Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    







The Killing of a Chinese Bookie, 1978 (Director's Cut)

Cosmo (Ben Gazzara) runs a burlesque club in Los Angeles. Cosmo has just made the last payment on a debt he owes to a loan shark. And to celebrate, Cosmo takes a few of his dancers out for a night on the town . . . where he racks up $23,000 in gambling debts. Unwilling to take spaced out payments, the casino owners tell Cosmo he can wipe out his debt . . . if he will murder a local Chinese bookie. Cosmo wrestles with this decision as the people who own his debt grow more and more impatient.

For me, this film teetered on the line between really good and merely good. Gazzara's performance as Cosmo is good--a strong portrayal of someone who makes poor decisions, but who clearly wants to live a decent life. At the same time, Cosmo will do what he needs to do in order to hold on to the club, which clearly is where his heart lies. The other performances are also very strong, with naturalistic style dominating every scene.

The direction if also very solid. The scenes inside Cosmo's club are a mix of slightly claustrophobic, fun, workmanlike, and just a bit seedy/gritty. You can understand why Cosmo loves it, and you can understand why the dancers and the (only?) male actor enjoy working there. Cosmo treats his employees with an easy respect that helps you to like his character more.

For me, the film stumbles a bit as it moves into its final third. What had been mainly a drama kicks into more of a thriller mode, and certain sequences just didn't feel as realistic as what had come before. And by bringing more of the focus to the thriller/logistical part of the story, the moral struggle that Cosmo experienced gets slightly displaced, which is a shame. It sort of takes away from the impact of the decisions he made and how that changes our relationship to him.

I haven't seen the original cut of the film, but I don't think that another 25 minutes of content would have been a good thing. Maybe someone who has seen both versions can comment here.

A good film, but it loses a little oomph in the final act.




Tonight's voyage into Film Noir, my latest "thing" - Whirlpool, Directed by Otto Preminger - A woman, wife of a well off psychoanalyst, is caught shoplifting and is saved from charges by a hypnotist. Later, however, she falls into a trance. Murder happens. Can a woman be turned into a murderer by a hypnotist, or is she the victim of a difficult childhood, or, is she a kleptomaniac? We will see. Among the stars are Jose Ferrer and Gene Tierney. It's fairly cheesy, plot wise, but looks good (very noir) and has star quality. Nobody can talk as fast as Jose Ferrer.

Great film, and very good noir! Jose Ferrer --with his trademark self assurance and poise-- really stole the picture, while Gene Tierney was her gorgeous self-- despite being made up rather plainly.

Preminger directed Tierney in the classic Laura, but I think that Whirlpool is almost as good. It seems schmaltzy today, but I'm sure it had a real impact in 1949.





Belladonna of Sadness, 1978

A young woman named Jeanne is raped on her wedding day by the local ruler and other members of the court. In her agony, she unintentionally attracts the attention of a demonic creature who tries to tempt Jeanne into giving up her soul in exchange for revenge. Jeanne's relationship with the evil spirit only makes her life--and the life of her husband, Jean--more complicated, pushing Jeanne more and more to a breaking point.

The positive and the negative of this film comes down to the animation style, which is very experimental/unconventional.

There are uses of still images, and at times different styles within the same sequence. There is an impressionist quality to certain sequences that I really liked and the use of color is bold an unapologetic.

However. There is an exploitative, slightly porny quality to a lot of the way that Jeanne is portrayed. Just the angles use to show her body and the postures they put her in. It makes me think of that comic book artist who was accused of over-sexualizing female characters and he was like, yeah, I trace them from porn. And this is especially bothersome because it is true even in sequences that involve sexual assault. She spends most of the film partly or fully nude, and it is very noticeable that this isn't true for any of the male characters. She is, unsurprisingly, given Barbie proportions, and the pervy element detracts from the story. Rather than feeling as if the film sympathizes with her, it's more as if it delights in finding excuses to rip her clothes off.

The story itself is not bad. There is something interesting about the application of such a bold animation style to a story that feels like a fairy tale/folktale. Unfortunately, there isn't a whole lot of character development. In addition to Jeanne, Jean is really underdeveloped (aside from looking like a total creep when his assaulted wife stumbles home and he's like "So anyway, let's just forget all about what just happened!" before she can even clean the blood off of her body), and it would have been interesting to see more about how he feels about his wife's transformation. There's a superficiality to it.

I get why this pops up as a film to see, but I found it a little underbaked.




I haven't seen the original cut of the film, but I don't think that another 25 minutes of content would have been a good thing. Maybe someone who has seen both versions can comment here.
I've only seen one version of it, but I think it was the original 1976 cut (though I can't be 100% sure), and I didn't like it at all, as I found it to be an extremely unfocused, empty experience, one that I would genuinely struggle to give even a 5 out of 10 to, so ever watching either version again really isn't a priority for me. Then again, I wasn't crazy about Woman Under The Influence either, so maybe I'm just not big on Cassavetes in general.



