Iro's One Movie a Day Thread

A Beautiful Mind seems to have a lukewarm consensus, everyone seems to like it, a select few seem to hate it and no one seems to love it. It didn't deserve to win whatever it won (I remember it won a big award or something).

You have no idea what it won...but stand by the fact that it didn't deserve it? Odd.

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

Suspect's Reviews

#18 - Blow Out
Brian de Palma, 1981



A jaded sound engineer (John Travolta) witnesses a car crash while recording noises one night and, upon realising it was staged, becomes embroiled in a political conspiracy along with the crash's sole survivor (Nancy Allen).

It'd be easy to write off Blow Out as a really lurid '80s rehash of The Conversation, but it more than holds its own. The sound design is naturally very good and the scenes involving Travolta's character doing his soundman job are interesting enough even without their direct contribution to the plot. The rest of the filmmaking is solid, with crisp photography emphasising a mix of neon and darkness while the editing of both sound and vision is strong. The plot itself is a fairly suspenseful affair for the most part, though it does seem to drag in parts. While Travolta's character has considerable depth with a traumatic past underneath his cool, cynical exterior, he's kind of cancelled out by Allen's naive airhead, though that's more a problem with the writing than with Allen's acting ability. John Lithgow's role as an especially sadistic enforcer manages to be sufficiently disturbing as well.

Blow Out is a solid little thriller that has enough interesting twists and turns to keep things turning and manages to compensate for some weak characterisation with all sorts of visual and, perhaps more importantly, audial flair. It may not be an all-time great, but it's definitely one of the better entries in de Palma's filmography.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

#19 - Donnie Brasco
Mike Newell, 1997



Centres on the titular mobster (Johnny Depp), who is secretly an undercover cop trying to work a case against a New York organised crime outfit in the 1970s.

At the end of the day, Donnie Brasco didn't do anything for me. Every "undercover" trope is on full display here and there's not really anything in the way of interesting variation on any of them. The job takes its strain on Depp's home life, he buddies up to a senior member (Al Pacino) who eventually trusts him more than anyone else, he constantly gets into situations where he has to prove he's not a cop (most memorably where the gang head to an authetic Japanese restaurant while his boots are wired), his superiors are dicks to him and there's the eventual implication that he's starting to favour being a crook over being a cop. Sure, it's well-made and the performances aren't bad, but it doesn't help that the movie just seems to go through the motions and doesn't feel like it does anything particularly worthwhile.

#20 - The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Niels Arden Oplev, 2009



A disgraced journalist (Michael Nyqvist) is recruited to solve a 40-year-old missing persons case, eventually teaming up with a young hacker (Noomi Rapace) in the process.

This is the first time I'm actually seriously checking out the Millennium trilogy - I never read the books and the films were showing on TV once a week over the course of three weeks. The central mystery was interesting enough, though it's worth noting how the film takes its time getting around to it, instead working on developing Rapace's character, who serves as a more fascinating and layered individual than Nyqvist's fairly archetypal truth-chasing journo. The film is technically proficient and has an impressive feel to it thanks to its washed-out appearance and foreboding music. If there's one complaint it's that the film does feel a little long at times and it's ultimately a bit lacking in depth but it's still a gripping page-turner put onto the big screen in all its vivid, unsettling glory. I'll definitely be checking out the other two films the next chance I get.

#21 - Me and Orson Welles
Richard Linklater, 2010



In 1937, a high school senior becomes involved with Orson Welles' attempt to stage a modern-day theatrical version of Julius Caesar.

Admittedly, Me and Orson Welles has a fairly basic coming-of-age kind of narrative (albeit compressed to the space of a week) to go with a film that is for the most part a comedy about that tried-and-true premise of a theatrical production suffering numerous setbacks. There's not much of the way of actual laughter, but there's a certain charm to the film (as with just about every other Linklater film I've seen) that overcomes the lack of broad amusement.

