Cyrano de Bergerac (Michael Gordon, 1950)

http://s1.dmcdn.net/idqIv.jpg
This low-budget Stanley Kramer production captures for posterity the brilliance of José Ferrer's Broadway performance and enabled the star to win a Best Actor Oscar to boot. The overall wit and strong plot of Edmond Rostand's play make the viewer basically ignore the threadbare sets, and it's especially easy since it starts at such a lightning pace with countless insults and swordplay crammed into the opening half hour. Cyrano is one of the great characters of literature, and Ferrer brings all his massive talent to the role of a man who feels contempt for almost all of humanity due to the fact that he feels his enormous nose has turned him into a grotesque who is unable to confess his deep love for his beautiful cousin Roxane (Mala Powers). Cyrano is a true Renaissance Man: a poet, soldier, wit, playwright, and swordsman, yet Roxane wants him to act as intermediary between her and the young recruit Christian (William Prince) she has fallen in love with at first sight. To keep close to her, Cyrano agrees.

Unfortunately, Christian is tongue-tied around women, so Cyrano has to write his love letters for him and try to help him to express his rapturous feelings to Roxane in person. The film follows the play faithfully, and at times, the low budget almost turns the movie into a film noir because there are so many shadows and dark corners on screen. It definitely has a different look and feel than Jean-Pierre Rappeneau's 1990 version with Gerard Depardieu's great performance as Cyrano, even though both films are full of wit and pathos. You can't really go wrong with any of the Cyranos thus far, including Steve Martin's Roxanne and the 1925 silent version where all the frames were hand-painted using a revolutionary stencil process which makes the movie look like a moving painting.

Sleuth (Kenneth Branagh, 2007)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C-NXvTGV0AAR2tQ.jpg
Kenneth Branagh and Harold Pinter's reimagining of Sleuth for a younger generation is both a treat and something like a punch in the stomach. In my old fart mind, the original film is definitely superior; it also runs 50 minutes longer and is far more psychologically believable in the "third act". However, I must say that Michael Caine (playing Laurence Olivier's original role) as the successful writer who has lost his wife to the younger, more-attractive Jude Law (playing the original Michael Caine role) both give excellent performances, and there actually seems to be an in-joke in the film where the characters aren't actually sure WHO is playing WHO. Branagh's direction, at least for the first two acts, provides plenty of ambiguity, visual acumen and a wonderful way to try to draw in the computer generation with all the surveillance cameras and the use of computer monitors, laptops, microphone-headsets, etc. Sleuth was always an actor's tour de force, and it still plays that way, but I have a tough time dealing with Harold Pinter's changes to the third act.
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/5d/d8/3f/5...on-raising.jpg
Pinter has said that he has never seen the play or the original film, but upon reading the play, he was immediately attracted to it. I consider his adaptation of the first hour quite impressive, even if it grafts on a few of the themes of his 1963 screenplay of The Servant, another power struggle film. However, the final act seems to subvert the entire point of Sleuth, at least insofar as it making the point of the movie clear. The original may be more concrete, but it doesn't completely tell you who the winner or loser is, although in one way, maybe it does. The third act of this film comes out of left field and then ends abruptly with no rhyme or reason. Not only that, the way Jude Law holds a supposedly loaded weapon, pointing it at his nose and chin (supposedly in some phallic allusions) only reminds me of the scenes in Plan 9 From Outer Space where the idiot detective kept pointing his gun at his own face while explaining the evidence to his even stupider underlings. I don't think that was intended, actually.

For me, the bottom line is that the strength of the original text, the direction, and the acting is good enough to give this film's first three-fourths about , but the last 20 minutes is barely worth . I did like Caine's house a lot, but I loved Olivier's house and maze in the original film, plus this film completely jettisons the subplot of the author's mistress, who is so important to the context of the film and the third act. For the record, I rate the 1972 film .

Westward the Women (William A. Wellman, 1951)

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/67/b8/09/6...golden-age.jpg
This is a powerful, entertaining depiction of a wagon train from Missouri to California which is transporting over a hundred women from Chicago to California in 1851. Roy Whitman (John McIntire) has established a community of male farmers in a California valley, but the men need wives to be happy and make the community grow. Whitman hires trail boss Buck Wyatt (Robert Taylor), and together they go to Chicago to recruit "good women" who are up to the difficult journey and want to get married. After selecting 138 women, they take a riverboat down the Mississippi and organize their wagon train to head west.

