Citizen Rules...Cinemaesque Chat-n-Review

→ in
Tools    






Take The Money And Run
(Woody Allen 1969)


Woody Allen's first full directorial debut, though he did directorial work on What's Up Tiger Lily?...Here Allen wrote, directed and stars in what's been called one of the first mockumentaries ever made. Woody Allen in his first full directorial job created a new genre of films with his fictional autobiographical documentary about a poor boy from a poor family who turns to a life of crime and utterly falls at it.

When I first joined MoFo over seven years ago I didn't like Woody Allen or his films, though I hadn't seen many. Then a fellow MoFo challenged me to watch more of Allen's films. Now I'm happy to say I totally changed my mind and count Woody Allen as one of my favorite currently working directors. I like his movies, I like his writing and I like him as an actor. I find his work highly unique. Woody is quite the auteur.

I enjoyed Take The Money and Run, I thought it was originally clever and never pandering to low hanging fruit type comedy. It was funny and well made. I liked Woody in it as the lead actor Virgil Starkwell who's an inept bank robber and fails utterly at everything he tries to do.





Hard Times (Walter Hill 1975)

'The adventures of a drifter turned illegal prize-fighter during the 1930s Depression Era in New Orleans.'

Hard Times
was a rewarding watch of a film that I hadn't really ever heard of before. I would describe it as straight forward, non-pretentious film making/story telling. The film style was well suited for Charles Bronson...a no nonsense, laconic actor. I appreciated the camera work and score as I was never aware of either aspect during my viewing of the film. To me the style of the film was enhanced by the unobtrusiveness of its components. That's not to say the film's cinematography is in anyway blasé, just the opposite. The viewer is treated to effectively filmed cityscapes of New Orleans, especially the French Quarter with it's historic buildings.

There's quite a bit of on-location shooting, both for interior and exterior shots. As someone who spent a wonderful weeks vacation in the French Quarter I just love seeing the sites of those grand ole buildings with their wrought iron trimmed balconies.

I read on IMDB trivia that the director didn't think much of Jill Ireland's acting and cut many of her scenes. I can't say I've seen her in anything else except as a guest star on the original Star Trek series, But I thought she was fine in Hard Times. I would've liked to seen more of her and more of Chaney's (Charles Bronson) side story, as it would've fleshed out more of Bronson's enigmatic character.





Take The Money And Run
(Woody Allen 1969)


Woody Allen's first full directorial debut, though he did directorial work on What's Up Tiger Lily?...Here Allen wrote, directed and stars in what's been called one of the first mockumentaries ever made. Woody Allen in his first full directorial job created a new genre of films with his fictional autobiographical documentary about a poor boy from a poor family who turns to a life of crime and utterly falls at it.

When I first joined MoFo over seven years ago I didn't like Woody Allen or his films, though I hadn't seen many. Then a fellow MoFo challenged me to watch more of Allen's films. Now I'm happy to say I totally changed my mind and count Woody Allen as one of my favorite currently working directors. I like his movies, I like his writing and I like him as an actor. I find his work highly unique. Woody is quite the auteur.

I enjoyed Take The Money and Run, I thought it was originally clever and never pandering to low hanging fruit type comedy. It was funny and well made. I liked Woody in it as the lead actor Virgil Starkwell who's an inept bank robber and fails utterly at everything he tries to do.

This is one of my favorite Woody Allen movies... 1.) because it's the first "mockumentary" I ever saw and 2.) because the humor is simple.

Unlike some of his later films, this one is not esoteric, it's not targeted at intellectuals with a minor degree in sociology - it's just good, old fashion, silliness with in-your-face jokes, ironies, situations and a dose of slapstick.

It's the little things that crack me up - like playing the cello in a marching band.



This is one of my favorite Woody Allen movies... 1.) because it's the first "mockumentary" I ever saw and 2.) because the humor is simple.

Unlike some of his later films, this one is not esoteric, it's not targeted at intellectuals with a minor degree in sociology - it's just good, old fashion, silliness with in-your-face jokes, ironies, situations and a dose of slapstick.

