Citizen Rules...Cinemaesque Chat-n-Review

→ in
Tools    






Incident at Oglala (1992)
Director: Michael Apted
Narrator: Robert Redford
Genre: Historical Documentary
Length: 99 minutes


This documentary narrated by Robert Redford covers the events of June 26, 1975 when two FBI agents in pursuit of a Native American suspect drove onto the Pine Ridge Indian reservation in South Dakota. A shoot out followed in which the agents were both shot and then latter executed at close range. Several members of the reservation were charged with the crime. These men had ties to an the activist group AIM, American Indian Movement. Ultimately the documentary uncovers a state of fear that took place on the reservation due to corruption in the administration of the reservation and a hostile split on the reservation between the traditionalist who followed traditional beliefs and the more westernized members of the reservation.

This is a very well done documentary that covers an important piece of forgotten history, but it shouldn't be forgotten. One man is still in prison to this day. Some say he's innocent, others say he murdered two FBI agents. The film takes an even approach and interviews people from both sides who were involved with the incident. Which allows the viewer to draw their own conclusions. It also uncovers a sickening amount of corruption and abuse by both the judicial system and abuses by those in charge of the reservation, the tribal chairman.

I was surprised at how good this was. A must see.





2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984)

Director: Peter Hyams
Writers: Arthur C. Clarke (novel), Peter Hyams (screenplay)
Cast: Roy Scheider, John Lithgow, Helen Mirren, Bob Balaban, Keir Dullea
Genre: Sci-Fi Mystery


About: In this sequel to Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, we find a joint U.S.- Russian expedition being sent on a Russian space ship to Jupiter. Their mission to learn what has happened to the first ship Discovery, and the missing astronaut Dave Bowman. There in orbit is a giant monolith the same one Dave Bowman had encountered nine years early. The only clue is his last message:



Review: I don't know why people are so down on this film. Sure the idea of sequels seem like a tired money making idea...and sure this isn't directed by Stanley Kubrick...and yes this has a totally different feel than 2001...But all of the doesn't make this a bad movie.

First, a lot of credit for 2001 goes to Stanley Kubrick as it should, but lets not forget the man who came up with the idea and wrote the story, novelist Arthur C. Clarke. And 2010 is based on Arthur C. Clarke's second novel in the series, named 2010. So this is not, just another attempt to make money. This movie gives fans more of the story that 2001 presented as a mystery.

Second
, the director pays respect to 2001 and never tries to out do it or ruin it's continuity, 2010 is respectful to the original 2001. The director Peter Hymas spoke to Kubrick and got his 'blessing' to make this film. And he even pays tribute to both Kubrick and Clarke on a cameo magazine cover.



What 2010 does right is to fill in some of the mystery of 2001, while importantly leaving the main mystery, as a mystery. 2010 tells it's narrative through the human experience via some very talented actors. The characters they play, take the part of 2001's vast visuals. Here the story comes with the heart of the characters via emotions.

I found 2010 to be a touching movie, in a spiritual, metaphysical, mystical way. And I've found myself thinking about the film and the greater idea of something more important than ourselves. And that's rare for a film to do that.




Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	e.PNG
Views:	811
Size:	390.7 KB
ID:	27690   Click image for larger version

Name:	a.jpg
Views:	804
Size:	257.1 KB
ID:	27691  



I've always viewed the two movies this way:
2001 is part sci-fi movie, part work of art. While 2010 is a decent sci-fi movie.
The first translates a story into an impressionist statement on existentialism set down on film, the second tells the rest of the story using a science fiction movie.



2010 is decent, it's certainly not the same spectacle as 2001 but never understood the hate for it myself - nice to see someone else enjoy it for what it is.



2010 is decent, it's certainly not the same spectacle as 2001 but never understood the hate for it myself - nice to see someone else enjoy it for what it is.
Lots of great scenes once they get into space, which happens quickly. The few scenes shot on Earth are nothing to write home about, IMO. Though the dolphin pool in the house was pretty cool. I assumed the dolphins were free range and could swim out to the ocean when they wanted.



Lots of great scenes once they get into space, which happens quickly. The few scenes shot on Earth are nothing to write home about, IMO. Though the dolphin pool in the house was pretty cool. I assumed the dolphins were free range and could swim out to the ocean when they wanted.
I tried to watch 2010 once...it was only slightly more interesting than 2001, which is not exactly a glowing testament.