Although it's not without humor, the trek is fraught with tragedy as many people are killed along the way, and eventually all that are left are Buck, his Japanese sidekick (Henry Nakamura) and the women survivors. The great strength of the film is that all the characters seem realistic and that the trip does take the time to show all the pain and suffering involved in such an undertaking, but hard work and perseverance do win out in the end. There are so many female sctors and characters who stand out that I can't mention them all, but Hope Emerson shines as the heart and soul of the group, Julie Bishop does well as a young pregnant woman who gives birth on the trail, and Denise Darcel adds some sexual tension in her love/hate relationship with Robert Taylor. This is one film which gets to its ending and deserves all the smiles and tears it illicits in the viewer.

This is England (Shane Meadows, 2006)

http://electricityandlust.files.word...is-england.jpg

This is the third Shane Meadows film I've watched in a month, and this is the one I would say is the best of the three (the other two being 24 7 TwentyFourSeven and Dead Man's Shoes). This one seems to tell a more complex and focused story, with deeper characters. He still uses what I consider both impressionistic and expressionistic technique and loves to maximize the mileage out of his soundtrack, but this is the first film I've seen of his that I would wholeheartedly recommend to everybody.
http://electricityandlust.files.word...sisengland.jpg
It's set in 1983 during the Falklands War and the height of Thatcherism, and although it's certainly a political film, it's even more about coming-of-age and a strong tale of friendship and wanting to belong. It's mostly told through the eyes of twelve-year-old Shaun (astonishing newcomer Timothy Turgoose) who, on the last day of term, gets picked on at school for wearing bellbottom trousers and goes ballistic when an older kid mentions his dad, who died in the Falklands. On the way home, he meets a friendly group of older skinheads (the non-racist kind), led by Woody (Joe Gilgun), and although it doesn't completely prove satisfactory for Shaun initially, he does bond with them and becomes part of their gang. This does bother Shaun's mom (Jo Hartley), but she decides that it's better for her son to have some friends than be estranged from the world.

Soon enough, Woody's friend Combo (the impressive Stephen Graham) turns up, out of prison after three-and-one-half years, doing time for something which Woody also participated in, and the gang begins to splinter because of this. Combo seems to be a friendly guy, but he also has apparently picked up a few bad habits and ideologies in prison; plus, it turns out, that he has plenty of baggage about his own father, although it's never really spelled out in the film. Shaun ends up looking to Combo to be his father figure, and tragedy eventually ensues.
http://owlpellets.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/tie-3.jpg
This is England won the BAFTA for Best British Film of 2007, and I can agree that it probably deserved it. Besides showing England in 1983 and poking at Thatcher and the Falklands War, it also takes shots, albeit almost subliminally, about the current Iraq War. Whether everyone picks up on it, when Combo makes his speech about it being a bogus war and she lied to us, it was obvious (at least to me) that there was some commentary directed at the current situation in Iraq. Additionally, the first time through, I pretty much took for granted the well-conceived montage of events in 1983 England and the Falklands which is presented over the opening credits and immediately pulls the viewer into the time and place of the story. One other thing I halfway missed the first time was that the film, especially in the first half hour, is pretty funny. I do acknowledge it now, and most all the comedy derives from the characters, and since I find these to be Meadows strongest characters which I've seen, that's why I believe this is his strongest flick. Now I need to watch Romeo Brass and Once Upon a Time...

Be Kind Rewind (Michel Gondry, 2008)

http://www.kutfilm.be/sites/default/...wind_still.jpg
My daughter Sarah asked me when this film started what the rating for the highest rated Gondry was for me, so I told her, in MoFo terms, it was a , and that wasn't even Eternal Sunshine (which I've watched three times), so that should tell you something about my experiences with Gondry.When the movie ended, I told her I had a new high rating for the GondryMonster. The film seems to exist in an alternative universe, yet it's still so believeable that people who complain should be ignored as ones who are are far too literal (yes, I know your names, but I refuse to McCarthyize you here and now). To me, this is a modern-day Capra flick, and the people who love it, understand that. It makes the people in the true life neighborhood of Passaic, New Jersey, happy; it also makes all the movie characters happy, and I would hope, that it makes most viewers of the film happy.

