Track the Films You Watch (2008) - Page 25

Michael Elliott · 03-14-2008, 12:17 PM

Did you like the ending, Pat? It seems everyone loves the film up till the end and then they're split.

I agree about THE RAINMAKER, although I probably haven't seen it in 15 years or so.

03/12/08

Bruiser (2000)

George Romero

A business exec (Jason Flemyng) is abused by co-workers, friends and his wife and all of this leads to him having morbid thoughts about killing them. One day he wakes up and his face is gone and in its place is a white mask like thing that takes away all of his features so he goes out for revenge. This was Romero's return to the genre and his first movie since 1993's The Dark Half and sadly it's probably the worst I've seen from him. The screenplay, by Romero, is all over the place and it's never quite clear what Romero is going for. As to be expected, Romero throws in his typical social commentary but he really isn't saying too much. Flemyng is decent in his role but it's Peter Stormare who steals the show as his sleazy boss who has an affair with his wife. Tom Atkins is wasted as a detective. I'm really not sure what could have been done to make this movie better but I'd say you would have to blow up the screenplay and start from scratch. It's a shame that a talent like Romero has made so few films over the past thirty-years but I guess that's the price he pays to stay away from the studios. With that said, he has proven to be good with studio films and something like The Dark Half is a lot better than this film.

03/13/08

Deadly Jaws (1974)

Harald Reinl

The title might make this sound like another Jaws rip off but it's actually another sunken treasure film. Two divers find a treasure map, which apparently points to a sunken treasure below the ocean. They hire a professional to help them get the gold but this guy turns out to have a few secrets of his own. This is a rather strange German film that is being sold in the recently released "Grindhouse Experience Vol 2" collection but those expecting anything like that are going to be disappointed because the film is certainly PG rated from start to finish. The film actually isn't too bad as we get some nice underwater photography, which certainly steals the show. We also get several close up looks at various sea creatures including an octopus and a Hammerhead shark. What doesn't work is the actual screenplay, which is rather bland and doesn't offer anything new. We get the same turning on each other aspect as well as various members of the crew having secrets. The ending when the divers are attacked by Mexican pirates is pretty over the top. Another annoying thing is that everytime the director builds up some suspense it's over before it begins. In one scene one of the divers is surrounded by sharks and can't float up to the top but then the very next second he's up on the boat and we never get to see how he escaped. This film isn't bad but it's nothing special either.

Blood Diner (1987)

Jackie Kong

Campy homage to the cult classic Herschell Gordon Lewis film Blood Feast has two brothers running a store, which packs people in due to their secret meat. The meat of course is human flesh and to keep to store in stock they are constantly on a killing spree. This is certainly a film that tries to deliver on all levels of possible entertainment when it comes to a horror film. There's a lot of good stuff here but at the same time there's a lot of bad stuff. What doesn't work is all the humor that is scattered throughout the film and this includes everything with their dead uncle who the brothers dig up and keep his brain and eyes alive inside a jar. A lot of the other humor doesn't work either but the film tries to spoof a lot of things from heavy metal to slasher films and it even spoofs films that tries to say their fake stories are real. What does work is the homage to the Lewis film as the movie works as a pure gore feast as we get non-stop killings. The special effects are laughable but that's part of the charm I guess. There's also a large amount of nudity, which certainly helps the film. If you're a fan of the Lewis film then you might want to check this out but others would be best to stay away.

PatW · 03-14-2008, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Elliott

Did you like the ending, Pat? It seems everyone loves the film up till the end and then they're split.

The film left me with so many questions that were unresolved.

Spoiler:

In answer to your question, when the movie ended I remarked to my brother " Is that it?" Upon reflection, the ending though abrupt, is appropiate.

Spoiler:

Any movie that gets to me like this, is a five star movie in my books. I think I'll have to bump up my rating.

Amistad (1997)

This movie is probably filled with historical inaccuracies but it remains an engrossing tale of man's desire for freedom.

Directed by Steven Spielberg, the events of the movie take place in 1839 and concern a group of Africans that revolted on the Spanish ship Amistad. The ship was seized by salvagers who brought the Africans to the US where they stood trial to determine their status. The abolitionists hire a lawyer to speak on behalf of the Africans who ably represents them in court. The President unwilling to accept the court's decision overrules the decision and has this case sent to the supreme court where it becomes known as the Battle of the Two Presidents.

