Track the Films You Watch (2006) - Page 11

I liked all the "current day" stuff in Love on the Run quite a bit, more than most of the stuff in the previous two movies, but the flashback stuff was completely out of control. There was one point where they just plopped in a nearly five minute long scene from Bed and Board! What on earth was that all about?

Quoting from SteveGon:



Wow, Steve! Most impressive, as you seem easy to please! Have you ever seen a film that you felt rated BOMB to ** ?

Three Violent People (1956)
Thoroughly ordinary western with Charlton Heston as a Civil War veteran returning home with a new wife (Anne Baxter) whom he discovers has had a rather dishonorable past. His one-armed brother (Tom Tryon) is jealous of him. Not much to thrill about here, though it was interesting seeing Baxter and Heston working together again after THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. For what it's worth, Robert Blake has a role as a young Mexican.

Did you miss Jamie Farr as one of his brothers?

Yes, I did! And you would think his face was very distinctive!

I've seen some stinkers in my day, but now I'm pretty good at avoiding turkeys.

I only gave out one bomb rating out last year and that was to The Exorcism of Emily Rose which offended me on a personal level (and I probably shouldn't discuss that here). I also gave out a few *1/2 and ** ratings. Overall though I've got a good batting average with my movie viewing.

Yeah, that particular flashback was a bit too much but I didn't mind them overall.

I haven't posted on it yet, but I watched Blackboard Jungle the other night, which had Jamie Farr's first role in either movies or TV, back when he was still credited as Jameel Farah (he's from a Lebanese family). He was pretty easy to spot.

Recently that I can remember

Out of 4 s

Corpse Bride
The Constant Gardener
Dune 1/2
Munich
The New World
Killing Zoe 1/2
Patton
Ghost In A Shell
Broken Flowers

Duel of Fists
The Deadly Breaking Sword
The Blood Brothers 1/2

Added to master:

2/1 King Kong (1933): /

I did a blind buy on this DVD after watching Peter Jackson's version and hearing great reviews for the work done on the original film.

I was surprised at some of the details from the 2005 version that actually came from the original, especially the bit where Kong plays with the T-Rex's mouth after it died. In general, the 1933 Kong had much better pacing and plotting than Jackson's, and the ending felt much more satisfying with Kong as a villain.

Kong is a spectacular, classic monster movie. The effects were great for the time and hold up pretty well today. The characters of Ann and Jack connected with me, and the supporting cast played their roles well, serving the story being told while adding their own charm.

Things from the classic movie era that I wish we could still have: overtures and true fades to black.

I'm looking forward to checking out all the special features later this week.

This was my big problem with Jackson's King Kong. I did not buy the character of Kong at all and the relationship between him and Anne was laughable.

Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1931) out of Extraordinary version of the classic tale which emphasises the sexual component of the story. The handling of the duality theme is nothing short of brilliant with Mamoulian's direction and March's performance(s) fantastic. I can't believe I waited so long to see this.

Cypher out of Excellent sci-fi thriller about corporate espionage and one particular employee who is drawn into a web of intrigue. The film is intelligent, well-paced and atmospheric and the twists make sense within the context of the story. The final twist is straight out of Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I Wake Up Screaming

I'm often struck by how amazingly vital the score is to a film. I wonder how much differently we'd view Vertigo if, instead of one of the greatest scores ever written, it had one of the worst. And I think giving a great score to a film without one would certainly elevate it.

Certainly, I Wake Up Screaming suffers from it's score. This is considered one of the early noirs, and you can see many of those elements - the shadows, the story, etc. - but that music! Oy!

It starts out with music that makes you feel like you're watching a Bob Hope spoof of a noir, not a noir. Way too upbeat and light. Genre comdies can get away with serious music, but genre films can't really live with comedy scores. The music in Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid works in that comedy, and it would have worked in I Wake Up Screaming, but the music opening I Wake Up Screaming belongs in a much lighter film.

And, then, the main love theme is Somewhere Over the Rainbow, played very lightly. In 1941, I suspect that this must have taken people out of the film - it certainly took me out in 2006, as I started thinking about the Wizard of Oz everytime this theme came on. Very distracting.