The plot has been mentioned elsewhere. It basically involves some sci-fi activities which cause Jack Black's character to become magnetized, and since the movie is set in an alterantive universe, he just happens to erase all of the video store owner's {Danny Glover's) VHS tapes, so the guy left in charge (Mos Def) decides to try to reshoot ("Swede") all the damaged movie tapes, such as Ghostbusters, Rush Hour II, Driving Miss Daisy, Do the Right Thing, and many other "classics". Eventually, the neighborhood makes the remakes popular, but the Feds don't like it.
http://iv1.lisimg.com/image/8779809/...screenshot.jpg
I find the movie to be a wonderful flick, which, in a perfect world, would not only attract oldtimers but newcomers. I have less faith that the younger generaton will fully embrace old-time filmmaking, although I find the sentiment to be one of the most lovely of any recent film I've seen. This film often feels slipshod, insignificant, offhand, sloppy, and out-of-control, yet it makes perfect sense to me. The offhandedness is surely part of its charm and makes it much easier to accept the film as a significant statement on how people love and appreciate film, in all its forms.

Inland Empire fans - please forgive me.
Southland Tales (Richard Kelly, 2006)
https://riversofgrue.files.wordpress...pg?w=450&h=173
I'm not sure what it is about Richard Kelly which makes him still fight the system and still put out movies, but I'm actually glad he does. This film, one of the most ridiculous pieces of crap the other side of Inland Empire, is at least blatant in its few attempts to connect with its audience. No matter how idiotic I believe the film is, I can still accept that somebody would like it and try to defend it in some way. It's truly amazing when you start watching a film, and after five minutes, you already believe that you are two plus hours behind what's happening! Even if this film has some humor and is completely wacko, it doesn't mean that most people want to follow along. I followed along twice, yet it still didn't make REAL sense at all.
http://cinedelphia.com/wp-content/up...land-tales.jpg
I'm not really a big fan of this movie. Sure, plenty of things happen, but most of them make no sense (how about the Justin Timberlake character?), yet when the film winds down, I was laughing a little bit. It's true that I find writer/director Kelly to be a lost soul along the current lines of David Lynch, but that's not really even fair. Lynch's Inland Empire, a movie which is as hard to sell as any I've ever seen, was able to "earn" $849,000 in the U.S, and I find that incredibly difficult to believe. Even so, the perhaps-better, but still hard-to-accept Southland Tales earned $273,000 at the U.S. box office. Sorry, but this should be enough to explain why certain films will never be accepted, and hell, no, I don't accept Inland Empire because it sucked away almost an entire day of my life (each time I viewed it), and gave me almost nothing in return

Come Live With Me (Clarence Brown, 1941)

http://www.movieposter.com/posters/a...in/18/MPW-9156

This film was mostly predictable plotwise, but the details were interesting, and when I start to think about it, it does seem a bit ahead of its time. It definitely qualifies as a feel-good movie. Basically, what happens is that a beautiful Austrian refugee (Lamarr) desires to marry an American so she can stay in the country, but it will only be a marriage of convenience. She marries a broke writer {James Stewart) and agrees to support him on what he determines he needs to survive, $17.80 a week. He agrees, but only with the stipulation that he will pay her back when he earns the money. This is her way of being able to be supported by a married publisher (Ian Hunter) in a much-higher fashion. Well, the publisher's wife (Teasdale) gets ahold of the writer's manuscript, where he's writing about his situation and confessing that he really loves his almost-never-seen wife, and presents it to her husband who starts to figure out what's going on. As I said, it's pretty predictable, but it does have some interesting bits. One thing I really enjoyed was Stewart's reflection making fun of him in most of the mirrors. I also loved the last part of the film where Jimmy takes Hedy to his grandma's house and they have a very chaste, yet surprisingly intense romance in separate bedrooms with a shared ceiling. You've gotta love those fireflies, and Grandma (Adeline De Walt Reynolds) too! Incidentally, this was the last film ever made by Verree Teasdale, who is often mistaken for Hedda Hopper