I've only seen one version of it, but I think it was the original 1976 cut (though I can't be 100% sure), and I didn't like it at all, as I found it to be an extremely unfocused, empty experience, one that I would genuinely struggle to give even a 5 out of 10 to, so ever watching either version again really isn't a priority for me. Then again, I wasn't crazy about Woman Under The Influence either, so maybe I'm just not big on Cassavetes in general.
I thought certain sequences of Faces were really strong. I've not seen a ton of his work yet.



I love Cassavetes, personally, but I haven't gotten to Chinese Bookie yet. Of what I've seen so far, Husbands is my favorite of his films.
__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd



I thought certain sequences of Faces were really strong. I've not seen a ton of his work yet.
I love Cassavetes, personally, but I haven't gotten to Chinese Bookie yet. Of what I've seen so far, Husbands is my favorite of his films.
I haven't seen either, as the only Cassavetes films I've seen are the two I mentioned, but I know one of them (Influence) is generally considered to be his best, which is why I'm not eager to prioritize the rest of his work over whatever else I'm interested in, considering my slightly underwhelmed reaction to it and (especially) Bookie. But hey, at least I thought he was good in Rosemary's Baby, huh? Heh.



I haven't seen either, as the only Cassavetes films I've seen are the two I mentioned, but I know one of them (Influence) is generally considered to be his best, which is why I'm not eager to prioritize the rest of his work over whatever else I'm interested in, considering my slightly underwhelmed reaction to it and (especially) Bookie. But hey, at least I thought he was good in Rosemary's Baby, huh? Heh.
I'll recommend trying out Shadows next. Though I think it's a lesser Cassavetes film, it might give you a good sense of his style without becoming tired of it.



Please tell me you have electricity and running water. I don't remember what part of TX you're in
My home is half destroyed from burst pipes. My sister has taken my wife and I in. Damage in our area is so bad I'm not sure when I'll get to actually go home because materials to replace the plumbing are scarce and waiting on insurance adjustors have grossly inflated the wait time.

But I saved my TV and the majority of my film collections and her house has heat and water so we're about as comfortable as can be.

Thank y'all for your concern. It's been a week of great unpleasantness but none of the falling drywall hit us and we had somewhere to go so I feel bad for complaining.



I'll recommend trying out Shadows next. Though I think it's a lesser Cassavetes film, it might give you a good sense of his style without becoming tired of it.
Eh, I dunno how much I want to check it out if you feel that it's "lesser" Cassavetes, since even Influence, while pretty good, still didn't live up to the expectations people had set for it (and that breakfast scene went on forever for no good reason). I'll see.



Eh, I dunno how much I want to check it out if you feel that it's "lesser" Cassavetes, since even Influence, while pretty good, still didn't live up to the expectations people had set for it (and that breakfast scene went on forever for no good reason). I'll see.
Ok, fair. Maybe don't make it a priority, but if you're able to find some free time and you feel in the mood, I recommend popping it in to see what you think of it.



The trick is not minding
Regarding Cassavetes, I’ve seen Killing of a Chinese Bookie, and A Woman Under the Influence. Both were let downs. Influence especially.
I have Husbands saved on Amazon to give it a go soon, so maybe that will resonate better.



Regarding Cassavetes, I’ve seen Killing of a Chinese Bookie, and A Woman Under the Influence. Both were let downs. Influence especially.
I have Husbands saved on Amazon to give it a go soon, so maybe that will resonate better.
It was the opposite way for me, as, while Influence had been built up more, at least I still liked it pretty well in the end; Bookie, on the other hand, I didn't like at all, which is why it took me as long as it did (over half a decade) before I checked out another one of his films.



I CARE A LOT



It was hard to care much.
Sometimes the reviews just write themselves!

My home is half destroyed from burst pipes. My sister has taken my wife and I in. Damage in our area is so bad I'm not sure when I'll get to actually go home because materials to replace the plumbing are scarce and waiting on insurance adjustors have grossly inflated the wait time.

But I saved my TV and the majority of my film collections and her house has heat and water so we're about as comfortable as can be.

Thank y'all for your concern. It's been a week of great unpleasantness but none of the falling drywall hit us and we had somewhere to go so I feel bad for complaining.
When I was thinking about people I know in Texas, you did not come immediately to mind. Yeesh!

I'm glad you are somewhere safe (and I hope that any other family you have in the state are also doing okay). If there's anything I/we can do, just say the word.



The trick is not minding
It was the opposite way for me, as, while Influence had been built up more, at least I still liked it pretty well in the end; Bookie, on the other hand, I didn't like at all, which is why it took me as long as it did (over half a decade) before I checked out another one of his films.
Influence, which I just reviewed recently in the Personal Recommendations HOF, was a miss largely due to Rowland’s over acting, always flailing about and making faces. I found Falk’s character far more interesting.
He has a relatively small filmography, as far as those he directed anyways, so I aim to finish it up over time.



Influence, which I just reviewed recently in the Personal Recommendations HOF, was a miss largely due to Rowland’s over acting, always flailing about and making faces. I found Falk’s character far more interesting.
He has a relatively small filmography, as far as those he directed anyways, so I aim to finish it up over time.
Could you link me to that review, then? I couldn't locate it when I tried just now.