It's the little things that crack me up - like playing the cello in a marching band.
The first mockumentary I saw was The Rutles (1978)...ha the cello, yeah that was pretty funny with him running to keep up with the band.



The first mockumentary I saw was The Rutles (1978)...ha the cello, yeah that was pretty funny with him running to keep up with the band.
Ah, The Rutles! I haven't seen that since I was a kid... and then I don't know if I ever saw the whole thing. Would love to see that again. Based on the dates, it appears The Rutles was the inspiration for (or at least the precursor of) This Is Spinal Tap (like The Big Bus was the precursor to Airplane!)



Ah, The Rutles! I haven't seen that since I was a kid... and then I don't know if I ever saw the whole thing. Would love to see that again. Based on the dates, it appears The Rutles was the inspiration for (or at least the precursor of) This Is Spinal Tap (like The Big Bus was the precursor to Airplane!)
Somebody once told me about The Big Bus fun movie! Hey, you're in luck The Rutles is on YouTube




The Whisperers (Bryan Forbes 1967)

I made that 3-way panel to show just a snippet of that amazing title sequence. A film's title sequence sets the tone of the story to come. I loved the cinematography and the shooting locations for that opening sequence. It says to me: forlorn loneliness, forgotten and empty. The use of the stray dogs and cats further that feeling of abandonment.

The Whispers is a quiet film that shows the degradation of the poor elderly in British society circa 1967. That 'quiet showing' is very effective as it allows the viewer to feel the film on an internal level.

The film's style reminds me of one of my favorite current directors, Kelly Reichardt. I appreciate it when a director doesn't force his or her views down my throat...but instead shows me a world that I can then experience on my own...That's what the director of The Whispers did.


British actress Edith Evans plays a convincing elderly lady living alone in poverty.

I've gushed about the directorial style, but I really need to swoon a bit over the interior sets! Gosh, I loved the rundown apartment of Mrs. Ross, it was so ecliptic, cluttered and looked oh so real. Mrs. Ross played by Edith Evans convinced me that I was watching an actual elderly lady with a touch of dementia. I never once thought of her as an actress and that's a compliment to her acting skill. Edith Evans was Oscar nominated for Best Actress for her performance in this film.






Barry Lyndon (Stanley Kubrick 1975)

I seen this before sometime ago and liked it. This time around I still like it. I'd say I appreciate it's overall construction and elements more than ever...it's an excellent film.

OK, so now that you know where I stand on this film, I can talk about some negatives. People say Kubrick has technical film prowess but is cold and doesn't convey human emotions well. Barry Lyndon is suppose to be an exemption from Kubrick's detached mode. But I have to say on a second watch I found Barry Lyndon to be detached as much as the other Kubrick's films I've seen. If it wasn't for the VO narrator there would be scant little emotions in most scenes. The film is more of a pictograph of one man's stumbling journey though life's misfortunes. That's not a complaint btw.

Some will say Ryan O'Neil can't act, well he really wasn't a thespian or even someone with oodles of personality. He mostly had this one look of disappointment on his face through out much of the movie. That's probably because Kubrick drove him nuts. I read that Kubrick would do take after take after take:

Writer, producer, and director Stanley Kubrick would often shoot a great many retakes of a scene, just to get "that extra something" in a shot; twenty to fifty takes per scene was not uncommon. It has been claimed that Kubrick shot over one hundred takes of the scene in which Barry (Ryan O'Neal) first meets Lady Honoria Lyndon (Marisa Berenson).


Good grief! No director needs a 100 shots or even 50 to capture that special moment. Hell the scene where Barry meets Lady Honoria Lyndon was brief and unremarkable. And reading that about Kubrick has made me think less of him as a director. Truth be told I don't see very many acting moments of sublime clarity in his films. Nothing that transcends the film and goes right to the viewers 'awe' brain center.

So Barry Lydon technically a good movie. Kubrick, I'm on the fence.