Dragonwyck (Joseph L. Mankiewicz, 1946)

https://78.media.tumblr.com/422527ba...DTi1qlyg3l.png
This florid Gothic melodrama, set in New York and Connecticut in the 1840s, reteams Gene Tierney and Vincent Price for the fourth and final time. It also delves into some U.S. history about how the Dutch-American "patroons" wielded power in New York all the way up to the time this film is set. Gene Tierney's Miranda lives on a Connecticut farm with her father (Walter Huston) and mother (Anne Revere), but one day, her married "cousin" and patroon Nicholas (Vincent Price) invites her to his New York estate to help him with his family, and against her dad's better instincts, she goes. She loves the elegance of the place and is quite taken by her cousin's attentions. It seems that Nicholas' wife (Vivienne Osborne) is bedridden and that his daughter (Connie Marshall) is a bit strange. Then, Miranda hears stories from the housekeeper (Spring Byington) that the family is cursed and perhaps an implication that madness "runs in it".

Plenty of things happen from here on in. There is a mystery involving a character's death, a fullblown love affair between Miranda and Nicholas, ghostly things occur, new characters (prominently Miranda's crippled personal servant [Jessica Tandy]) appear, and that local doctor (Glenn Langan) who also loves Miranda is still about. Although it gets a little too obvious and histionic near the end, the film maintains an eerieness and interest all the way to the conclusion. It does remind me a bit of Nathaniel Hawthorne, and it is a welcome calling card from the former scripter/producer-turned- director, Joseph L. Mankiewicz (All About Eve).

Good Times (William Friedkin, 1967)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ovieposter.jpg
This film is actually much better than its reputation. Much of it is silly and empty, but other parts are quite meaningful, and in the case of the Mickey Spillane spoof near the ending, pretty funny. Sonny and Cher are approached to make a movie. Sonny likes the idea, but Cher knows it won't turn out the way they'd want it. Sonny visits eccentric billionaire producer George Sanders and agrees to a contract, but when he hears the story idea, he says it's impossible for the married singing duo to make that film. Sanders explains that shooting will commence in 10 days, so that's how long Sonny has to come up with an alternative script.

http://www.reelfilm.com/images/goodtime.jpg
I'll be the first to admit that the spoofs of westerns (High Noon specifically) and jungle flicks are a bit unfunny, yet they at least have some good ideas and Friedkin (The French Connection, The Exorcist), in his feature debut, already shows adeptness at shooting and editing scenes. Most of the best parts in the film are all in the last half hour, so try to stick with it if you invest the time to start watching. There is a legit message in this film which may have been more counterculture in the '60s, but remember now, Sonny Bono was elected to the U.S. Congress as a Republican, not to mention that he eventually became a Scientologist (!!).

P.S. Keeping with my idea that the film's final third is easily the best, the two best songs are sung in the final 10 minutes.

WALL·E (Andrew Stanton, 2008)

http://images.rottentomatoes.com/ima...e/wall-e_3.jpg
Since there have been so many WALL·E reviews around the site, I'm not sure that there are reasons for me to recount the plot, so I'll be brief. I'm pretty sure that most people realize that it takes place in the year 2815 and begins on Earth where the only things which seem to be "alive" are a small robot who tries to clean up the trash and an especially-resilient cockroach-type creature. All the humans left the planet 700 years earlier on a huge spaceship which was designed by the mega corporation/world government called Buy and Large, with the intention of only being away for about five years. There were apparently millions of WALL·Es left behind, but now there seems to be one, and shortly after the film begins, he finds green plant life growing in the soil.

Soon a spaceship appears and leaves a probe behind to search for signs of life. This probe is called EVE, and it is like nothing WALL·E has ever seen before. In fact, although WALL·E (ostensibly playing a male) is frightened by EVE's seemingly violent nature and firepower, he finds himself attracted to her as a companion along the lines of the ones he sees in the film version of Hello, Dolly! which he watches repeatedly. Eventually, both machines find themselves on the huge spaceship where the descendents of the humans who left 700 years earlier live blissfully unaware of their history or potential. OK, that wasn't as brief as I intended.

