy Nesbitt is an excellent actor, I think, but he's rarely had the film work that his talent deserves. Paul Greengrass's Bloody Sunday is worth a look if you want to see more of him and Resurrection Man definitely isn't.

Thank you :)

I may give Bloody Sunday a look.

[Sleezy]

To Tacitus you listen! Bloody Sunday is fantastic.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Watched the original "Sleuth". 2

Too long, too self indulgent, and a slightly confused (the police?) but generally obvious twist.
Only the great Caine and Sir Larry himself give us anything to really enjoy.

[Prospero]

Watched the original "Sleuth". 2

Too long, too self indulgent, and a slightly confused (the police?) but generally obvious twist.
Only the great Caine and Sir Larry himself give us anything to really enjoy.I like Sleuth a little more than you, and in fact had the opportunity to see it performed in a small community theater. Quite a feat for those two actors to memorize all those lines. In fact, the theater had fake biographies printed in the programs of all the "actors" who played the various characters.
It was a fun time and ever since then Sleuth has had a special place in the general vicinity of my heart.


So anyway...

http://www.zvents.com/images/internal/3/3/3/0/img_150333_primary.jpg http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2005/10/03/revolver372.jpg
Revolver (2005)
Dir: Guy Ritchie

Guy Ritchie takes a stab at neo noir with decidedly mixed results. I liked the style of it, but it's a movie that thinks it's way more clever than it is. The "twist" s so convoluted that I'm sure there are holes in it aplenty, if I analyzed it more closely. The thing is, I just couldn't care enough to do it.

All in all, I thought the first two thirds were damn good, although Ray Liotta is terribly miscast (and pretty terrible in general), but in the last act Revolver pretty much blows up in your face.
2.5


http://i.clevver.com/photos/118087/240/240/rocknrolla-movie-poster.jpg http://www.channel4.com/film/media/images/Channel4/film/R/rocknrolla_xl_01--film-B.jpg
RocknRolla (2008)
Dir: Guy Ritchie

Guy Ritchie returns to form. Huzzah!
Although it's not quite at the same level as Snatch and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels, RocknRollal is still in much the same vein. Smart, funny, violent, and profane, with double crosses aplenty and a very satisfying finish, it makes for a nice night at the movies
3.5

[Used Future]

My computer died recently so I'm reduced to posting from my local library until the new year (when I'll be buying a new one). As such I'll have to keep this brief...one Harry Lime special coming up;)

http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7a/MASHfilmposter.jpg/225px-MASHfilmposter.jpg

MASH (Robert Altman, 1970) 4+
I laughed my ass off at this and thought Donald Sutherland was an absolute hoot as Hawkeye. Favourite bit? his hilarious putdown of 'hot lips' in the mess tent.

Oh come off it, MAJOR. You put me right off my fresh fried lobster, do you realize that? I'm now going to go back to my bed, I'm going to put away the best part of a bottle of scotch... And under normal circumstances, you being normally what I would call a very attractive woman, I would have invited you back to share my little bed with me and you might possibly have come. But you really put me off. I mean you... You're what we call a regular army clown.

http://static.omdb.si/posters/active/167250.jpg

Jacob's Ladder (Adrian Lyne, 1990) 3
A bit of a shaggy dog story this (and a predictable one at that), but Tim Robbins is brilliant and the film high on style and atmosphere.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/Bugsy_poster.jpg/202px-Bugsy_poster.jpg

Bugsy (Barry Levinson, 1991) 3+
Excellent performance from Beatty, but the film left me wanting more from the story (once the flamingo had been built). I had a hankering to re-watch Scorsese's Casino right after.

http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1010/463281.1010.A.jpg

The Scalphunters (Sydney Pollack, 1968) 3
Loved the comedic pairing of Telly Savalas and Shelly Winters in this, otherwise middling western.

http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/05/Convoy_film_poster.jpg/200px-Convoy_film_poster.jpg

Convoy (Sam Peckinpah, 1978) 2.5+
Pretty daft road movie (with lots of idiotic dialogue and a dumb plot), but immensly likable and entertaining at the same time. Peckinpah's energetic direction helps a lot, and the final act elevates it to cult status.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_aOQLE4Fqk3w/R9akjU4x3QI/AAAAAAAAAeM/9ZRUVbgjWxA/s320/pin_poster.jpg

Pin (Sandor Stern, 1988) 3
Well acted psycological suspenser along the lines of Magic (which Mark tabbed recently) and Psycho, about a young man obsessed with an anatiomical dummy (Pin, short for Pinochio) whom he talks to and voices using ventriloquism. His sister knows he's crazy but covers for him until her new boyfriend comes between them. This is well made and delivers some creepy moments but is almost completely ruined by the sugary happy ending.

other stuff I watched....

Colin (Marc Price, 2008)
Reputedly made for a measly £45 this British zombie movie looks more like 45 pence. I've seen more impressive homemade stuff on Youtube and subsequently turned it off after fifteen minutes (hence no rating). This is nothing more than a gainy camcorder home movie, and I'm genuinely baffled as to how it found a distributor. Avoid at all costs.

The Final Destination (David R. Ellis, 2009) 2.5-
A formulaic sequel too many (even for staunch defenders of the series like me), this fails to bring anything new in the way of ideas, but still delivers on the tension (especially the cinema inferno sequence).

Tenement: Game of Survival (Roberta Findlay, 1985) 0.5
Irredeemable garbage about occupants of a tenement slum terrorised by the usual gang of sadistic 80's punks. Comes off like a grade Z immitation of Carpenter's Assault on Precinct 13, minus all the tension (unforgivable considering the premise) and excitement. Sure there's gore and violence aplenty, but it's way too episodic and snail paced to be fun. Amaturish in every respect.

Mirrors (Alexandra Aja, 2008) 2.5-
Keifer Sutherland is an alcoholic cop on suspension reduced to taking a job as a security guard in a haunted old building. Oh and he's estranged from his wife too. Yawn, cliche ridden time filler does deliver a couple of scares, and has an interesting central idea (the evil spirit can attack from any reflection on any surface, anywhere) but everthing else is strictly routine. Good ending though.

Star Trek (J.J. Abrams, 2009) 3.5-
Entertaining for what it is, but Pegg is cringeworthy, and the plot undermines the original material. Still probably about as good as could have been expected from a 'Star Trek begins' reboot; perhaps the inevitable sequel will re-address the paradoxical story.