[center]
[left]Lions for Lambs (2007)
Director: Robert Redford
Cast: Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep, Robert Redford
Genre: Political Drama
Length: 92 minutes
I tried to watch this once and turned it off about 15 minutes in...out of respect for you Citizen, I will give it another shot.




Things to Come (1936)
Director: William Cameron Menzies
Writer: H.G. Wells(novel), H.G. Wells(screenplay)
Cast: Raymond Massey, Edward Chapman, Ralph Richardson
Genre: Sci Fi, political social commentary


H.G. Wells' story of a 40 year long war that starts in 1936 and plunges most of mankind into a 'dark age' like anarchy...complete with plaques and a strong-man chieftain. Thus the continual war making, ends man's technological progress...But far to the south, a group of people, the 'Air Men' have avoided war, embraced rationality and eventually bring a near utopian civilization to the Earth.

Things To Come is not the most popular sci-fi movie ever made, but at the time it was an ambitious movie, costing a million dollars! With it's foreword looking themes and futuristic sets it's still worth watching, if for no other reason than the novelty of seeing what people in the past thought the future would look like.



One of the things they got right was the big open atrium of the city, complete with exterior elevators and terraces, just like modern hotels have today. The other forward looking idea was the use of big screen TVs. Not bad for a 1936 movie. Luckily no one in the 21st century wears that type of clothing!

Overall not a gripping film, in fact it's said that it set back sci fi for a decade, as the big budget film failed and studios were reluctant to make another sci fi like this.

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	a.jpg
Views:	750
Size:	221.9 KB
ID:	27695   Click image for larger version

Name:	aa.jpg
Views:	902
Size:	392.7 KB
ID:	27696  



Things To Come (along with a mere handful of other films) really stands out since science fiction wasn't even a movie genre in the 30's.

Granted, horror was a popular genre, and some of those stories crossed over into sci-fi (such as Frankenstein and the Invisible Man), but they were still considered horror as opposed to sci-fi.



Things To Come (along with a mere handful of other films) really stands out since science fiction wasn't even a movie genre in the 30's.

Granted, horror was a popular genre, and some of those stories crossed over into sci-fi (such as Frankenstein and the Invisible Man), but they were still considered horror as opposed to sci-fi.
Captain when was the last time you watched Things To Come? I have never seen it before and was amazed! to see a couple of iconic shots in the film. Does this shot from Things To Come, remind you of anything?

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	large_things_to_come_blu-ray_netx09.jpg
Views:	685
Size:	207.9 KB
ID:	27708  




Attack of the Giant Leeches (1959)

Director: Bernard L. Kowalski
Cast: Ken Clark, Yvette Vickers, Jan Shepard
Genre: Sci Fi/Horror B budget-Drive In
Length: 62 minutes

Don't let the cheesy name fool you, this is a pretty darn interesting movie! It's a cut above the usual, B-budget teen drive-in monster movies that were produced in the 1950's. This one was produced by Gene Corman, younger brother to Roger Corman. Put it this way, you could remove the monster from the film and you would still have an interesting and colorful story.

What I thought was interesting was the backwoods bayou take on the atomic large sized monster craze...this time it's giant intelligent leaches. OK, OK...I know that sounds cheesy but the main story is about a portly man who runs a store where all his Cajun buddies hang out. Just so happens he married to a very hot and trampy woman, who talks down to him causing him all sorts of embarrassments, even worse she runs around on him, behind his back, ala Baby Doll. There's a pretty steamy scene too, where the wife, Playboy playmate Yvette Vickers is sensually messaging lotion on her long legs as a cigarette dangles from her mouth. Letting us know, she's a bad girl for sure!


Sorry for the poor quality of the pic, I couldn't find a better one.

Her husband who looks like Raymond Burr from Ironsides, catches his best friend with his cheatin' younger wife and chases them around the bayou with a shotgun, pretty intense, especially as he makes them get into the water where the giant leaches are lurking! Later the police believes he's done them in and hid the bodies.

Meanwhile there's a city slicker game warden who's trying to stop the illegal pouching, which puts him at odds with the bayou folks and even his girlfriend. His girlfriends dad is the local doctor and wants to use dynamite to blow up the creatures, which is a clear violation in the game wardens eyes.

Best of all is the giant leaches, we never really see them clearly, it's always dark and in the water, so it's up to our immigration to decide what they really look like. What makes them horrific is they keep their victims alive and suck their blood. The cave scene is chilling, even by today's standards.