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/s...rary/walle.jpg
I thoroughly enjoyed the film. It creates a barren, grimy Earth, a beautifully inviting Solar System and a unique vision of human life on a spaceship far in the future. It succeeds on all levels of storytelling for me. I especially loved the homages to 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Thomas Newman's magical musical score is one of the two best I've heard this year, along with Carter Burwell's terrific In Bruges score. I'm also happy about who they used as the voice of the ship's computer. I can believe that some people may find it to be a kiddie movie, but I think it's far too romantic and thought-provoking to relegate it to that realm. I also didn't find myself being swamped by the film's message of conservation vs. consumerism as many others have. I thought the film's overriding message was one of humanity, and if it takes some non-human "creatures" to help us rediscover our lost humanity, that's OK with me. I don't find WALL·E to be a political film along the lines of Persepolis; that's for sure. :)

Persepolis (Marjane Satrapi & Vincent Paronnaud, 2007)

http://electricityandlust.files.word...persepolis.jpg
This captivating French animation wonder, based on Satrapi's semi-autobiographical graphic novels, is a sharp combination of Iranian history, political awareness, a coming-of-age story, love of family, and some intriguing animation techniques. It tells the story, in flashbacks, of Marjane's life in Iran under both the Shah and the fundamentalist "Islamic Republic" and during the Iraq-Iran War, as well as her times spent in Europe where she always felt to be a fish out of water. Whether you're aware of Iran's history during the last 80 or so years or not, this is a fascinating perspective, but it's much more alive and humorous than any history lesson could be.

One thing which is totally unique, at least to me, about Persepolis is that it's a mostly 2-D animated piece of art which is heavily inspired by film noir. Most of the film is in black and white, with major use of shadows. Although it is full of funny moments concerning family and growing up, there is a threat of danger and violence during each step the film takes. The film also uses a surrealistic approach occasionally, especially during scenes involving drugs and the Kafkaesque nightmare in which women and non-fundamentalists find themselves in the Iran of the later 20th century.

http://pescanik.net/wp-content/uploa...Persepolis.jpg
Before I make the film sound too much of a downer, I need to add that I laughed out loud several times. Many of these involved Marjane's unlucky attempts to find a boyfriend. Her grandmother is also a foul-mouthed lady who teaches her about integrity, but she and Marjane both swear quite a bit, and it actually is very funny to hear them say things you couldn't really imagine. (Don't get too worried though; sure, it's an adult-themed film, but it's only rated PG-13.) There are also many touching moments involving Marjane's family, often because the family has always been Marxist and therefore, they've always had family members in jail or killed. Not that you need me to explain this, but in general, everyone, regardless of their politics or religion, is a human being. It's just that sometimes people act much more inhuman than they realize. This film shows things in a realistic light in my mind, and so it's nice to remember that people throughout the world share more similarities than they do differences. Oh yeah, did I mention that the animation techniques and the music are groovy? I especially liked Marjane's crazy interpretation of "Eye of the Tiger" by Survivor. :cool:

Kung Fu Panda (Mark Osborne & John Stevenson)

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/12/fe/b6/1...scar-wilde.jpg
In response to that blurb in the poster, damn straight. No question about it, this is Dreamworks' best animated film. It is hip, occasionally, in its use of language, but other than that, there are none of the pop culture references which kill things for certain people. This is a surprisingly realistic and reverential film, celebrating the concept of Martial Arts and what it means, especially since when we watch kung fu, we mostly think of the physical prowess involved, Yet, no one can truly practice kung fu to the best of their ability without a spiritual connection to themselves and all of their environment. Based on some posts I've been reading around here lately, it seems that kung fu should be relegated to the dustbin of superstitious BS. I don't really care because this "Disney Dork" says this movie rocks!

This film opens with some of the starkest, most original animated imagery in film history. A panda is literally kicking ass and announcing his awesomeness, but eventually we learn that it's just a dream, and Po (Jack Black) has to get up out of bed to go to work for his dad (James Hong) at his noodlery (it should be a word for a type of restaurant if it isn't). Po learns that the Dragon Warrior is going to be chosen from amongst the Furious Five (the greatest warriors available in the City), so he does everything he can to try to witness the selection. When all is said and done, Po is chosen to become the Dragon Warrior by the All-Knowing, All-Seeing Oogway (Randall Duk Kim), despite the protests of his protege and super trainer, Shifu (Dustin Hoffman). Eventually, Shifu's adopted son, Tai Lung (Ian MacShane, sounding like Mark Hamill doing the Joker in the animated series), breaks out of prison to wreak revenge on all those whom he believes have kept him from becoming the rightful Dragon Warrior.