Antwone Fisher (Denzel Washington 2002)

'Antwone Fisher, a young navy man, is forced to see a psychiatrist after a violent outburst against a fellow crewman. During the course of treatment a painful past is revealed and a new hope begins.'

Antwone Fisher was a nearly perfect film for me. I might compare it to Goodwill Hunting as both films have similar themes. Only this film felt so much more grounded in reality and focused on the story at hand. And I've always liked Denzel Washington too. He reminds me of Tom Hanks as both have this quiet, yet determined demeanor about them. That quiet resolve is what makes Denzel so effective in this movie. And I have to say I'm impressed with the actor who played the titular role, Derek Luke. Derek was able to show blind rage, OK that's probably not too hard for actors. I've heard actors say anger is the easiest emotion for them to do. But Derek isn't just angry in the film, he's emotionally wounded and trying to heal his mental scars. He's shy and unsure of himself which comes from years of child abuse. Derek made me believe I was watching a real person and that's also saying a lot!

The real Antwone Fischer must be quite a talented person because he wrote this movie! That's impressive...And it's the movie's script and the story it describes that impresses me the most. I felt like I was watching these events unfold in real time. Part of the credit for the honesty of this film has to go to the director Denzel Washington. I liked the way Denzel directed this, no cheese, no over the top-hey look at me type direction. Denzels' directing is like his acting, perfectly in sync for what he's doing.
What a great film!





La Dolce Vita (Fellini 1960)

I watched this film in one go...and the time flew by too. I've seen 90 minute movies that dragged, but with La Dolce Vita the visual sensory is on high and there's always something gorgeous to look at.

This was my first time watching it and I expected to be raving about Anita Ekberg. I mean whenever I see images from this movie, it's always of her. But I didn't find her or the scenes she was in to be all that fascinating. I didn't even really find her all that attractive. I mean she is of course, but just not my type. Probably nobodies type here! I actually found Marcello's wife Emma to be more attractive and interesting too. Well whenever she wasn't half dead from popping pills or screaming how much she loved Marcello.

Me, I loved the first 30 minutes of the movie, its kinetic energy and exploration of things common yet unseen, reminded me of another favorite Italian film L'Avventura.

I do however think Fellini is over indulgent and actually a bit lazy. He gives us three nearly identical and long scenes showing Rome's well-to-do engaging in drunken shenanigans. The first of these at Steiner's house with all the bored to tears, rich intellectual types, made Fellini's point crystal clear.

But then Fellini duplicates that party scene twice more: The old villa castle scene and the last party scene in the house where the unhappy Marcello pours chicken feathers over a drunken young lady...If you tell me that's symbolism, then the pizza stains on my sweatshirt are freakin' high art and surely must decipher the Da Vinci code just by looking at all that dried tomato sauce.





Shame (Ingmar Bergman 1968)

'In the midst of a civil war, former violinists Jan and Eva Rosenberg, who have a tempestuous marriage, run a farm on a rural island. In spite of their best efforts to escape their homeland, the war impinges on every aspect of their lives.'

Shame examines the collateral damage of an ongoing civil war. The effects of that war is seen through the personal experiences of two former musicians. This hapless couple ekes out a meager existence on a sparsely populated island. They bicker, they love, they vacillate. Then it's too late...war comes to their very doorstep.

I'm always happy to watch a Bergman film, but for an odd reason. I have yet to find a Bergman film that I love.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I have nothing but respect for Bergman. I can see his film's greatness and understand why others love them so. Maybe one day I'll find that one special Bergman film that I can connect to...But for now I can only say that I find his films to be coldly austere, like the image of the forlorn couple on a desolate beach. His films never make me feel much, nor do I long to immerse myself in their world...And the people who inhabit his films seem distant to me.

Objectively: Shame is a 4/5 in my book.
Subjectively: I found myself checking the run time of the film all too often. But I have no complaints, it's a near perfect film. Nothing I'd change. I guess Bergman is just not my cup of joe.