At only 1 hour, there's lots to like in this movie!






Touch of Evil (1958)
Director: Orson Welles
Writer: Orson Welles(screenplay)
Cast: Charlton Heston, Orson Welles, Janet Leigh
Genre: Film Noir

Marlene Dietrich once said of her time working with the great Orson Welles, ''People should cross themselves when they speak of him''. Indeed, Orson was a genius and he shows his mastery of visual arts in his 1958 film noir, Touch of Evil.

The films opening sequences goes down in the annuals of cinematography as one of the great camera shots of all time. We, the audience, sees one long and uninterrupted tracking shot. Orson set the bar with this shot which latter would be duplicated by other film makers.

Originally Universal Pictures, the studio bank rolling the movie, wanted the film to be shot on a studio lot on constructed sets. But Orson would have none of that preferring to shoot in a real city. He decided to film almost exclusively at night, which gave him control over the production. Sadly, during post production editing, Orson was out of the country and so despite his objections, the film was cut up by the studio. A situation that ironically Orson complains about in the movie Ed Wood.


Orson Welles as the corrupt Police Chief, Hank Quinlan

With the sole exception of Citizen Kane, Orson's feature films would all suffer the same indignation of being hacked up by the studios, thus destroying much of Welles' film vision. And ultimately causing him to retreat from Hollywood, which robed us of what might have been a large canon of masterpieces by Welles.

Touch of Evil
is a triumph for Orson Welles, thanks to a turn of events his film was restored to his vision in the 1998 cut. When Orson Welles initially discovered the studio had cut his film in his absences, he fired off a detailed 58 page memo on how he wanted the film to be edited. The memo was presumed lost until found to be in the position of Charleston Heston, years latter. Universal Studios in 1998 gave it's OK and the once cut up film was restored to Welles ideas, giving the boy genius his film back.



One of the hallmarks of Touch of Evil is the cinematic idea Welles adopted after watching (and being confused by) another great film noir, The Big Sleep. Welles once stated his goal was to infuriate the audience with a closed-lip plot. He does that by keeping the audience in the dark as he shows us the events as they happen and at almost real time. We go along for the investigation and are told nothing of the back stories of the characters we encounter. Mike Vargas (Charlton Heston) is our proxy and we are kept as clueless as he is at the start of the film. Only as he begins to discover the truth, do we. Welles extenuates that feeling by use of many closeups and low dutch angle camera shots, which makes us feel like we're a fly on the wall, listening in.

Welles chews the scenery in most films he appears in. Sometimes that doesn't work well, but like Kane, his characterization here helps give the film impact. I liked Charleston Heston in this, I think he makes a fine proxy for the audience as we go along for the ride at his side. Janet Leigh made a good victim! And woo hoo! we even get Zsa Zsa Gabor and the great Marlene Dietrich. I love Marlene's character in this film and she loved being in it and working with the master, Orson Welles.

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	touch-of-evil.jpg
Views:	762
Size:	122.5 KB
ID:	27709  




Conquest of Space (1955)
Director: Byron Haskin
Producer: George Pal
Cast: Walter Brooke, Eric Fleming, Mickey Shaughnessy, Benson Fong
Genre: Sci-Fi


About
: On an orbiting space station 'wheel' built by an international coalition, a team of Americans train for the first flight to the moon. At the last moment the moon mission is scraped and they're sent on a much more dangerous mission, to Mars.

Review: Conquest of Space is a big budget sci fi, by producer George Pal. Pal was well established as producing some of the great big budget sci fi films of the early to mid 50s:

Destination Moon (1950)
When Worlds Collide (1951)
The War of the Worlds (1953)

This time however his futuristic film bombed with both audiences and critics. He didn't go back to making sci-fi films for 5 years, finally returning in 1960 with the well received, Time Machine. After watching Conquest of Space, it's not hard to understand why it was so disliked at the time.

Unlike his early sci fi's that broke new ground in realistic special effects, this one had what looked like very cheap, small plastic models, almost laughable. The only saving grace is that the star field backdrop was beautifully done with splashes of color.



But what is really unforgivable is the silly one dimensional characters who joke and spar with dialogue that is as contrived and stale as can be...and sounds like something out of a matinee serial movie made for kids. Phil Foster who played the father on TV's Laverne & Shirley, tore up the scenery with his booming caricature voice. He's funny and even likable but not suited to a serious sci-fi.