http://nick-intl.mtvnimages.com/uri/...rue&crop=false

Kung Fu Panda succeeds on multiple levels. First off, it presents a totally realistic alternate universe, it's populated with strong convictions and characters, and both the situations and characters are humorous and intense. All of the characters grow, and even if the results may be considered predictable, they certainly earn enough good will to allow them their just desserts. I mentioned that the film is funny, but it's also action-packed, and often the humor and action go hand-in-hand. For example, the highlight for me is the incredible "Battle For the Final Dumpling" scene where the Hoffman character trains the Black character enough to become worthy of the true title of the Dragon Warrior. The fact that the action scenes only escalate from here all the way to the ending is something to be happy about as a viewer and something to be proud about as filmmakers. There are many other notable scenes and vocal performances, but I just want to say that I recommend you see this movie on the big screen before it disappears. It's not just a wonderful action comedy, it's also a powerful drama, and although many animated films push the idea that "you can be what you want to become, if only you put in the work and trust yourself and those who support you", I find that message much more life-affirming than the alternative.

Freaks (Tod Browning, 1932) (that's my legit rating; for those who are OUT THERE, think: ).

https://diccineario.files.wordpress....aks9.jpg?w=559
I don't know what to say about Freaks anymore, but down through the last 30 years, my opinion about it has kind of turned inside out. I've seen this film several times, on the big screen, on commercial TV, cable TV, and now on DVD. I've seen three different endings, but never apparently the original ending which was scrapped after the first preview screening in front of an audience. Freaks is a one-of-a-kind film. I realize that phrase gets tossed around a lot, and since this movie is 85 years old (!!), you probably won't believe me, unless, of course, you've seen it yourself.

When I first watched Freaks, I thought to myself, "Why, in God's name, would anyone make this film? Is this just pure exploitation or not? If it isn't, it's still very embarrassing for all involved because nobody can act and the whole thing comes off as amateurish." However, even so, probably because there was an incredible finale, I knew this film was much better than Browning's lauded, but sleep-inducing Dracula which made Bela Lugosi a star. A strange thing happened the more I watched this film. (Actually it's not that strange for all of you who watch a movie over and over; it seemed to shapeshift, transform and become more normal.) I started thinking that the "Freaks" were actually the more physically-"normal", hateful characters, while those with physical disabilities were more human and friendly.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/229/4...59e26914fd.jpg
(That character is super cool!)

Ultimately, Freaks is a melodrama showing how people try to take advantage of others. The fact that you never see the owner/manager of the traveling circus allows that non-character to wash his hands of everything. But the true villains of the piece are the "everyday" people who hate and take advantage of others. It's strange that these people who make a living in a sideshow can somehow believe themselves to be any less of a "freak" than those who have no say in the way they were born. Of course, Freaks makes it clear that if you are not "One of Us, One of Us!!", then you deserve whatever you get for being the inhuman monster you are.
https://morestarsthanintheheavens.fi...-the-march.jpg

Definitely, Maybe (Adam Brooks, 2008) +

http://www.yowazzup.com/blog/images/...aybe-movie.jpg
This is certainly one of the best romantic comedies of the 2000s. If you have watched it, did you notice how it's a sly parody of The Princess Bride? The story is told by the father in this instance, and he's telling it to his daughter, and of course, there are no giants, quicksand, six-fingered men, but you see, this listener cares about the romance and doesn't need all the BS action-adventure bits. :cool: My wife loves The Princess Bride as a novel, and it was one of the first movies we watched at the theatre, but she already loves this film after one viewing and a few Kleenexes. :cool:
http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/definitelymaybe.jpg
I have to admit that I'm apparently extremely ignorant because I don't even know who most of the actors are in this wonderful flick. All I know is that the lead actor, who I find to be very good, should be cast as Jason Lee's younger brother, or maybe be cast as the son of Chevy Chase, if Chevy is allowed to have sons this young anymore. This Ryan guy is actually a very accomplished actor. The cute part of the story is that he is about to be divorced by his wife, but due to her school's curriculum, his daughter (the adorable Abigail Breslin) wants to understand why "penises thrusting" have something to do with her parents' divorcing! Meanwhile, her father tells her a story about the three women in his life (each one who could be her mother), in New York City, while he was being a Bill Clinton worker/supporter in 1992 and later on, too. Some of the most romantic scenes are the ones where people actually confess that they love some one. However, the wife has filed for a divorce, so the daughter has very little time to solve her "romantic mystery".
http://www.timeout.com/img/39759/w513/image.jpg
This is a film which will reward all the tie-ins, here and now, but I enjoy watching the way things play out, especially with little payoff.