I don't want to debate the history around these facts because I'm not knowledgable about American history especially during that period of time.
What remains is an interesting story if highly suspect. Though some of the actors were bland in their roles that is not the case for Anthony Hopkins and Djimon Hounsou who play John Quincy Adams and Cinque, the leader of the African slaves. These are two outstanding actors playing vastly different parts. We know Anthony Hopkins and he never fails to disappoint but Hounsou was new to me at that time and in movies since, he's proven to be quite a talented actor. The events aboard the ship are protrayed I imagine very realistically and we get a good sense of what it must of been like aboard the slaver ships. The sets and costumes are very well done and authentic to the period. This is beautifully photographed and scored by artists who have worked with Spielberg many times. I would have liked to have known more about some of the other characters in the movie, but time constraints wouldn't allow. All in all a good film that I'm proud to have in my collection.

Michael Elliott · 03-15-2008, 01:41 AM

Spoilers for NO COUNTRY

[spoilers]Pat, I'm really not sure what to make of the ending. I plan on watching it again soon to see if it sits better with me but when my girlfriend and I watched it a few weeks ago my brain really wasn't on the ending because I was rather upset that Brolin was killed off screen. I know "the ending" made a lot of people made but I was more upset with how Brolin's character is killed off screen. You bring up some interesting points that I'll have to think about with the next viewing.[/spoiler]

03/14/08

Cutting Class (1989)

Rospo Pallenberg

Incredibly bad slasher film sat on the shelf for many years but finally got released after Brad Pitt became a huge star. I'm sure Pitt wasn't too thrilled with this but he's the only reason this film doesn't get a BOMB rating. Jill Schoelen and Pitt play a couple who find themselves trying to discover who is killing all of their classmates. Fingers point to a former friend who was just released from a mental house due to killing his father. This is a really bad film and there's no way around that fact but seeing someone like Pitt in a movie like this makes it somewhat entertaining. Pitt isn't too bad in the film but God knows no one will mistake this for Fight Club or something to that nature. The death scenes are all incredibly lame and the limited amount of nudity does nothing. Martin Mull plays the girl's father and his scenes are the strangest of the film as they come off as a spoof yet these scenes go against everything else going on in the movie. Roddy McDowall plays the perverted school principle.

Thou Shalt Not: Sex, Sin and Censorship in Pre-Code Hollywood (2008)

No Director Credited

Another brilliant documentary from Turner Classic Movies. This one deals with Hollywood from 1930-1934 when movies pushed the limits on sex, drugs and various sinful things. The film talks about how two Priests came up with the "rules" of what you could or couldn't do and then talks about Hollywood broke all of them and tried to push the limits of what you could show. The Hayes Code finally broke through in 1934 when the Catholic Church jumped in and started boycotting the films and telling their followers that it was a sin to watch these movies. John Landis, Jonathan Kuntz, Leonard Maltin, Rudy Behlmer, Hugh Hefner and Jack Valenti are among the people interviewed for this film, which does a great job at telling the story of the Pre-Code movies. We get clips from countless films including The Divorcee, Night Nurse, The Public Enemy, Midnight Mary and various others. These types of documentaries still upset me since a religious group or a group of people can have so much control on what others do. Needless to say, the Catholic Church should have been looking in their own closet instead of going after Hollywood. Some of the early history is also talked about and this includes the scandal caused by Roscoe Fatty Arbuckle and his rape trial. If you aren't familiar with this great part of Hollywood history then this film does a great job at introducing it. Complicated Women is another Turner doc that covers this era.

PatW · 03-15-2008, 02:51 AM

Snakes on a Plane (2006)

I've avoided this movie for so long but I finally had to watch it when my son who owns it brought it over last night. This might have been okay if the director and writer hadn't taken themselves so seriously. Write it like a Shaun of the Dead and it might have been alot better. The movie was pretty lame, pretty bad but I must admit I was entertained enough to keep watching. There was so much hype over this movie and especially Jackson's line that when it did occur, it was abit of a letdown. My family had so much fun watching this, that I had a great time watching them as they were watching this film.

PatW · 03-15-2008, 06:47 PM

Braveheart (1995)

I was torn on how to rate this movie. Back when it was released I would have awarded it 5 stars, but now clearer eyes prevail and I rate it between 3.5 to 4 stars. There are many historical inaccuracies in this movie like most films of this kind. Apparently the screenplay relies heavily on a poem written by a 15th century minstral. The most objectional part of this movie was Wallace's romance with the Princess of Wales. That is so implausible that it should have been left out of the script. In fact the Princess didn't even come to England until after Wallace's death. But it sure made for a nice little romantic interlude. Braveheart paints alot of its characters black or white. For instance William Wallace is protrayed as this brave heroic figure where there is evidence that this is not the case. I imagine alot of this is speculation since what is written about him could be suspect. What is known is that he fought and won at the battle of Stirling but lost at Falkirk and he died a horrendous death.

