One Movie A Day Remix

Day 143: September 20th , 2010

Dark Country



At the End of the Road... The Nightmare Begins.

A newly married couple hits the road and drives through the desert from Las Vegas when they encounter a person who was just in an accident. They take him and try to find some help, but they get more than they bargained for and all hell breaks loose.

I was intrigued by this film from the trailer, not because of the story or the actors, but it was the visual flare that grabbed me. It was a film noir with a twilight zone twist and that was exactly what the film gives you. Dark Country is the directorial debut of Thomas Jane and with Dark Country he shows that he has some interesting concepts and talent to back it up, yet still needs time to hone those skills. Dark Country, while showcasing some impressive scenes, comes off as slightly amateurish at times.

The most evident is the green screen. Now, Jane has obviously chosen to make it noticeable that when they are in the car, that the scenery in the background was stylized to make it feel like a comic book. It works, but the problem lies in the production values that are evident in the cracks. Bits of the green screen are visible through our lead female characters hair and around their faces. This takes you out of the film and you realize that you're watching a film.

The second would be the audio. While Jane pays a lot of attention to the detail of the visuals, he seems to have let the audio slide a little bit. If a film has bad visuals, the audience can forgive you as long as the sound is good. If a film has bad audio, you are screwed. While the film doesn't have horrible audio, there are times that it feels like it was put together in a day. ADR is very evident and jolting.

I give the film some credit for the intrigue. I immediately wanted to listen to the audio commentary from Jane to see what his agenda was. I got some of the film, while other parts of it were lost on me. The film is without a doubt a Twilight Zone entry aided by the film noir and graphic novel aspects that Jane added. It's a genre piece that has a specific market. Jane knows what he is doing and comes off extremely prepared and knowledgeable. I just wish he would have taken a bit more time with this one and improved those little imperfections.

It's funny, during the film there were parts where I asked myself if Jane was trying to make a 3D film. Reading up on the film, much to my surprise it apparently was suppose to be a 3D film. Not only that, but Jane is apparently not happy with the final product. I can see his frustration because there is a lot here that could be good. Instead it feels as if it's an exercise. A project to see if Jane could actually direct.

Dark Country is a beautiful looking film that has a few problems, yet those few problems are jarring enough to make you upset with the final product.

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

Suspect's Reviews

What is this thread about? I don't get it at all

Uh, try reading the first post. Does a pretty good job of explaining it, though it's kind of self-explanatory if you ask me: he's posting a review for each day of the year (starting in May). That's it.

This thread is actually about the song "One Movie A Day Remix" by The Usual Suspect.
The song is about movies & how the lead character lives through them each day remixing them in the process to suit his way of life.

Day 144: September 21st , 2010

The Slammin' Salmon



Bring a bib, it's gonna get messy.

I am not afraid to admit that I am a Broken Lizard fan. I dug Super Troopers , but it was Club Dread that made me a fan of the group. A perfect blend of horror and comedy. Vastly underrated, even by Broken Lizard fans. It makes me appreciate the film that much more, it's like the dark horse of the filmography. Beerfest was their next film and again, they scored high in my books. so my excitement rose when I heard there was another Broken Lizard film coming out, The Slammin' Salmon.

When the owner of a restaurant owes a Yakuza crime lord $20,000, he decides to hold a competition with the staff. The one who brings in the most money will win a prize. There was something off about this film from the get go, I couldn't put my finger on it until the credits started rolling. Jay Chandrasekhar the director of previous Broken Lizard entries was not the director. Kevin Heffernan was behind the camera. The film isn't poorly directed, just very basic. With Club Dread and Beerfest Chandrasekhar was use to being in the directing chair and would get a little bit more creative with the camera. Heffernan seems a bit timid.

The second would be the the film felt familiar. It could be that it's basically another swing at the dinning experience, one which we had earlier with Waiting. The difference being that this is an upscale restaurant, but the jokes, which we have seen before are still there. Some fall flat, others are just right up the groups alley. They also implore the use of twin characters, which we saw in Beerfest.

The film stars the usual boys, all doing a great job of course. They have their sense of timing and comedy down pat. Some people don't get or enjoy their comedic nature, but I do. The supporting players are April Bowlby, a waitress who tries to score tips based on her looks and Cobie Smulders (How I Met Your Mother) as a waitress who also is trying to become a doctor. Both are great and fit nicely into the film with the boys. The stand out character is without a doubt Michael Clarke Duncan. He has the best lines, the best mannerism and has the most fun with the character.

While it is the weakest of the Broken Lizard films (not including Puddle Cruiser) it is still a decent entry. They have yet to disappoint me and if you are a fan of these guys, this film will make you laugh.

Day 145: September 22nd , 2010

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.



Alien hand syndrome.