Honeydripper (John Sayles, 2007)

http://www.up.programosy.pl/foto/honeydripper_2007.jpeg
John Sayles returns with a love letter to the blues, set in early 1950s Alabama. It's supposed to take place at about the time that rock 'n' roll was born, but there are enough fantasy/blues legend elements included here that a little anachronism suits the film just fine. It tells the story of an old-time piano man, nicknamed Pine Top (Danny Glover), who runs the Honeydripper Lounge but is on the verge of losing it due to his being unable to pay off his debts, including the rent. Everyone in the area, including the cotton pickers and the soldiers, hangs out at the club next door, even though they never play any live music there. Pine Top likes his blues live, but his regular act, singer Bertha Mae (Mabel John), doesn't attract any audience, so he's forced to let her go. His idea is to get an up-and-coming singer/guitarist named Guitar Sam to get everyone into his club on the weekend and make enough money to save his club.

Pine Top's best friend and co-worker Maceo (Charles S. Dutton) and PT's daughter, China Doll (Yaya DaCosta), help him with the advertising and getting the club in order. Pine Top's wife (Lisa Gay Hamilton) is also there, but she's spending a lot of time at the revival tent and wonders if her husband is as good as he should be. Another important character is the young man who rides the rails into town looking for a job and carrying his homemade guitar and amplifier. He's Sonny (Gary Clark Jr.), and he, the town sheriff (Stacy Keach), and the blind blues master guitarist Possum (Keb' Mo') play important parts in the unfolding story.
http://www.austinchronicle.com/binar...neydripper.jpg
Honeydripper is a watchable musical drama, even though it's not terribly original or believable. It gets by on the skill of writer-director-editor Sayles to be able to tell a simple, yet not simplistic, story, as well as a nice mixture of old pros and some newcomers in the cast. Then there's the music. If you like blues, you'll like the movie even more than if you don't, but either way you should be able to toe tap or slow dance if you have a mind to do so.

The Orphanage (Juan Antonio Bayona, 2007)

http://www.chicagonow.com/parental-v...rphanage-5.jpg
This is a very thorough and complex film, even if the clues are laid out for you to be able to know what's going on before the characters in the film do. In fact, this is probably one of those movies (like The Innocents) where it's more fun to watch it at home so you can yell out loud what you think is going on, and then you can rewind it to show everybody else (or vice versa). The plot is extremely tight, and that's one of the reasons that it enables the viewer to "guess" about what will happen. Now, the fact that 90% of my guesses have less to do with the fact that I was right, and more to do with the fact that I was guessing about once a minute.

Of all the classic horror films I can compare this to, I'd probably choose The Haunting (1963) more than any other because the sound was often quite loud to try to disturb the characters and the viewers. Producer Guillermo del Toro's fingerprints are all over the film, but it's obvious that he was gleeful to give the following people their feature film debut: director J.A. Bayona, scripter Sergio G. Sánchez, cinematographer Óscar Faura, and a few others. The acting honors go to Belén Rueda, who plays the mother and totally inhabits a character in between her ill, adopted son, who sees many imaginary friends and her doctor husband who could never see them in a million years, at least unless he changed his way of living.
http://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/2008/03...ge_450x300.jpg
If you haven't already, watch this suspense film which is meticulously crafted. It's both scary and thoughtful. Don't forget to watch The Innocents when you get a chance, too.

Silver Streak (Arthur Hiller, 1976) +

http://www.boyculture.com/.a/6a00d83...ad96970d-600wi
Silver Streak was both Colin Higgins' return to movies after writing the awesome Harold and Maude script, and his reintroduction to Hollywood, with a Major Bang! Higgins had come up with an ingeniously-original take on Hitchcock films. In other words, most of the characters and plot devices could be seen to be lifted from Hitch's films, but the way he bathed them all in beautiful romance made the critics and the viewers not care in the slightest. Both this film, and its follow-up, Foul Play, which Higgins got to both WRITE AND DIRECT, were big moneymakers and enabled Higgins to direct both Nine to Five and The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas. Unfortunately, Higgins died of AIDS without directing another film after Whorehouse, but he left behind plenty of entertainment for everyone.