Putting that all aside, this is a great looking picture, well directed, with amazing looking battle scenes that look realistic. The score is of epic quality if a bit repetitive at times. The acting was good but some of the characters were one-dimensional, but that was acceptable for the scope of the film. I thought the film was overly long but that feeling only developed on subsequent viewings. There are many touching little moments in this film, the thistle scene with young Murron comes to mind but of course such scenes are few and give way to the general mayhem of the majority of the film. Still I enjoyed the movie immensely.

Marie Antoinette (1938)

A lavish period piece from the 1930's with good acting and wonderful sets. Of special note is of course Norma Shearer in the title role and especially Robert Morley as the Dauphin of France. I don't think there could have been better casting and the 2006 version pales in comparison. As I was watching I could help but think that this would have been splendid if it had been shot in colour.

Stardust (2007)

A wonderful fantasy story in the same vein as Princess Bride with wonderful acting, sets, costumes and direction. Of special note is Robert De Niro who is hilarious as a pirate of a different sort

who actually steals the movie. Based on a book written by Neil Gaiman, this is an enchanting movie that will appeal to older children and adults alike.

Mario Gauci · 03-16-2008, 12:42 PM

03/11/08: THE BATTLE OF NERETVA (Veljko Bulajic, 1969)

There exist various versions of this film – running anywhere between 102 and 175 minutes; the one I watched, dubbed in Italian, was itself around 142 – although the official Italian print is actually 134 minutes long! Over the years, I had missed out on a couple of occasions to watch this – both on Italian and local TV, as well as a VHS rental. Given its title and roster of established international movie stars – Yul Brynner, Curd Jurgens, Sylva Koscina, Hardy Kruger, Franco Nero and Orson Welles – one could be forgiven for mistaking it as yet another WWII-set Hollywood epic a` la THE LONGEST DAY (1962) and BATTLE OF THE BULGE (1965). Consequently, its eventual nomination for Best Foreign Language Film Academy Award proves at first suspect and highly surprising but, in hindsight, well deserved since the film is actually a big-budget co-production between Yugoslavia, West Germany, Italy and even the U.S.A.

While the film is mostly distinguished by the fact that it features an impressive array of battle sequences which must surely be counted among the most spectacular of its era, it must also be said that it takes care and time to show the effects that constant warfare has on the behavior of human beings: an explosives expert (Brynner) is renounced and spat at by his own people when he is forced to destroy their only way back home to stop the advancing troops; two blind men leading each other during an airborne attack are led by the sound of another man’s voice already taking cover; a partisan is driven crazy when stricken by typhus; a proud Italian general (Anthony Dawson) commits suicide in a shabby room where he is held in captivity by the partisans; an Italian captain (Nero) deserts his side to join the ranks of the partisans and is taken under his wing by an artillery officer (Sergei Bondarchuk); a brother and a sister (Koscina), both members of the Yugoslav partisans, die together when hugely outnumbered during a deadly encounter with a band of long-haired renegade Chetniks led by a hesitant senator (Welles)!; a German captain (Kruger) comes to respect the determination of his enemies during combat, etc.

Despite the various strands of plot touched upon and the multitude of major and minor characters involved, the unknown director weaves a clear and expansive picture of the river Neretva conflict – at least in the version I saw; one can only wonder what an incoherent mess the shorter versions (some of them accompanied by a new score by Bernard Herrmann, no less) must have been! Incidentally, in spite of that afore-mentioned Oscar nod, THE BATTLE OF NERETVA is still highly undervalued today – no doubt, its reputation is lost among the countless WWII actioners made both by Hollywood and Euro-Cult film-makers during the 1960s and 1970s.

03/13/08: JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN (Irving Rapper and Luciano Ricci, 1960)

In the wake of the adoption of the Widescreen process and the consequent increase in popularity of the Biblical subgenre within the realm of the Epic, stories from the Old and New Testament became a much-raided Hollywood commodity during the 1950s and 1960s. It was only a matter of time before the ultra-Catholic Italians got onto the bandwagon and grew another branch into their own in-house brand of the epic that was renamed the peplum.