I suspect that, rescored, there's a good noir here, but with the music it has, it falls flat.

I haven't seen Jackson's version yet, so I can't discuss the relative merits of the two films or their endings. As it concerns the original, however, I've always gotten precisely the opposite feeling. Kong never seemed like a bad guy (ape) to me. Especially at the conclusion, he just oozes pathos. I feel sympathy and pity, but never the contempt that the nastiest villains elicit.




Amen.


And amen.

Couldn't agree more with these points. Kong has a great classic movie vibe and don't forget the wonderful score and sound effects.

Brandon,
The special features are great, you're in for a real treat.

Superman IV: The Quest For Peace (1987)
Other than the poor SUPERMAN 3, I've never seen any of the SUPERMAN films in their entirety (though I've come across many scenes). I'm not in the habit of watching sequels in reverse order, but due to a Netflix screw-up I was stuck watching this final (and rightly so) turkey ahead of the first two movies. Without having anything from SUPERMAN 1 or 2 to go on, all I can say to start out with is that I've never liked Margot Kidder as Lois Lane. In part 4 there was a gross under-use of Perry White and Jimmy Olson. I thought these special effects were quite poor and certainly not up to what I'd expect from the late '80s. Even though this is a fantasy film there were so many hard-to-swallow implausibilities (like how a human being can safely be carried off into outer space, for example). Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor seems to have been tossed into the mix just for the hell of it (even moreso for his sidekick Jon Cryer) and that idiotic Nuclear Man was pathetic and annoying as hell.

You say that as if it was a good thing, Michael.

I rank the Doniel films:
Stolen Kisses, 400 Blows, Antoine et Colette, Bed and Board, Love on the Run

I don't remember how I graded it in the director's poll, but Love on the Run is one of Truffaut's worst films in my view. The story just meanders around and the breeziness is long gone. Totally a personal thing, but Doinel changes in ways I don't like at all. The whole divorce in Bed and Board never sat well with me and I just don't like where Truffaut takes the character after that. The only reason I'd watch Love on the Run again is to see those great storyboards from Rohmer's Perceval. I still haven't bought Criterion's Doinel box because I don't really want to own Love on the Run or the 2nd half of Bed and Board.

Ok, I'm gonna try to do this SteveGon style to catch up. We'll see how successful I am at it.

The New World (2005) - Malick's epic weaves personal journey's of discovery into the greater history of the English colonization of Virginia. Like his previous film, The Thin Red Line, the first half of the film works much better than the 2nd half, benefiting from a narrower focus and unburdened by Christian Bale's too-mannered performance. But it is the first half, and in particular the way that Malick captures the early conflicts between the English and Native Americans, that rises to the artistic heights of his earlier films. One battle scene in particular, the operatic camerawork and score raise to the level of grand tragedy, as if in the space of 5 minutes, Malick is visually describing the entire history of the United States. This scene embodies the power of cinema. - A-

Thumbsucker (2005) - Indie teen-angst/coming-of-age drama about a boy who alternates between sarcastic slacker and conniving approval-seeker. The film's "hook" is that he still sucks his thumb as a security blanket, and the cast, which features Vincent D'Onofrio and Tilda Swinton as the kid's parents, Vince Vaughn as his debate teacher, and Keanu Reeves in his usual dazed & confused mode as a philosophizin' orthodontist. The problem is the stars (besides Reeves) are much more interesting than the teen actor who is not up to the lead role in a film. It also doesn't help that nothing terribly interesting ever happens and the ending rings false. The only thing I found to really appreciate was Vaughn, who turns in a solid dramatic performance without falling back on his comedy schtick. - C+

Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room (2005) - A powerful human story of arrogance, lies, betrayal's, and tragedy. However, I don't think the filmmaker's bring that much to the table. In most cases this is a tabloid style presentation that lacks the finer details of what really happened. For such a well-known story, there isn't a lot of new revelations brought to the table other than some audio tapes of Enron employees waxing on about all the money they're making. It isn't all that different than the stuff 60 Minutes, 20/20, etc were doing at the time. And I'm all for gratuitous nudity, but there was absolutely no reason to feature it in what is supposedly a serious, educational film. - B-

