The 29th Hall of Fame

There are more modern versions of the film from 1994 from Abel Ferrara, and a 2007 ish film starring Daniel Craig.

But for most people , it comes down to the first or second, with a few (I originally mistaken it a popularity earlier) touting the 1994 remake.

They're fairly close to each other, but I prefer the original film. I didn't do a whole lot of comparisons between the two films in my write-up in this thread, but I elaborated a bit on it in my review.

I don't remember if I talked about this or not in my review of Invasion of the Body Snatchers...but I' convinced the movie is not an allegory for black listing like High Noon was. It feels like an allegory for the fear of a communist take over from within. That was a common fear in the 1950s.

The great thing about the Invasion movies is they can be taken as an allegory for pretty much anything we are currently frightened of. All the bad seeds we think are being implanted in our neighbours. It is an endlessly perfect horror premise, adaptable to any time.

I’ll finish The Promise tonight after work. Not much left.


Probably will watch Tomboy this weekend.

Anomalisa (Charlie Kaufman & Duke Johnson, 2015)

I remember liking this a good bit when it came out but I was concerned going in as I've lost my taste for Kaufman's writing in recent years and I definitely liked it less this time around but not as much as I feared. Kaufman seems like an annoying dude I wouldn't want to be around and he very much writes from the perspective of an annoying dude I wouldn't want to be around but him writing something that feels a bit more off-the-cuff than his typical fare is a nice change of pace for him. This is still Kaufman whining about himself like all his films are but taking out the hyper-meticulous nature of his usual fare makes this easier to swallow for sure (though it felt like he couldn't help himself with that dream sequence lmao). I don't know, its fine, uncomfortable at points but appropriately so. It passes the time. Realizing I have nothing positive to say despite liking it well enough. Uhhhhhh.... *shrug*

I'll try to have my final review out by tomorrow.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

Out of curiosity, have you seen Being John Malkovich? That's still my favorite film he's done.

The Promise

Roger and Igor are a father and son duo who rent out apartments to illegal immigrants. Roger exploits them by having them pay high prices and has them work on the apartment to fix any issues that arise. Of which there are apparently many. The apartment complex isn’t even finished by the look of it.

One of the tenants has just brought his wife and child over, and is short on money. He has gambling debts apparently. One fateful day he falls off of a scaffold and is seriously injured. Thinking he may die, He makes Igor promise to watch over his wife and child. Roger arrived but refuses to take him the hospital and instead covers his body. Could he have been saved? Possibly. Igor seems to think so.

After this, Igor starts to try and take care of the wife, Assita. He gives her money. Her helps her with firewood. But Roger grows increasingly concerned over Igor’s affection for her. He’s also worried about her constant questions about where her husband is. He sets up a rape attempt ti scare her off. He tried to convince her he won’t be coming back. When these prove ineffective, he decides to fake a telegram from her husband with his location and offers to take her there himself.

Igor suspects the worst and instead, decides to flee with Assita to fulfill his promise.

It’s a good movie that has some good character development, especially with Igor. He once idolized his father but later begins to turn away from him. It doesn’t offer any answers to his predicament, but rather allows us to watch the ordeal unfold naturally. There’s no grand standing nor any big speeches. It’s good stuff.