I didn't find this film to be that funny, but I did like it enough to warrant it a decent rating. I found the film to be of it's time. Kubrick without a doubt has films that are polarizing and despite this being a comedy, it's right up there with his other entries.

First things first, Peter Sellers, is remarkable here. He did in fact make me laugh. I had the most fun with this film when he was on the screen. George C. Scott helps with the laughter as well. I found him to be just as good as Sellers, but of course Sellers had the multiple roles going for him.

Maybe it's because political comedy isn't my thing, but I don't see how people can say this is one of the funniest films ever. I say it's because of age disconnect. I'm simply torn on the film, some of it was great great stuff, while other bits bored me horribly. Everything with the General made me yawn. Yet, everything in the war room is solid gold.

Leave it to Kubrick to give you a film like this.

I'm waiting for Mark F to make a comment about how on earth I could possibly give The Slammin' Salmon and Dr. Strangelove the same rating.

Wait. Did I see that right? The same rating for the Slammin Salmon and Dr. Strangelove?!?!?!

I need an explaination.

__________________
"Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and like it, never really care for anything else thereafter." - Ernest Hemingway

The explaniation is that he likes them about the same. I'll agree it's odd, as almost anything is funnier than Dr. Strangelove, even the Broken Lizard guys.

Day 146: September 23rd , 2010

Friday The 13th



Welcome to Crystal Lake

This is the recent remake that takes the first three Friday films and throws it into one. As far as the "big" three horror remakes, this one is my favourite. The other two are Texas Chainsaw Massacre and the very recent Nightmare on Elm Street. I thought the filmmakers took a more creative route and tried something different with the character of Jason, whereas the other two were high and dry remakes that made me squirm with disappointment too often.

So we start off where the first original film ends, Pamela Voorhees decapitated. We see a little kid, deformed, grab her head and head off into the woods. Flashforward 12 or so years. 5 twenty somethings hike in the woods, two of them planning on stealing a crop of weed that is out in the woods. Sliced and diced!

Flashforward a few weeks...again. We see another group of twenty somethings heading up to a cottage, an expensive one. One they travels they run into a guy looking for his missing sister, you guessed it. She was one of the people from the attack a few weeks earlier. Well, Jason shows up, kills more people and what not and we have the same formula that the original films had.

So where is this film different? Gone is Jason, the supernatural killer who can die multiple times and keep on coming. Jason has been grounded in reality, he lives off the land, he's a hunter. He has gotten a little smarter too, setting up traps for his victims, like bear traps and using other victims as bait for others. Smart guy. The same overbearing figure is there, we get a glimpse of him with his trademark sack with one eye hole, then he finds his famous hockey mask.

I applaud the film for making the characters do stupid things, yet making them not seem stupid themselves. Their actions are results of others. Why does the one guy go to the shed alone in the dark? Other than being drunk, the annoying guy who owns the cottage told him to, because he has to fetch some tools and fix a broken chair. No investigating some strange noises.

The film has drugs, sex that is accompanied with a lot of boobies and death. The kills range from his trademark machete, to hatchet, arrow, stabbing, etc. It's funny to me that I prefer the original Nightmare on Elm Street compared to the original Friday the 13th, yet here I prefer the Friday remake.

Do you disagree that Halloween is one of the "big 3"? Or did you just forget? If there's a big three, then surely it's Halloween, Friday and NOES.

You will get there keep them coming

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

No, I don't consider the Halloween remake part of the big 3. Rob Zombie did that on his own agenda, the big 3 would be part of Platinum Dunes.

I didn't have too many laugh-out-loud moments either. Sterling Hayden's talk about how the communists poisoned the American water to infuse their commie ideas was the most hilarious bit for me. All of his conspiracy theories were very funny. Personally, I think Hayden's character was the funniest.

I also liked Slim Pickens a lot. His manner of speech and accent were superb. What I loved about Scott is how he kept saying that the US needed to attack the communists, especially near the ending when they have to start a war to avoid missing out on underground space to live in.

Surprisingly, I didn't find Peter Sellers to be all that. To me, the supporting roles were much funnier than his. His character of Mandrake mostly annoyed me and the President didn't do much for me either.

While I understand why many people think this is the funniest film of all time, I don't find it to be so myself. I definitely had some chuckles, smiled a bit and a few laugh-out-loud moments, but my overall appreciation of the film wasn't overly diminished by it. I certainly rate Dr. Strangelove highly as a comedy. I'd give it a solid +. To me, it falls just short of greatness.

Any mention of Strangelove's humour reminds me of this article by Mike Nelson. The movie will probably never drop out of my top 100, but I can't deny Mike's comments on the film ring pretty true.

Cracked?

__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."

It's a guest article by Mike from MST3K, so it's more than cancelled out.

