Iro's Film Diary

I think the sequence where Jordan and co. are sitting around a table discussing the logistics of holding a dwarf-tossing event (rather than the event itself) is hilarious. Something about their obliviously patronising tone where they show over concern over the insensitivity of such a display only because they're trying to figure out what they can and can't get away with really does tap into something funnier than any actual dwarf-tossing could ever be. The same can be said for one of the first scenes between Jordan and Donnie where Donnie is talking about how he's married to his cousin - obviously the film is full of more graphic depictions of the incredibly reprehensible absurdity of both these people and their world, but something as simple as a one-on-one barroom chat is just as demonstrative yet amusing, especially when you take into account Hill's off-kilter delivery.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

I can understand what your saying but I think the content of what they are saying about the dwarves just gets too absurd. I don't buy that even this group of idiots would have this discussion in a serious manner. I believe they would have the event, but not that they would actually think there is a way to have it in a sensitive manner.

__________________
Letterboxd

I never said that it was about them actually trying to be sensitive about it, more like they were trying to figure out how much that they could get away with without being called on it. They literally cap off the discussion by jokingly re-enacting the "one of us" scene from Freaks, so it's obvious that they're not acting out of genuine concern for the dwarves' well-being. As a result, I do see the scene as yet another extension on how they approach the situation as the amorally self-interested salesmen that they are - to them, it's no different than trying to figure out the nicest possible pitch they could use to sucker people into buying worthless penny-stocks. That's what makes it work.

I think I might be talking myself into rating this higher.

#128 - The Cell
Tarsem Singh, 2000



A psychologist must use experimental technology to enter the mind of a serial killer in order to find his next victim.

I know that film is primarily a visual medium and narrative is not the be-all and end-all of a singular movie's worth, and I already knew before watching The Cell that it would most definitely be that kind of movie. The plot itself is a very simplistic sci-fi variation on a familiar serial-killer premise where a lawman (Vince Vaughn) and specialist (Jennifer Lopez) must join forces in order to beat a killer (Vincent D'Onofrio) at his own twisted game, though in this case it involves Lopez diving into a comatose D'Onofrio's subconscious to solve the mystery. This is where The Cell's true strengths (or, if you want to be harsh, redeeming features) come into play as Lopez must navigate a lurid landscape filled with vibrant yet frequently disturbing images, hoping to forge a connection with D'Onofrio's subconscious avatar. Leaving aside the fact that the visuals look conspicuously dated (most obviously in the film's use of CGI), there's only so much variety in this grotesque fantasy world, making it decidedly easy to grow bored even as the film throws out everything from saturated colours to ornate production design in order to stand out. While The Cell is not a total failure in this regard, it quickly becomes apparent that the film's unusually artistic approach to such rote material only goes so far towards creating a favourable impression and ultimately results in a film that leaves very little impression.

I remember being really disappointed with this when I fist saw it, but I was young back then. I think I was hoping for an Inception style film well before Inception came out. What I got was a visually odd film with bad leads and a fearsome, yet terrified villain.

Maybe a half popcorn higher? I don't know...

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

I didn't think this would be something I'd like, but I know MV loves it so I recorded it. I've still not seen it, though.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Iro just hates everything.

__________________

You're only saying that because I went after a movie you liked. Most of the films I've covered in the past few pages have good ratings.

The Cell is pretty notorious to be fair.

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

#129 - The Great Beauty
Paolo Sorrentino, 2013



When an ageing writer learns of the death of the first woman that he ever loved, it causes him to reflect on both his past and present.

Having already seen Sorrentino's later film Youth, I was a little underwhelmed by how The Great Beauty seemed to cover a lot of the same themes as it also involves an older man pottering around a variety of picturesque locations in a rather tragicomic and contemplative (albeit rather satirical) two-hour film. Sorrentino does demonstrate some technical aptitude and knows how to balance static back-and-forth exchanges with flashy displays of the many different sides of Rome (which here range from prestigious monuments to seedy nightclubs). There's a decent collection of players to help sell the rather scattered collection of jabs at the Italian upper class, which makes The Great Beauty fairly watchable and appreciable but I'm hesitant to think of it as especially, well, great for now.

#130 - Psycho
Gus Van Sant, 1998



A woman goes on the run after stealing a large amount of money from her workplace.

While a bad remake does not automatically tarnish a beloved original, Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot remake of Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho definitely feels like it has the potential to be an exception precisely because of its dedication to replicating the original with a few cosmetic tweaks. Though one can try to appreciate the generally decent cast of actors and the decision to swap stark monochrome for lurid colour as yet another of Van Sant's bold attempts to experiment within a mainstream context, it really is hard to see much of a worthwhile reason. Even the occasional alteration that is made possible by the more open social attitudes of the 1990s comes across as misguided more than anything - look no further than a certain change to the scene where Norman Bates (here played by one very miscast Vince Vaughn) observes an undressing Marion Crane (Anne Heche) through a peephole. Part of me wants to think of this film's existence as some kind of subversive response to the concept of unnecessary remakes by making one of the most unnecessary remakes possible, but even that supposition does little to make this film feel like anything more than a waste of time and talent.