The main reason anyone should at least consider watching this film is for Christian McKay's turn as Orson Welles. McKay naturally dominates the film with an uncanny impression of Welles, managing to portray him as a multi-faceted man that generally projects the sort of smug eloquence the world associates with Welles but who also tries (and often fails) to hide a much more temperamental side, especially when it comes to glaring foibles such as his rampant infidelity or perfectionist tendencies. Zac Efron, here still making a shift away from being known as the guy from High School Musical, gets a role that seems rooted in self-deprecation (his part in the play calls for singing, of course) and he proves himself a serviceable performer. Claire Danes serves as little more than his love interest, but she works well with what she's given. Quite fittingly, there's also a good ensemble at work outside the core trio.

Linklater is a filmmaker who doesn't really have a distinctive visual style and it works well here, as if the whole film is bending to the awesome will of Orson Welles even in fictional form. Of course, the plot and characterisation of anyone who isn't Welles leaves something to be desired (though the subplot involving Efron's character befriending Zoe Kazan's aspiring writer is fairly decent) and it builds up to an ending that did take me by surprise, but overall it's a fairly charming little piece of work.

Well, Al Pacino is awesome.

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

He holds his own well enough, but he doesn't have all that much to work with.

Outside of some of the stylistic flourishes, I wasn't a big fan of Blow Out. Decent, but disappointing after reading so much high praise from members of the forum. I've yet to fall in love with any of De Palma's movies.

I thought Donnie Brasco was very good. Just seeing Depp and Pacino share the screen was enough for me.

Have you seen Fincher's version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo?

Me and Orson Welles was surprisingly good. Despite Linklater's impressive track record, I think people tend to skip over it just because it stars Zac Efron.

__________________

I have not seen the Fincher version - I'll get to it after finishing the other films in the original trilogy.

Disappointing at the lack of love for Donnie Brasco. It's on my 100 so I obviously love it, but I think it's damn near perfect at what it does and I love what it does. I disagree with you about the performances and the writing, too. The chemistry between Pacino and Depp is fantastic, whilst being both natural and believable as their relationship grows. Obvously all the cliches are there, as you point out, but I feel the film just uses them as the structure, as it's supposed to, and adds to it, decorates that structure, much like a climbing plant follows a trellis.

I'm the complete opposite with Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. This does feel like decent, but not great or even good Nordic Noir. I'd seriously put almost any episode of the first two series of Wallander, they're all feature length, against this. Maybe it's because it wasn't new to me when I saw it (I've seen a little of this stuff before) or, maybe, it's just that TV gives me what I want in a way that cinema doesn't anymore (though as I said, the Wallander episodes are all feature length) but I was amased at the praise this'd gotten when I eventually saw it.

I'd like to see the Fincher version, just to see how it differs and what the Hollywood factor adds/takes from it. I didn't get that feeling/atmosphere I often get from Nordic crime drama from GWTDT, so maybe the Hollywood version will give it something extra? Didn't happen with Insomnia, but who knows?

Me And Orson Welles is something I've wanted to see when it came out.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

#22 - Rambo III
Peter MacDonald, 1988



When Col. Trautman is captured by the Soviets during a mission into Afghanistan, it's up to Rambo to find his way in and save the day.

Well, considering how I wasn't particular entertained by First Blood Part II, there was even less chance of Rambo III being a success but I still held out. Aside from the near-identical plotline - Rambo has to infiltrate enemy territory to rescue someone, fails on his first attempt but ultimately succeeds - there's not much to endear one to this movie. Having Rambo team up with the Muhajideen (complete with scenes of him slowly bonding with his newfound allies - including a scrappy young kid to boot - before they are inevitably ambushed) seems rather quaint these days. The main villain is more or less interchangeable with the villain from the last film (he might actually have less depth that Berkoff's scenery-chewing colonel - here he's just a sadistic thug without even Berkoff's smattering of off-kilter charisma). It was interesting to see Trautman become a more active part of the narrative rather than just being Rambo's voice of reason or mission control - it's a shame he spends the bulk of the movie being imprisoned and tortured because when he does team up with Rambo to do some fighting it's actually not bad. Unfortunately, it's not enough to save this from being another semi-forgettable action movie.