The thing I've always liked about Strangelove is that for all its ridiculous character names and many of the seemingly incongruous actions, the entire film is played straight. Even at the end when the Doctor himself seems to be undergoing a combo miracle cure and a reversion to Naziism, I can see it all actually being true. Let's say for a moment, as some have mentioned previously, that Dr. Strangelove isn't a comedy at all. What rating would you give it then? It has documentaryish realism in the attack on Burpelson Air Force Base. It has great suspense inside the bomber as the Soviet missile hones in on them. It has an incredible set recreating the "War Room" and also Major Kong's plane. It also has a set of solid, very personalized performances. I believe the fact that the visual presentation of the film is so realistic that it often lulls viewers into thinking that they are watching something serious and not funny at all. Then again, the intent of the film is deadly serious; at the end, the world is gone.


So Strangelove also has to fight against the uphill battle of being a mostly realistic dark comedy, and many people don't get dark comedies unless somebody's being hit over the head with a shovel or being secretly buried. Something else I was just thinking about for the first time is that the film also has the air of being a British comedy. Even if Sellers and Peter Bull are the only principal British actors, there is the element of dry wit found in the film which many people cannot seem to comprehend as being funny. I realize that this subject hasn't been mentioned much here at MoFo, but I've come across many people who do not get the comedy of early Alec Guinness films, for example. I love British comedies (at least the good ones), so I don't have a problem with dry humor. I will admit that the film does take its time establishing the situation at the beginning. It is in the opening scenes where I find the movie most closely resembles the concept of being "boring" and not too funny, but keep your eyes and ears open because there are other things going on which are trying to set you up for the sucker punch ending.


I realize that nobody can make anybody change their mind about anything, but I just find Dr. Strangelove an almost miracle film which walks a tightrope where every ominous line or performance can be equally seen as humorous. If it sometimes seems insane, even in what some people mistake to be laborious boredom, that fits right into its intentions since the film perfectly depicts how the insanity of war can lead to the destruction of Humankind and probably all other life on the planet. Perhaps that overriding theme makes it seem better to those who truly love it, but then again it could just be what's in the flyer's survival kits or the fact that Group Captain Mandrake may have to answer to the Coca-Cola Company.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Even just that picture with Slim Pickens on the bomb that says "NUCLEAR WARHEAD HANDLE WITH CARE" makes me laugh!

__________________

Day 147: September 24th , 2010

The Experiment



Everyone has a breaking point.

This is an American direct to dvd remake of a German film called Das Experiment. With two Oscar winners in the lead roles and a good concept, I guess I expected a little more from this film. It was a well made polished film, but it lacked the emotion that was needed to really give it that powerful edge. It falls under the cliched saying of, watch the original instead.

A bunch of people answer an ad in the paper, an experiment that will last for two weeks. $1,000 dollars a day for a total of $14,000. No experience needed. The experiment? People are divided up into two groups. Prisoners and guards. They are locked away at a remote location, where they must follow 4 simple rules. If one of the rules is broken, the guards must take action. Cameras are everywhere, everyone is being watched and everyone has a breaking point.

Adrien Brody plays a hippie protester who was just laid off and if looking for some money. He answers the ad of course. Forrest Whitaker is a religious man who also needs some cash, he lives a life sheltered life with his mother. These two men form some sort of friendship through the auditioning process and both make it into the experiment. Obviously this so called friendship is tested because one is in position of power, while the other has his rights taken away.

The performances from the two leads are decent, Whitaker takes a special notice because he has a character that does a total 180. He gets off on the authoritative position he was given. His whole life he was a nobody, now that he has power, he abuses it. Whitaker plays the role well, he has the hint of crazy to him that makes it noticeable. Brody has the unfortunate task of getting the snot beaten out of him and humiliated at every opportunity. While he does a decent job, I never fully believed he met his breaking point.

The film was written and directed by Paul Scheuring, who has some prison experience, working on the hit show Prison Break. For a first time director, he seems to grasp the ins and outs. He has a good film here, but the imperfections are enough to ruin the overall experience. The problems that escalate in the film happen way too early. All these men are striving towards the same goal of $14,000. The lines are drawn too fast. All hell breaks loose to early. The experiment is suppose to last two weeks. Do we even make it past one?

The supporting characters aren't given enough screen time. Clifton Collins Jr. has a supporting role here. He has an interesting character that I wanted to learn more about, but he is always pushed off to the side and never explored. Some of the actions of the people in the film are questionable. I wondered why certain characters would follows others without question. The experiment itself isn't explored deep enough. The whole thing is about power and the abuse of it, what do people do? Do they do what is morally right, or what society deems morally right? If no one stops the experiment because of abuse, is it still okay to abuse people? These questions are just skimmed by on the surface, I wanted a bit more.