Iro's Film Diary

I have Suicide Club on my watchlist, and am interested in Titus and Primer.

Great reviews as usual Iro.

#167 - Murder by Death
Robert Moore, 1976



Five legendary detectives and their sidekicks are invited to the country home of a wealthy eccentric to participate in a lucrative but dangerous competition.

Murder by Death certainly has a fair bit going for it. It features an extremely novel idea in having facsimiles of famous fictional detectives like Hercule Poirot or Sam Spade be made to compete against one another in order to solve a country-house murder mystery. To make matters better, it does bring together one incredibly impressive ensemble cast to recreate these iconic characters or bring a deft comic touch to original creations (most obviously Alec Guinness as a blind butler). The deconstructive air that hangs over proceedings does a decent job of justifying some of the cast's more outlandish characteristics (such as Peter Sellers yellowing up to play a thickly-accented Charlie Chan knock-off) in addition to offering some comical variations on a lot of the usual whodunit tropes. As good as these qualities are, they only go so far in filling out a film that definitely starts to run out of steam after about an hour. Though this could be considered part of the film's caustically parodic nature, one wonders exactly how much the film actually wants to inflate the importance of these characters instead of deflating them. At least it's a generally fun little caper either way.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

#168 - Johnny Mnemonic
Robert Longo, 1995



In the future, a courier who can store computerised data in his head must go on the run when he acquires an especially high-risk package.

I don't think science-fiction cinema gets much more '90s than Johnny Mnemonic, a William Gibson-based cyberpunk tale that sees Keanu Reeves play into his most unfortunate acting stereotypes as the eponymous anti-hero who gets caught up in a deadly cat-and-mouse game after a job goes wrong. The resulting film is definitely not worth more than the sum of its parts - it's a barely-comprehensible chase where any engaging with the thematic implications is tangential at best. However, I do have to marvel at it for being such a fine example of how bizarre sci-fi could get in the mid-'90s. The extremely lurid attempts to render cyberspace using rather primitive-looking computer effects are noteworthy, as is the grim yet colourful depiction of this global dystopia and its bizarre population. What does intrigue me is the rather bizarre cast that gets assembled around Reeves. The idea of a film that features the likes of Takeshi Kitano, Dolph Lundgren, and Henry Rollins (among many others) is truly an absurd one; if nothing else, they all get some roles that allow for decent amounts of scenery-chewing. As a result, Johnny Mnemonic is more or less what I expected - a charmingly dated curiosity that's worth watching for the sheer weirdness of it all, but that only goes so far towards making it especially worthwhile.

#169 - Timecop
Peter Hyams, 1994



In a world where time travel is used by the U.S. government to retroactively keep the peace, one of its officers must stop a corrupt politician's attempts to alter the past.

While you've got to appreciate the sheer bluntless of a title like Timecop, it's a pity that there's probably a bit too much bluntness in this film for its own good. It makes good on the title's promise by delivering a somewhat hackneyed collection of cop-movie clichés that are only slightly tempered by the usage of time travel, which does play decidedly fast and loose with the rules only as far as it makes for easy entertainment (though there are some egregious qualities to the proceedings, especially when it comes to the shuttlecraft that future cops use to travel to the past). It's not like there aren't a few good moments scattered throughout - Jean-Claude Van Damme's physicality gets memorably demonstrated quite a few times, even if the action scenes do get chopped up a bit too much for the hits to have quite that much impact. There's also a decent villain in the form of Ron Silver's slimy senator and the effects work is aided by the fact that it doesn't need to be remotely realistic. Even when taken as the quick little B-movie that it is, Timecop is still rather underwhelming as its scattered moments of sci-fi weirdness ultimately don't grant much flavour to a generally mediocre piece of work.

I really like Titus.

It's a novelty, but it's a very interesting novelty.

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

I had to rep you for Titus even though i haven't seen it because you posted a pic of Titus from Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt the other day and it really confused me . Haven't seen any of the others.

I love Murder by Death. It's far from a perfect movie, but it has a great cast, and it's just such a fun combination of mystery and comedy.

I agree on suicide club.I had to order it from overseas way back when and it took foreeeeever. i was so disappointed.

I think it's interesting enough that it rises above the term "novelty" completely.

Honestly, I only made it through the first episode and decided "nah" to the rest, but given how much of a weird mess of a movie Titus is (especially considering its predominantly white cast), I figured that using the "what white nonsense is this" reaction image was appropriate.

For me, it's undermined a bit by the fact that I managed to see Clue first, which clearly owes a major debt to Murder by Death in terms of its plotting.

Understandable.

I wrote a script that owes a great deal to both Clue and Murder by Death, called Murder A La Mode.

Great films.

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

Suspect's Reviews

#170 - The Purge
James DeMonaco, 2013



In a futuristic America where all crimes are temporarily legalised once a year, a wealthy family is targeted by a group of masked murderers.