#23 - Blossoms and Blood
Paul Thomas Anderson, 2002

A short film made during production of Punch-Drunk Love about its lead characters, Barry (Adam Sandler) and Lena (Emily Watson).

I may have had my misgivings about Punch-Drunk Love itself, but the idea that it had a matching short film on the 2-DVD edition made me wonder if seeing this might actually expand on it in some important way. Unfortunately, the resulting twelve minutes basically functions as a much more abridged and abstracted recap of the source film - it cuts out the bulk of the characters and plots simply to focus on Barry and Lena. Some scenes are basically alternate takes of scenes that were already in the original film, while others come across as deleted scenes. Even if you actually liked Punch-Drunk Love you'd be hard-pressed to think there's anything about this film that either added to the source film or made it stand out on its own merits. I'm not even sure why it exists.

#24 - Rambo
Sylvester Stallone, 2008



A group of American missionaries hire Rambo to take them into war-torn Burma so they can administer humanitarian aid to the villagers there, but it's a Rambo movie so of course things go wrong very quickly.

After resurrecting Rocky Balboa with the imaginatively titled Rocky Balboa, Stallone obviously thought that bringing back his second-most-famous character would be just as great a success and so he did with Rambo (boy, those sequel titles, I tell you what). Even with the absence of Col. Trautman due to Richard Crenna's passing, the narrative is pretty much the same as it was in the last couple of films. At least with this film Stallone seems to realise how thin the Rambo sequel formula is and the resulting film doesn't even clock 90 minutes - while it ensures against bloat, it does mean that Stallone indulges a lot of 21st-century filmmaking's less tolerable aspects such as choppy editing and documentary-like shakycam. The decision to incorporate CGI blood and gore over practical effects is a double-edged sword because while it may look and feel less authentic than practical effects it does make for some ludicrously violent visuals. Too bad Stallone likes to play everything incredibly straight so being amused by this is a challenge. Characterisations are also pretty thin - Rambo is still wrestling with the same questioning of his own nature that was bothering him in Rambo III underneath his laconic exterior. The missionaries come across as clueless idealists who predictably get a harsh lesson in reality, while the villains are one-dimensional stereotypes who exist only to cause mayhem and violence for no real reason. At least the last couple of films gave us lead villains with some halfway-decent characterisation. There's also the group of mercenaries that appear halfway through the film that also cover the spectrum of soldier archetypes - amoral jerkass, sensitive new meat, etc.

Rambo has a few good moments scattered throughout its brief running time, but it's still a pretty weak film when all is said and done. I think the fact that I managed to watch every single Rambo movie even after my misgivings about the second one means there is at least something worthwhile about each of these movies but not enough to make me give any of them a positive score. At this rate, I'm still going to end up seeing Rambo V.

I plan on never watching any Rocky or Rambo movies.

Rocky and First Blood are both solid and worth watching at least once, but the sequels are of very inconsistent quality.

#25 - Every Which Way But Loose
James Fargo, 1978



A trucker (Clint Eastwood) falls for a country singer (Sondra Locke). When she leaves town, he embarks on a road trip in order to win her back.

Better known as "that movie with Clint Eastwood and the orangutang", this is a decidedly mediocre excuse for a comedy, even one that doesn't aim particularly high. The performances are generally serviceable, though the members of the biker gang that Eastwood antagonises are too irritating to even be entertaining when they get screwed over by Eastwood. Though Eastwood does a good job of sounding laid-back and deadpan, the show is stolen by Ruth Gordon as the cantankerous mother of his best friend (Geoffrey Lewis) and, of course, Clyde the orangutang. Clyde is as good a reason as any to watch this movie, performing antics such as flipping people off or drinking beers. Aside from that, the jokes aren't much chop. It's a very basic road-trip comedy that does last way longer than it needs to settles into a pattern of having Clyde do something funny or having one of Eastwood's many enemies try to get revenge on him - and, of course, Eastwood getting into fights.