One BIG plus is a diversified cast, which had a black American astronaut which is amazing for the 50s. Even more amazing is one of the main leads, is an Asian actor, Benson Fong, playing a Japanese who has the courage to volunteer and has the respect of his fellow astronauts. His was the best scene in the movie.



The drama comes from the dangers of space and from a type of 'space psychosis' that effects the men after longer periods in outer space...and the Captain has been in space a very long time!


Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	ConquestOfSpace04.jpg
Views:	921
Size:	165.1 KB
ID:	27720   Click image for larger version

Name:	4768152_l5.jpg
Views:	710
Size:	117.3 KB
ID:	27721  



Captain when was the last time you watched Things To Come? I have never seen it before and was amazed! to see a couple of iconic shots in the film. Does this shot from Things To Come, remind you of anything?

I had the same reaction when I first saw it, Rules, which was probably a few years ago (on TCM of course - pretty much my sole source for old movies).

It was just amazing to see such an old film tackle sci-fi in a much more mature way than the Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon serials.

As far as the shot - it reminds my of a few things, but I'm afraid to say!
Not sure exactly what it is - like if it's a shot from up high looking down on thousands of people who are just dots? It's got an art deco feel to it. I see something like an obelisk in the center (the Washington Monument of the future). Since there's a big circle it's bringing up images of "carousel" from Logan's Run (or HAL's "eye").
I'll let you tell me when you get time.

This is a weird aside, but there's a guy in Things to Come (a future general or something?) who wears a uniform and kind of an animal fur shawl. It looks very much like the outfit worn by the bad guy's right-hand-man in the Postman (1997)! I wonder if it was inspired?



To me, that shot looks very similar to the overhead shot of the core reactor in Forbidden Planet. It even has the small cat walks and tiny, tiny people for scale.

Yea, you got a Logan's Run vibe from that film too? Several of the shots really reminded me of Logan's Run in the 2036 city. I used one of them in the 4 pic montage.

Also when we first see the chieftain bad guy in the animal fur shawl, he's seated in a large decaying, domed building with a hole in the center roof....which really reminded me of the first shot of Peter Ustinov in the decaying U.S. Capital building surrounded by cats.

I bet you're right about Postman (1997) and the general with the fur shawl. Now, I have to see that movie and Logan's Run again! I actually like the Postman, especially the first half.



Yes, I like the Postman too. A lot of people don't like it. My only criticism of it (and this will come as no surprise)... just too long. Shave off about a half hour or so and it would be perfect!



Yea, I like Kevin Costner but man...he's always in those really long movies. It's been 15 years since I seen it and I've only seen it once, but if memory serves me it gets more grandiose towards the end of the movie, sort of like Waterworld (which I also like)...but I prefer more subtle.





Beast from Haunted Cave (1959)
Director: Monte Hellman
Writer: Charles B. Griffith
Cast: Michael Forest, Sheila Noonan, Frank Wolff
Genre: Crime, Horror
Length: 75 minutes

About: A group of criminals pull of a gold robbery and then take a cross country ski trip in the snowy backwoods of South Dakota to hide out from the police. After the bad guys blow up a cave as a diversion, a mysterious giant creature stalks them.

Review
: Another one of those B-budget horror thriller films from the Corman brothers. For this one they actually shot on location! and traveled to South Dakota's Black Hills to film the ski scenes in real snow! And they filmed in a real, abandoned mine shaft. This gives the film a more realistic look than most of the Corman early films.

I thought this was just OK, until we get to the creature in the cave. Which comes latter in the film. OMG, it was creepy for 1959. Wisely the creature is never clearly shown, being concealed in dark shadows which allows the human mind to fill in the gory details. To make the creature they covered it in spun glass, that made it look like it was draped with old cobwebs. Very effective.

In the best scene which predates Aliens, the creature has captured some humans, keeping it's victims alive wrapped in a cocoon and hung from the cave walls. Then the creature feeds on the living victims by sucking their blood. Ooouh!

+


Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	a.jpg
Views:	1416
Size:	92.4 KB
ID:	27735  



Some more nice sci-fi watches there ... I really must get back on track tomorrow



Some more nice sci-fi watches there ... I really must get back on track tomorrow
Last night I watched one of your recent 50s sci fi B films. I'll review it real soon. Hint...I liked it!