I'll admit that The Purge at least has an intriguing enough (if inherently absurd) B-movie premise that made me want to watch the original simply to get some background on the sequels that seem to be making better use of the scenario's potential. Of course, The Purge itself doesn't really manage to be a good film in its own right as it proceeds to create a rather flat (but thankfully lean) home-invasion thriller where the premise only creates one or two unique complications to distinguish itself. Those complications do offer the film a modicum of personality as its core dilemma - the young son of a rich family disobeying his parents by letting a homeless stranger into their high-security home, thus drawing the attention of a gang of rich killers looking to murder the poor - prompts some degree of classist commentary that is fairly potent but not strong enough to override the film's underwhelming execution that is a bit too dependent on familiar horror tropes for its own good.

#171 - Trilogy: The Weeping Meadow
Theo Angelopoulos, 2004



During the first half of the 20th century, two young Greeks try to live their lives despite the growing intrusions of fascism and war.

It is perhaps Angelopoulos' greatest strength and greatest weakness that he is so committed to his own particular aesthetics and preoccupations that he can make a film like The Weeping Meadow almost thirty years after making The Travelling Players only for both films to look like they could have come out in the exact same year. The gritty film stock, the unhurried camera movements, the lengthy takes...they are as present as always, and the film's pre-1950 settings only seem to add to the timelessness rather than subtract from it. While I don't deny that such a distinctive visual style leads to some of the most striking images I've seen in any Angelopoulos film (most of which seem to happen in the middle third of the film), they are in service to a film that struggles to stay engaging for most of its gargantuan running time. It starts off with a sense of urgency as two young lovers must escape from their hometown and elude one relentless pursuer, but said urgency eventually dissipates amid the outbreak of war in the film's second half. While it is admittedly rather unreasonable to expect Angelopoulos to embrace some sort of cloyingly positive sentimentality as the film works towards the conclusion, it's not like his tendency towards embitterment and misery doesn't grow at least a little monotonous. As a result, there are moments that make The Weeping Meadow worth watching, but they are lost in a film where Angelopoulos seems to be repeating himself thematically without too much in the way of interesting variation.

#172 - Nightcrawler
Dan Gilroy, 2014



An aimless low-life decides to become a "nightcrawler", a person who drives around filming crimes and accidents in order to sell the footage to television networks.

Original review found here.

#173 - Out of Sight
Steven Soderbergh, 1998



A male bank robber breaks out of prison but has his escape complicated by the accidental involvement of a female U.S. marshal.

As someone who counts seeing Ocean's Twelve as one of the most frustrating cinematic experiences he's ever experienced, you'd think I'd know not to trust in the original Steven Soderbergh-George Clooney caper comedy being particularly in line with my tastes. While Out of Sight doesn't feature anything as absurd as a character breakdancing past laser tripwires or Julia Roberts playing a character who impersonates Julia Roberts, it still somehow manages to lack any genuine spark despite its pulpy Elmore Leonard origins. Clooney's as good a leading man as this film could hope for, but Jennifer Lopez definitely feels like a weak link and I don't get any real sense of chemistry between these two despite their characters' unlikely connection being the driving force behind the narrative. An ensemble cast of generally respectable actors (and Steve Zahn) can only do so much to add to this film's very weak sense of momentum (which is not helped by the lengthy running time), as do a handful of small moments scattered throughout. As a result, there is very little to distinguish Out of Sight favourably in comparison to many other films of its ilk. Despite the obvious attempts at injecting style and personality (none more so than the overbearingly funky soundtrack), it's still an incredibly dry and overstuffed film where none of the good points seem to make much of a difference.

From the title it sounds like it owes a lot to De Palma as well...

#174 - X-Men: Apocalypse
Bryan Singer, 2016



In 1983, a team of super-powered mutants comes together in order to defeat an ancient mutant who wishes to dominate the world.

It's common for long-running cinematic franchises to reference their own longevity, whether through off-hand remarks or actually using it as a thematic concern that informs the narrative. X-Men: Apocalypse marks the eighth film in a franchise (ninth if you count Deadpool) that has run for almost two decades and featured sequels, prequels, spin-offs, and combinations of the three, yet it is decidedly uninterested in acknowledging its age (this is reflected in multiple recurring characters looking virtually the same as they did in 2011's First Class despite that film taking place over twenty years before this one does). It does seem rather relevant when one considers the franchise's fluctuating levels of quality over the years; the original X-Men may have served as a blueprint for the post-millennium superhero movie, but with the rise of various challengers ranging from Christopher Nolan's Batman series to the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe, it's hard not to think of it as the old man on the block in comparison. The recent uptick in the franchise's popularity courtesy of recent prequels First Class and Days of Future Past really puts the pressure onto Apocalypse to deliver a worthy third installment in this particular trilogy (which the filmmakers are aware of to the point of including a throwaway gag involving bad sequels).