The Year My Voice Broke (1987) -

This was a good coming-of-age movie which resonated with me quite a bit. It successfully captures the feelings of growing up, first love, and jealousy which are relatable for many people, me included. When I was Danny's age, I was in a similar boat as him in certain respects and my background helped me to relate to his character quite a bit. I also found Trevor memorable. While he and Danny had their differences with each other, they were still able to get along reasonably well. One gets the impression that, though they're not close friends, they're able to tolerate each other due to their shared attraction to Freya. Speaking of which, Freya is a fine character as well, even though she's not quite as memorable. She gets into some risky situations, faces the consequences of them, and attempts to recover. Not a whole lot to dig at with her, but she isn't bland by any means. For instance, that she's a soul mate to Danny is probably her most memorable trait. Technically speaking, the film is pretty good as well. The usage of natural lighting, particularly for the scenes which take place at evening where you get golden hour light, look really pretty. The paranormal aspect to certain scenes was a nice touch as well (even though I wished the film would've done a bit more with this aspect). The only reservation I had is with the noticeable disconnect between Danny's actions and how the movie wants you to feel about his character. Throughout the film, his love for Freya remains consistently creepy, with him spying on her changing clothes, stealing her underwear, and attempting to hypnotize her so he can look up her skirt. While I normally don't mind unlikable characters, I think the movie asks you to feel sympathy for him in the ending and that connection wasn't there for me. I also think the film tries to convince you that Danny is a better romantic partner for Freya than Trevor, and that fell flat for me as well. In spite of that, however, I did enjoy the movie quite a bit. While teen romance films aren't necessarily my favorite type of film out there, this one ranks amongst the better ones I've seen.

I enjoyed your review and I liked the way you delved into the film & the characters. I know what you mean about Danny, he was a bit odd. Personally I liked that his character wasn't the typical teen nerd who loves the girl but can't win her. If this had been a Hollywood film he would've been indeed nerdy. Instead his nervy. He's got the balls to go to a dance by himself, walking in smoking a cigarette and wearing a leather jacket which in Hollywood would almost always denote the 'bad boy' or cool outsider dude. I liked that the film made Danny his own person with a lot of quirks and some naughtiness too. The kid had spunk! I liked him.

To be clear, I don't have an issue with his characterization in and of itself. I don't mind the movie making him unlikable or providing him with a naughty edge. It's more or less with being asked to feel sympathy for him as that wasn't there for me.

Yeah I kinda thought that.

I just felt like posting my own thoughts on how the film handled his teenage outsider character compared to what a Hollywood film would do.

That's fair. I liked that his characterization was a lot more unique than you'd get from a typical Hollywood film. With a bit of edits to the script, I might've liked it even more. Still a solid film though.

Watching Enthiran felt like wandering into the wrong club on a night out - one where everyone speaks a foreign language, and the music is completely removed from any previous experience you've had. You like what you hear, and what you see - but you can't quite slip into the feel of things with ease. I'm not at all familiar with Bollywood, Kollywood, Tamil-language films or much at all related to Indian cinema, so there's nothing for me to relate the movie to. I'd assumed, it being a science fiction film, that there'd be no musical numbers - but no, there are musical numbers. At some stage in India's past, there was some kind of mandate drawn up, bill passed through their law-making chambers of government, and law enacted that makes it compulsory for every single Indian film made to have musical numbers. It's one of the most confounding cultural differences in the history of cinema - that of India, which sets it apart from all other countries on earth. Luckily enough though (especially since Enthiran goes for nearly 3 hours) the movie is entertaining, funny, exciting, visually pleasing and great sounding.

The film itself involves the creation of "Chitti" - a humanoid robot, by K. Vaseegaran (both roles played by Rajinikanth.) Chitti is strong, fast and has incredible cognitive abilities - and Vaseegaran hopes that it can be used by India's military. His testing grounds are out in the real world, and problems arise - specifically, Chitti's inability to understand and interact with humans due to it's lack of emotional reasoning. Professor Bohra (Danny Denzongpa), Vaseegaran's superior, is the man with the power to approve Chitti - but he's working on his own series of robots, although with much less success. When Vaseegaran manages to make enough modifications to Chitti, the robot proves itself by getting angry with it's master - but although it passes it's accreditation, the machine also falls in love with Vaseegaran's fiancé, Sana (Aishwarya Rai Bachchan). When Chitti is rejected by her, it purposely fails it's military testing and is destroyed by Vaseegaran in a fit of rage. The robot is saved by Bohra and fitted with a red microchip to enhance it's willingness to kill - which only creates a destructive force that will stop at nothing to possess Sana. Will it even be possible to stop this machine, after it builds it's own series of powerful robots into a superior army?