As would eventually became the custom, veteran Hollywood film-makers – among them Frank Borzage, Raoul Walsh, Jacques Tourneur and Edgar G. Ulmer – were engaged to supervise the production of these cheaper Italian epics and so it is that Irving Rapper – best-known for the schmaltzy but solid Bette Davis vehicles NOW, VOYAGER (1942) and DECEPTION (1946) – became involved with bringing to the big-screen the story of Joseph; subsequently, he would be employed in a similar capacity on PONTIUS PILATE (1962). While the co-director here was one Luciano Ricci – who would later (under the alias of Herbert Wise) be the officially credited director of THE CASTLE OF THE LIVING DEAD (1964) despite the reported intervention of two others! – the actors who came on board JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN were far better known. Chief among them were Robert Morley (ludicrously hamming it up as Potiphar) and genre staple Finlay Currie (as a dignified Jacob), while the younger roles were entrusted to an eclectic bunch: Geoffrey Horne (in the title role), Belinda Lee (as Potiphar’s deceitful wife, she featured in several of these Italian cheapies and would eventually die tragically within a year in a road accident), Arturo Domenici (as Potiphar’s ambitious counsellor), Terence Hill (as Joseph’s younger brother Benjamin) and Dante Di Paolo (as the main schemer among Joseph’s jealous brothers).

One may wonder why I’m talking about everything else but the film and, unfortunately, that’s because it is no great shakes. While the story was good enough to be remade thrice on celluloid – as a 1974 TV movie by Michael Cacoyannis, yet again for TV in 1995 and as a Dreamworks animated feature in 2000 – not to mention revamped as a musical extravaganza on the stage, the version under review is dreary, dull and unmemorable. Small wonder, then that the film has fallen into public domain and is available on various budget DVDs in an English-dubbed, pan-and-scan, washed out print which further serves to alienate the viewer.

03/15/08: SAUL AND DAVID (Marcello Baldi, 1964)

Much of the same comments I made in connection with JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN (1960; see above) apply here as well; in fact this is a Biblical peplum also found on the same 3-Disc 10 film collection I rented in time for Good Friday. Luckily, this is slightly superior in that one gets to see re-enacted events with which one is not much familiar (unless he is a staunch Bible reader or theologian). In fact, although the film opens with the perennial David and Goliath confrontation (which while swift is also remarkably bloody), it mostly concerns itself with the embittered and ever worsening relationship between renounced Israelite sovereign Saul and his champion warrior David who regularly makes mincemeat of legions of Philistines.

Saul is portrayed as a pitiful weakling by Norman Wooland (a surprising but not ineffective bit of casting) while blond-haired Gianni Garko is suitably imposing as the psalmist-harpist-warrior David of Bethlehem. As the story goes here, Saul’s persection of David is so long drawn-out that the latter almost joins the Philistine ranks against his own people! While the handling of the material is insufficiently inspired to sustain one’s interest for two hours, as I said the main thrust of the narrative is fresh enough to distinguish itself from other cinematic versions of the Biblical tale I am familiar with: DAVID AND BATHSHEBA (1951; with Gregory Peck as David), DAVID AND GOLIATH (1960; another Italian costumer with Orson Welles as Saul) and KING DAVID (1985; with Edward Woodward and Richard Gere as, respectively, Saul and David).

george kaplan · 03-16-2008, 05:29 PM

Teacher's Pet

This wouldn't make my top 10 romantic comedies (or 25 for that matter), but it's a solid entry, with Clark Gable and Doris Day's only foray together. The material is a bit dated, and this one would probably work better in color (the b&w along with the dourness of Gable's character for much of the film brings it down a notch), and it's a bit too long, but still, overall, well worthwhile.

PatW · 03-16-2008, 06:03 PM

Man in the Iron Mask (1998)

This man was a prisoner at the time of the reign of Louis XIV and there has been much speculation as to his identity. This is one version of that story. Leonardo DiCaprio surprised me in this movie. What I at first thought was a pretty boy role turned out to be some complex acting because he was able to convey the complexities that was inherent in each brother. Superb acting by Leo. Also of special note was Gabriel Byrne as D'Artagnon and Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich and Gerard Depardieu as the three Musketeers. Great performances from all of them. This was a fun movie and I enjoyed watching it again.

Rio Grande (1950)

My least favourite of the John Wayne westerns that I've seen so far. There didn't seem to be much going on here with long segments of uninteresting material. I guess they filled the gaps in the story with some songs which became annoying after awhile. The cinematography was impressive but little else in the film was, and I found it mostly boring.