#131 - Tombstone
George P. Cosmatos, 1993



An ex-lawman and his brothers attempt to build a new life for themselves in a bustling town but must deal with a local gang of outlaws.

In theory, I should love Tombstone. A modern take on a classic Western legend that not only features an all-star cast but has Kurt Russell and Val Kilmer headlining it (as righteous lawmaker Wyatt Earp and his roguish associate "Doc" Holliday respectively) should be a thoroughly enjoyable adventure, yet I have never found it to be anything more than passable. I don't deny that it's got its good parts - Russell is as charming as ever, while Kilmer delivers one of his greatest performances as the sickly charismatic gambler who steals every scene he's in. The sheer amount of talent in the cast is such that I could just copy out their names and add in the good moments that they get throughout a film that moves at a quick enough pace to really make the time fly. However, the film's attempt to bring the same tone and vibe of your typical old-school Hollywood Western into the 1990s makes the film feel a bit too dry at times, as does the film's tendency to revel a bit too much in broadly-drawn vignettes involving everything from tense showdowns to romantic melodramatics; even the better instances of such vignettes are dragged down by the lesser ones. I wouldn't go so far as to say that there's anything truly awful about the film, but it's just so fundamentally weak that I can only really look at it as a handful of good scenes haphazardly scattered across a film that doesn't do anything especially new or interesting for the most part. Still, a handful of good scenes is better than a lot of films manage and Kilmer alone is enough to stop me from coming anywhere close to hating this.

This is my best friends favourite film, but I feel like you do about it for the most part. Watching this with her is much more enjoyable than alone or with anyone else because I like that she's enjoying it so much. A bit like watching a horror film with someone who gets scared by them.

Oh, most definitely. I daresay that a lot of my appreciation of it stems from Kilmer movies being something of an affectionate in-joke on an old forum I used to frequent.

#132 - Broken Arrow
John Woo, 1996



A young fighter pilot must stop his corrupt mentor's plan to hijack thermonuclear warheads for profit.

When it comes to John Woo's Hollywood output, I can at least handle stuff like Face/Off or Mission: Impossible II because of how they at least tap into the same styles of action and thematic concerns that made films like The Killer and A Better Tomorrow into the classics that they are. Broken Arrow doesn't have quite as much of the director's fingerprints on it and ultimately suffers for it (there's only one instance of a guy jumping through the air while holding two guns, but at least there's the right amount of fluidity to the camerawork). There's only so much Woo can do with such a bland excuse for an action film, though. Having a great pair of scenery-chewers like Christian Slater and John Travolta headline the film definitely makes it easier to digest and there is a pulpy exchange or two to give the film some personality. Unfortunately, the action tends to be rather limp for the most part (though the train finale is suitably bombastic) and the end result is one extremely passable excuse for an action movie.

#133 - Darkman
Sam Raimi, 1990



When a scientist is horribly disfigured and left for dead by a ruthless gangster, he vows revenge.

Darkman is another one of those films where the various elements on display should cohere into something I like but the overall result leaves me wanting more in a bad way. It's good to see Liam Neeson chew some serious scenery as the eponymous anti-hero - the scene where he tries to win a stuffed animal for his girlfriend (Frances McDormand, who is better than the role deserves) is definitely a highlight. Raimi also deploys the same unhinged approach to cinematic language that he had used to strong effect in the Evil Dead movies, throwing out haphazard camera moves and gloriously dated effects work to render everything from experimental technology to Darkman's inner torment in vivid detail. The flaws that undermine Darkman tend to be of a narrative nature - though it's a rather lean film, it's still got a flat origin story that's also given over to a rather dull plot full of generally weak characters that also has trouble pacing out some good action scenes in the process (with most of them being packed into the film's final third). Though these are significant problems, I reckon that Darkman still uses enough of its potential to feel like a fairly fun little movie from time to time.

The only time I saw Darkman was when it was released on video and I really didn't like it at all. I don't remember anything about it now, so I don't know how I'd feel, though Liam Neeson being in it makes it more difficult to like even if I would.

I like Broken Arrow, but I can watch a red haired Samantha Mathis in most things.

I like Darkman. I'd rate it higher.

Not a fan of Neeson? Boo to that, I guess.

I imagine that "most things" does not include Super Mario Bros.

Of course you would.

I quite like Darkman