My rating:
+



Ya I think Shame is really good. But I still like Virgin Spring and Autumn Sonata above it, perhaps a couple more.
I liked Virgin Springs. I've not seen Autumn Sonata. I'd like to see another Bergman, all the ones I've seen were in HoFs...maybe soon.



My favorite Bergman is Fanny and Alexander the tv series. It is sumptuous. Which is not what you usually think of when you think of Bergman. My other favorite is The Best Intentions which is written by Bergman but directed by Bille August. this is a wonderful semi-autographical story about Bergman's parents as is Fanny and Alexander. Though The Best Intentions takes place in the early years of their marriage and Fanny and Alexander is that marriage seen through their children's eyes.





Zodiac (David Fincher 2007)

For me, watching innocent victims being tied up and stabbed to death is way too violent to enjoy the movie especially when the scene is so brutally realistic and depicts an actual murder...I just don't need that image burned into my brain. I think that many movie watchers are desensitized to violence by the movies that they watch, so that they don't view brutal killings as shown in Zodiac as much of a big deal. But I don't watch slasher horror films, etc and so the killings were horrible to watch.

As an aside, I don't think showing the killings are necessary or even helpful to the movie's story, they could've been done off screen. The stories focus is that the Zodiac is a conundrum, a puzzling mystery to all. By showing the audience the actual crimes it takes away from the feeling of being in the cops shoes and feeling completely baffled by the mystery, as it makes us privy to what actual happened.

Even without the disturbing killings, this was a poorly directed movie. Both Jake Gyllenhaal and Robert Downey Jr. blew in this. Downey was the same off the wall, nutsy druggie/drunk character that he's played in so many other films. He's like a caricature, good in a comedy-drama but silly in such a serious film.

Gyllenhaal is just a boring actor. I've never really liked him. He had no handle on how to be the odd, cartoonist guy. I was painful aware of his attempts at doing a 'character' and he failed as his acting was too visible. It was only towards the end of the film when he became obsessed with finding the identity of the Zodiac that his performance rang true.

Mark Ruffalo and his cop partner were both good in this and I did like whoever played Melvin Belli too.

The story itself was lagging, did this really need to be 2 hours and 45 minutes? Zodiac has the same lack luster quality as another disappointing news investigative movie, The Post.

A really good investigative, true crime movie was Spotlight...about child abuse by pedophile Catholic priest...and that film didn't need to show children being horribly abused for shock value. BTW I didn't care for The Social Network and I don't like David Fincher style of direction.


I agree with you that as good as the movie is, there's no justifying its length. I also agree that Spotlight is a far superior film.



You'd probably like The Guilty (2018). However, I disagree with the vast majority of your review this movie. Besides, there was only like 1 killing in Zodiac, wasn't there?



My favorite Bergman is Fanny and Alexander the tv series. It is sumptuous. Which is not what you usually think of when you think of Bergman. My other favorite is The Best Intentions which is written by Bergman but directed by Bille August. this is a wonderful semi-autographical story about Bergman's parents as is Fanny and Alexander. Though The Best Intentions takes place in the early years of their marriage and Fanny and Alexander is that marriage seen through their children's eyes.
Interesting! I would've never guessed Bergman had directed a TV mini series. I hadn't heard of Fanny and Alexanderbefore. I see it's highly rated too.

Nice set of films. Someone should nominate them for a HoF if they haven't already done so.
Yeah all of the main HoFs have had great films nominated. When I go back and take a look at what was chosen I'm surprised by the diversity and quality.

Shame is a horribly overlooked Bergman.
Maybe the most horribly overlooked.
I hardly ever hear Shame mentioned and yet it was well received by the HoF members and certainly is a worthy film to watch.

You'd probably like The Guilty (2018). However, I disagree with the vast majority of your review this movie. Besides, there was only like 1 killing in Zodiac, wasn't there?
Thanks for the recommendation but I read the mini synopsis on IMDB and it doesn't sound like my cup of joe. But I'm sure it's a good film, just not the genre/style I usually watch.