Rather than set up a relatively complex narrative involving espionage or time travel, X-Men: Apocalypse instead opts to go for broke and doubles down on the franchise's comic-book roots by introducing a major villain in the form of the eponymous mutant (Oscar Isaac), who ruled ancient Egypt as a living god before some rebellious humans manage to trap him for several millennia. Of course, he is eventually disinterred and brought forth into the brave new world of 1983, where he plans to remake the world in his image and eliminate anyone who would seek to stop him. As such, the film introduces and re-introduces the various heroic and less-than-heroic players from the franchise as they have scattered across the world. Recurring characters like Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) and Magneto (Michael Fassbender) are working as an underground freedom-fighter and living a quiet family life respectively. Meanwhile, younger versions of familiar characters like Cyclops (Tye Sheridan) and Jean Grey (Sophie Turner) are busy learning to cope with the onset of their own considerable powers and how to fully control them under the combined tutelage of Professor X (James McAvoy) and Beast (Nicholas Hoult). The stage is then set for an epic conflict - perhaps a little too set, as a good chunk of this rather long film is dedicated to preamble that tends to feels too obligatory and overdone (especially in regards to Magneto's own sub-plot, where Fassbender's trademark intensity barely salvages an extremely thin stab at serious drama). Given the need for a stronger villain than usual, even Apocalypse himself does not feel especially compelling as an antagonist; the manipulative cult-leader vibe is a nice touch, but Isaac's usual charisma still ends up being buried under distorted vocals and copious amounts of makeup.

A common complaint with superhero movies is one rooted in dramatic irony - if the villain's goal is to take over and/or destroy the world, then it's hard to feel especially invested in the hero's struggle against the villain since we know deep down that the world won't really end due to the villain's plot. There are definitely smaller conflicts and stakes at work, but they do fail to prove interesting more often than not. It is good to see the film actually try to build off previous installments - just compare this film's handling of Quicksilver (Evan Peters) against his appearance in Days of Future Past - but it's just as likely to fall into old traps as it feels compelled to cram in as many different elements as possible in order to conform to some sort of epic ideal (most notably by shoehorning in a prolonged sequence of events that serves as an extended call-back to one of the franchise's better films). If nothing else, the fact that Singer is behind the camera again means that the resulting action manages to look fairly polished (perhaps too polished) as it involves everything from one-on-one punch-ups to scenes of global catastrophe. The balancing out of the various moments of action is a challenge, especially as the number of combatants grows with each cumulative battle and the editing is put under extra strain to keep things moving as smoothly and as coherently as possible. In this regard, Apocalypse does okay, though the resulting tension is squandered a bit as the fights go on and on until it's just one more reason that you wish this already overlong movie would be over sooner.

If I had to summarise X-Men: Apocalypse in a single word, it would be "weightless". I can't imagine that those who are unfamiliar with X-Men would get too much out of it beyond a fairly flashy sci-fi blockbuster, but I don't think that having seen the previous installments will automatically allow for a significantly greater appreciation. The final product looks as slick as ever, but it's lacking in the bombast necessary to make an impression for better or worse. Smaller moments of character development and larger moments of effects-heavy action do what they can to flesh out yet another exploration of the same social justice metaphor that has been picked fairly clean over the course of eight movies. I don't automatically consider it to be the worst movie in the series - it's at least somewhat competent and doesn't do too much to break your suspension of disbelief - but it's still too inconsequential despite its attempts to incorporate both personal nuance and astounding spectacle into the proceedings.

#175 - Richard III
Richard Loncraine, 1995



In 1930s England, a civil war leads to an opportunistic general wishing to take the throne for himself by any means necessary.

Another Shakespeare play that I'm not too familiar with, Richard III gets a fairly decent adaptation that updates the medieval setting to Edwardian times and features the one and only Ian McKellen as the eponymous tyrant. He's a pleasure to watch from start to finish as he soliloquises through the fourth wall and barrels through every scene with magnificent abandon - having a solid ensemble cast that includes the likes of Kristin Scott Thomas, Nigel Hawthorne, and Robert Downey Jr. is able to keep things flowing just fine. The fascistic aesthetic does strike a fine balance between the usual Shakespearean formalism and the deranged modern re-interpretation of something like, say, Titus (especially in the film's final incendiary moments). It's definitely watchable and almost never gets dull.

#176 - Theatre of Blood
Douglas Hickox, 1973



A homicidally insane actor starts killing off a group of theatre critics one by one using methods that are influenced by the works of William Shakespeare.

Theatre of Blood has a great premise that bridges the gap between the high-culture of Shakespeare and the low-culture of B-horror, but I'm not so sold on the execution. Vincent Price makes as good a star as any for this extremely cracked little movie as he is able to rattle off the Bard's words and indulge some comically brutal violence against some snobby critics, allowing the creators to show off a decent knowledge of Shakespeare's lesser-known plays even in the service of a gory goof-off. Hardly the strongest film and you can sort of tell how things will turn out depending on your familiarity with Shakespeare (or slasher-like horror movies in general), but it's fun enough for what it is.

#177 - Hot Shots!
Jim Abrahams, 1991



An ace pilot with a troubled past is encouraged to rejoin the U.S. Navy's fighter jet division.

I'll keep this one short. Hot Shots! is about what you expect from pretty much every ZAZ comedy as it involves all sorts of gleefully absurdist humour that ranges from speedy deployment of countless sight gags to rapid-fire wordplay between extremely stoic performers. I'm not exactly a fan of Top Gun in the first place so I'm not sure whether or not I can really get that much out of this film, but it's got a decent enough handful of laughs scattered throughout that make it worth watching once, but beyond that I'm not so sure.