The first thing you notice about Enthiran is it's playful, deliberate comedic, sensibilities - providing us not only with a cute kind of robotic doofus (to begin with) but also two comic relief characters in Vaseegaran's assistants Siva (Santhanam) and Ravi (Karunas). The best lines though, are saved for Chitti, whose misunderstandings come from his complete and utter inexperience with the human world. The next thing you notice is the fact that Vaseegaran's girlfriend is being played by an actress 23 years Rajinikanth's junior. Some things never change, although to be fair this lead actor does look a lot younger than his age suggests. The effects are great, and look really nice - thanks to Legacy Effects and V. Srinivas Mohan - who people might be interested to learn also worked on popular Indian film RRR. Mohan visited Industrial Light & Magic in the U.S. before filming commenced. He's been working in the business since 1996, and although I think these special effects don't quite rise to the standard a high-budget American film might reach, they do the job well enough, and are required here to a dizzying extent, for this three hour film is filled with action and impressive set-pieces. At the time it was made, Enthiran was the most expensive Indian film in history.

The film had something of a tortured pre-production history, taking 10 years to get off the ground, but something high profile writer/director S. Shankar was always going to get around to - in some form. Interestingly, Ben Kingsley was nearly nabbed to play Professor Bohra - which would have been a coup - but the net was cast wide for a stunt coordinator with Hong Kong martial arts choreographer Yuen Woo-ping brought in for fight sequences. Yuen Woo-ping worked on the Matrix and Kill Bill films. It's interesting to note that location work was usually undertaken for the musical segments, with cast and crew travelling to Peru and Brazil to get down and sing ditties in this lethal robot action extravaganza. Despite being the highest grossing film in India during 2010, it's only up at No 48 on the all-time list, despite it's sequel, 2.0, being right near the top at No 8 - kind of ironic, considering the fact that the sequel to Enthiran is considered to be something that adds up to much less than the original. Although I enjoyed this film, I don't think I'll be checking it out.

This all adds up to a story that's somewhat reminiscent of Frankenstein - involving something mankind has had it's eye on for a while now, for we are on the verge of creating something questionable when you consider A.I. and robotics. It puts the creator in a god-like position, and it's interesting that these creations so often turn against their masters. I have to admit though, I never expected the catalyst for that to be love. I often pondered how Chitti would end up expressing that love - aside from the kisses he's perfectly capable of. I'm reminded of Ex Machina which recently explored whether a robotic A.I. could ever achieve consciousness or awareness, and the same thing goes for Chitti with him falling in love. Is this really a machine in love, or is it approximating love - mimicking it in a way it's programmed to? When Chitti begins arguing and becoming angry, it's assumed he's experiencing emotions, but the fact remains that he could be simply behaving the way he's programmed to. He only lashes out when a microchip is inserted that commands him to. Consciousness is something that's hard to prove.

The greater impression I got from the film in the end was an Indian approximation of big budget science fiction blockbusters from the U.S. - the likes of which came from James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, Paul Verhoeven and Christopher Nolan. This includes the film's length, which I struggled with a little bit - I often find myself a little frustrated with action scenes that extend themselves beyond the point of providing us with tension and excitement. I find that action can only sustain itself for a certain amount of time before it exhausts our ability to follow a fast ever-changing landscape, or breaks our ability to remain in suspense. I felt that the final stretch of Enthiran could have been a lot tighter and quicker to resolve. In it's last stretch, a lot of the humour and fun had been drained from proceedings, and I felt like I was watching a completely separate and different film. As a whole though, the action and narrative weren't bad.