One thing that did stand out to me about the film was the reveal that


For the most part, though, Every Which Way But Loose is a very underwhelming bit of slapstick. Having an orangutang does it make it stand out, but that (and the stuff covered in the spoiler space) are the only things that make it really stand out.

#26 - Any Which Way You Can
Buddy Van Horn, 1980



Following on from Every Which Way But Loose, Philo wants to give up street-fighting but he is soon roped into a Mafia-organised fight against a particularly dangerous fighter.

The sad thing about watching sequels like Any Which Way You Can is that you can see ideas at work that would have improved the original film but are instead left to flounder in a sequel of generally lesser quality. There are some good concepts at work here - the fact that the Mob constantly try to coerce Eastwood into fighting their champion despite said champion being an extremely affable guy who ends up befriending Eastwood - but they're buried under way too many attempts to lifelessly recycle gags from Every Which Way But Loose. The annoying biker gang I mentioned earlier is back with even more of a vengeance, there's more gags about getting Clyde laid (complete with jokes about tranquilising a female ape that sound an awful lot like date-rape jokes), plus they bring back Sondra Locke's character despite the reasons I mentioned in my last review. Having the film climax in a massive fist-fight across an entire small town was decent enough but it feels like too little, too late, especially in a film that's even longer than its already-overlong predecessor.

#27 - Holy Flying Circus
Owen Harris, 2011



A loosely-based-on-a-true-story dramedy about legendary British comedy troupe Monty Python as they have to deal with the outcry against their controversial Biblical comedy. Life of Brian.

Biopics about comedians can be tricky - trying to depict the same comic brilliance that made them legends in the first place is already difficult, while trying to balance it with the actual drama of their personal lives can make for a tonally unbalanced piece of work. Right from the outset, Holy Flying Circus claims to be "largely made up" and instead tries to throw in a load of Pythonesque jokes while throwing in the occasional actual event.

Though it's about the group as a whole, the film wisely decides to make Michael Palin and John Cleese the main characters. "Nicest man in the world" Palin is legitimately conflicted over the impact the film is having on everyone (including himself), while Cleese is an insensitive bastard who thinks the group has every right to offend everyone. At one point, the film acknowledges that yes, the film's version of Cleese is basically one big Basil Fawlty impression. The other Pythons are more or less background characters with one running gag each - Eric Idle is a greedy sellout, Terry Gilliam is a dopey American, Terry Jones has a speech impediment (and in true Python style, Palin's in-show wife is played by the same actor as Jones) while Graham Chapman is a constantly-smoking snarker. Despite the limits placed on their characters in the narrative, the actors all do tremendous impressions - during the first post-credits scene I initially thought they were the actual Pythons (not going to lie, the film's version of Idle is scarily identical to the real thing). Other characters in the film, from TV executives to outraged Christian groups (led by Mark Heap, better known as Brian from Spaced), are serviceable for the most part.

Unfortunately, for a film that tries to simulate Python's style of humour (including fake commercials and cut-out animations), the jokes tend to fall rather flat an awful lot of the time. There are lots of call-backs to existing Python jokes, especially to jokes from Life of Brian, but repeating them with some slight variation isn't enough to make them work a second time. Even when the Pythons' knack for making extremely metafictional humour is taken to the extreme several times it's not as clever as it thinks (not even when it points out that it knows that it's not as clever as it thinks). There's also the matter of the narrative itself - it's a pretty standard story about the right to free speech and the responsibility that comes with challenging the status quo and all that good stuff. Palin makes for a good protagonist, at least, as his reputation for being the "nicest man in the world" is frequently challenged by obstructive anti-Python individuals and institutions and makes for decent enough drama and at least one memorable revenge fantasy. I give the film credit for getting some amazingly accurate portrayals of the Pythons out of its actors, but the film as a whole, both as a comedy and a drama, does leave a fair bit to be desired. Still worth a shot if you like Monty Python, but be wary about your expectations.

Addendum: it's a minor thing, but I thought it was a nice touch how...

Wow. You're just pissing your time away atm aren't you?