Silver Streak lifts from North by Northwest, The Lady Vanishes, Shadow of a Doubt and Foreign Correspondent, among others. It also feeds into the romantic homages which Stanley Donen made. Since Silver Streak has a lush romantic score by Henry Mancini, it's often reminiscent of his scores for Donen's Charade and Two For the Road. The thing about Silver Streak is that about an hour into it, the incomparable Richard Pryor shows up and becomes Gene Wilder's accomplice. Now, Pryor is probably my fave stand-up comedian of all-time, but Hollywood tried to quash him. Even so, this film probably shows the most volatile and vibrant Pryor this side of all his concert films. Therefore, I recommend this flick, which has some of the best "special effects" ever at the end when the train destroys a shopping mall (in slow motion, yet!)

Richard Pryor Live in Concert (Jeff Margolis, 1979)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...V51482415_.jpg
First off, Richard Pryor released a few concert films; or at least, people trying to make money off his talent did. This review is only concerning the very first film, and it's called exactly this title. This will always be my "go-to" film when I need to just laugh and feel a bit better about life. I've talked to many people of many ages, and they all have their fave stand-up comics, but I find it hard to believe that a truthful person could watch this film and not tell me that Pryor is the funniest, most-honest person on the face of the Earth here. If you deny that, then tell me somebody who can remotely perform so many human and animal characters on stage. The man pours his entire soul out in this wonderful movie, and I feel privileged to relive it two or three times a year with my friends and family. R.I.P.

OK, I availed myself to the funniest, most truthful concert film I've ever seen again, and I sure hope that I don't cause a riot here, but Richard Pryor Live in Concert still has to rate to me as the funniest film I've ever seen. I will admit that loving this film, especally as a "white person", leaves me open to charges of racism, but let's not shy away from that, and follow Pryor's lead. Pryor uses the "N" word incessantly. It's true that a few years after this joyous, wonderful film that Pryor swore off ever using the "N" word again. He said that it was an insult to all those he loved and all those who loved him. Even so, this film completely and honestly captures Pryor before he had a change of heart. I completely respect his change of heart, but I also completely respect his earlier opinion to rub people's faces in the reality of being a "black person".
http://www.richardpryorliveinconcert.com/pryor4.jpghttp://www.somewhereville.com/blogim...chardpryor.jpg http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/56/5...inconcert2.jpg
Now, I don't think I need to explain myself here, but I was born and raised in Compton, California. I have spent my entire life equally surrounded by Blacks, Latinos and Whites. I have also allowed them to think their own thoughts about our situation, unless they come across as racist pigs. Thankfully, I recall no racist pigs, and I certainly don''t want that way-ahead-of-his-time GIANT, Richard Pryor, to be thought that way either.

I just checked Richard Pryor and I'm completely screwed. There is not one Genius scene from Live in Concert posted on youtube. Maybe, if anybody actually cares about love, comedy, and us, a scene will actually be posted from the funniest film I've ever seen, Richard Pryor Live in Concert. Then again, this isn't a frivolous post; at least, not yet! [This has been addressed - videos now available.]

Son of Godzilla (Jun Fukuda, 1967)

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/99/2b/5f/9...--godzilla.jpg
Back when I was younger and more cynical, I thought this movie was the bottom of the barrel. I believe I actually gave it a "1" originally! One other thing to remember is that I've only seen this film dubbed. Well, I started watching it, and all I could think of was Woody Allen's What's Up, Tiger Lily? You know, the Japanese spy flick Woody and crew dubbed into being about finding the secret egg salad recipe? Even back in the day, I thought the dubbing in Son of Godzilla was so godawful, I just turned off my brain and thought the whole thing was stupid beyond words.

Having rewatched it today, it's obvious the entire film is a comedy. Either that, or I've just so mellowed out and am somehow less cynical than I was as an "idealistic youth", even if that doesn't seem to make sense. :cool: The way the Baby Godzilla keeps getting hit by boulders on the head should make it clear that it's an Abbott & Costello movie in disguise! Besides, with such supporting monsters as the three Giant Mantises and the humongous spider Spiga, you basically have to laugh at most of it. The main flaw seems to be that Godziilla is only seen for a few seconds in the first half hour. However, extra credit for Baby Godzilla appearing to blow smoke rings when he tries to fry you with radioactive fire!