If Enthiran is anything to go by, Indian cinema is producing home-grown content that's providing entertainment world-wide, with appreciative audiences providing earnings for any companies joining in with distribution. A lot of the reactions to this film I've seen have been good, and it absolutely bursts at the seams with action, effects, comedy, romance and music - all of which is well executed and entertaining. I enjoyed watching it - and that especially goes for it's first half. It wasn't quite at a level of sophistication I like my big budget science fiction epics to be - but at the same time, I'm more wary of big budget science fiction these days anyway, so getting an example from India at least added some colour and novelty to proceedings. That's why I really didn't mind when musical numbers started breaking out - which provided something different from what I'm used to. It hasn't converted me into a fan yet, but I certainly don't dislike it - and don't begrudge it the success it has had. Big budget science fiction and action from English-speaking countries often has success that isn't justified.

__________________

As promised, I’ll be starting Tomboy up later tonight.

Okay, so the first question that gets posed is which of the two films I found to be better, right? While I do think that the remake's highs are far higher than anything that's in the original, it also has some low lows that aren't present in the original. Both films in the end stack up almost equally, but if I had to give the edge to someone, it would probably be the 1956 version which in quality was more consistent.

Let's start with what the remake does better. The defining feature of the 1978 film is its tone, particularly its usage of the cinematic language to communicate and portray said tone. The chaotic energy behind the music, the editing, and the cinematography, all hand in hand and unified in making the experience as paranoiac as possible. The special effects are obviously far greater, I mean not to throw digs at the 1956 film but its effects are pretty bare-bones and basic. I previously had all sorts of complaints about the logistics of the body snatching process in the original, so I was glad to have most of my questions answered in the remake. They were all important questions too, such as as what happens to the human body during and after said process? Or how are the pods and what they're replicating even linked in the first place? Despite how underwhelming it would've been, the 1956 movie could've successfully copped out with the ol' excuse of "leaving things out for interpretation", but any chance of that is ruined with the scene where we're showcased Becky's transformation. Finally, I'd also have to say that the foursome in the remake are way stronger characters than the four in the original, matter of fact, I was struggling to even remember if there even was a foursome in the original, because all I remembered was the two main characters. Even though the remake's cast arguably made dumber decisions, they were still overall more likeable.



There are of course many instances where the original exceeds, for example, in the remake, we follow Elizabeth for a while and witness why and how she came to the conclusion of her boyfriend not really being her boyfriend, and to me that came off as super unwarranted, I mean she literally became hysterical after what amounts to be a minute of "weird" interactions with him. The reason this works way better in the original is because we never see the whys and hows that pertain to Wima's behavior, or the little kid for that matter (who mind you was surprisingly quite the great actor), we're instead introduced to them already on edge. Another bothersome thing was with the Chinese laundry man and his forwardness towards the main character. That whole little scene was not executed well, writing wise, acting wise, but what I think they were trying to do was replicate the vibes of the main character from the original, as he seemed to be the pillar of support for the townsmen. Again, the reason this worked in the original is because the setting was a smaller town, and that man was that town's dentist, so of course he's gonna be relied on and trusted by his people. That is not the same thing as being the head of the health department in San Francisco, there's no personal attachment between that title and the people. Similarly, the whole sequence with the distribution of the pods with all the trucks and all that doesn't work as well as in the 1956 film, because again, we're at a much bigger town, and moreover, we just witnessed in the scene prior to that that there was still a whole lot of remaining humans untouched in the nocturnal scene of the city, so chances of them being inconvenienced and interrupted during their whole process is very feasible, which wasn't the case in the original.

One thing neither version does well is the romance. I mean seriously, who's got time to be thinking with their dick, when y'all just witnessed some especially gross shit, and more importantly y'all are hiding while the body snatchers are right outside the door, but no we gotta kiss first. I get it, the themes that the story naturally comes with can be complimented with a romantic relationship going on, but you gotta develop that thing first and choose your moments wisely. At least with the original it wasn't so random and the couple had some history.



To wrap things up, I'll finish off with my overall thoughts on the 1956 movie, as that's what we're here to talk about in the first place. The black and white cinematography was great and quite fitting. I actually would like for the same aesthetic to remain if there ever was a more current adaptation. I certainly don't think it looked like a cheap B movie. Hell, the scene in the highway for example is quite the impressive feat and obviously demanded more coordination and carefulness than anything else. There's also all sorts of great use of shadows and lighting. I definitely would've enjoyed the film a whole lot more had it ended where it was originally supposed to, but of course we got our typical Hollywood producers ruining everything. It didn't even make any sense either, wrapping up an entire conflict that was being built for 80 minutes with a quick little scene and three dumb lines of dialogue. So sloppy.

On another not, I wonder when and where that dreamy flashback effect originated, because it's such a cheesy cliché, and I haven't seen it applied in a minute, so I was surprised when it popped up in this film. Also, imagine being the guys receiving this story uninterrupted for the entirety of the movie's runtime, haha like that was awkwardly structured. And can someone please go to that man's bar and order some drinks or something. I felt really bad when Becky and Miles left before they got to even have the opportunity to pay, especially since the owner must be struggling financially considering all that's happening.

Attachments

 

__________________
"A film has to be a dialogue, not a monologue — a dialogue to provoke in the viewer his own thoughts, his own feelings. And if a film is a dialogue, then it’s a good film; if it’s not a dialogue, it’s a bad film."

- Michael "Gloomy Old Fart" Haneke

Vengeance is Mine


Why you should never tell a Yankees fan you're a Red Sox fan at a train station.

"Do you know what the most frightening thing in the world is? Nothing." This is a quote from an episode of Angel that describes this movie and its appeal in more ways than one. It sums up the void that is the morality of Iwao Enokizu, a man who values people as much as he's able to defraud them or that they have in their pockets or secret stashes after he adds them to his victim list. Perhaps more chilling is how this quote describes the number of explanations in the movie as to why Iwao is the way he is. In fact, I can't think of another movie that better exemplifies the argument that art is supposed to ask questions and not give answers. It helps that Ken Ogata is so good at making Iwao one inscrutable, chameleonic and ice-cold guy. His performance is like the dark side of Peter Sellers' in another great movie from the same year, Being There. The brutal double homicide that kicks off the movie notwithstanding, the same descriptors apply to the murder scenes, which have as much feeling as the scenes in which Iwao buys their weapons. Credit also goes to the lead female performers, Mayumi Ogawa and Mitsuko Baisho in particular, whose constant fear and victimhood depict the patriarchy in '60s Japan as one that makes the one in today's U.S. seem like a feminist paradise. Speaking of Being There, the supernatural conclusion in which the heavens refuse to accept Iwao's cursed remains is just as surprising, appropriate and poignant as that movie's ending.

Why do I think Iwao is the way he is? I don't know - if I did, I'd offer my services to the FBI - but the movie's less than flattering portrait of home life in '60s Japan offers one explanation. Whether it's the weakness the young Iwao sees in his father when he surrenders his boats to the government or his family's laughable adherence to Catholicism, he justifiably has little faith in either institution or institutions in general. The horror show behind the facade of the inn where the adult Iwao takes refuge likely dissolved what inkling of faith in them he had left. While countless people besides Iwao have had similar unfortunate experiences and have never committed crimes worse than parking violations, if this much institutional rot existed in Japan in the mid-20th century, it's still surprising more Iwaos didn't come out of its woodwork. I don't love everything about this movie: some may describe its jumps back and forth in time as artistic, but I often found them messy and misleading. Also, I don't think it's puritanical of me to say that too many of the sex scenes have an HBO, "we can whether or not we should" vibe. With that said, if I were ever asked to recommend a movie that provides a memorable and compelling portrait of a serial killer (no pun intended) or a sociopath, this one would come to mind first.

Interesting thoughts on both films. I enjoyed reading them, even though I think I like both films more than you do. I also prefer the 1956 version though.

So I need a link for Tomboy with English subtitles. I couldn’t find any last night. I’ll have to start it tonight after work, instead