Lila Says (2005) - Romantic drama about an Arab teen living in a French slum who falls in love with a beautiful French-Polish girl. He is both shocked and intrigued by her sexual openness as she both taunts and flaunts for him as their relationship develops. While the film at times goes over the top in its racial conflicts as one of the young man's friends becomes brutally violent in his lust for the girl, the relationship at the film's center, and the way it drives the young man into changing his life, makes for an affecting film as well as an erotic one. It also is quite good at portraying the "ripped from the headlines" struggle of immigrants to economically fit in French society. - B+

Truffaut, in an interview on the LOTR disc, expressed his disatisfaction with the film as well. To each his own I guess.

There are still a couple of Truffaut films I really want to see: The Green Room and Such a Gorgeous Kid Like Me. Hopefully someone will release these. (I'm currently debating whether or not to pick up a cheap VHS copy of TGR. SAGLM doesn't seem to have been released to video at all.)


Um, that's only four movies. :p)

(Movie watching is much easier when you don't have a life.)

Upon reflection, I see Kong as less of a villain and more of a tragic figure. I hated his casual killing of humans, but he did have reason: invasion of his home. I have a harder time explaining the L-train deaths, but I can think of plausible rationalizations.

The real tragedy is the kidnapping of Kong from Skull Island. Everything that follows from that point seems inevitable, up to and including his plunge from the Empire State Building. In the 2005 Kong, the Ann/Kong relationship and the ice sliding scene made it seem like he could be trained to live in the new environment, so the ending becomes too depressing.

The Kong documentary was spectacular, and so was the commentary, even though Wray only had two lines in the commentary. Cooper's biography was well-done for those who care about the director's story. I did like hearing more about Cinerama and his connection to it, though.

The extra materials did their job; I was entertained, and I have a new respect for the artists involved in King Kong's creation.

I've seen the real KING KONG (1933) many times, but with my recent viewing of it on DVD I did come away thinking that the hairy guy was a lot more mean than I'd recalled, and not at all a nice ape. However, I do think the "tragic figure" description fits well, and his death atop the Empire State Building has always struck me as sad.

By "SteveGon style" I meant only using 2 sentences, not doing 10 films at once. Obviously I couldn't quite pare it down that far and it was a struggle just to be that brief. It still took me 30-40m. I'm hideously slow writing.

There is or was a Spanish DVD of Such a Gorgeous Kid Like Me. It wasn't OAR though. I forget where it can be found. Ted Todorov might be able to help you out if you're interested. I rented The Green Room once on VHS but my VCR ate the tape. Those are the 2 Truffaut's I still need to see as well.

Ah. I'd like to get in the habit of doing longer reviews again. I'm also a slow writer, which doesn't help.

This is probably the most horrific and unjustifiable thing Kong does. The senseless rampaging can be rationalized away as just that, senseless. He knows not what he does.

As Brandon points out:
Everything that he does subsequently can be seen as a response to being uprooted.

As for his very deliberate (almost human) murder of the woman, whom he confuses with Ann, well, Michael's got a valid point there. If that sticks in your craw, then Kong's death might seem less inhumane and poignant than deserved. That act bothers me, but I don't think it rises to the level of sadism, which would make Kong an unequivocal, irredeemable villain. If I didn't feel sorry for him at the end, the film would still be enjoyable (a la a good monster flick) but it is the sympathy that lends it gravitas and makes it great (a la Frankenstein).

Interestingly, I think Son of Kong is a failure (among other reasons) because it does not invite this kind of debate by removing all of the nuance of the original, making the ape almost completely human and heroic.

Mighty Joe Young, which I love, is another story altogether, as it is, primarily, a comedy.

Michael,

Who are the other two?

I like Godzilla better as a good guy too, or at least not an outright rampaging monster. Except for the original of course.

I don't count shorts in my movie totals or list them in my sig, but I ended up writing up something for the director's thread.

Philbert (Three's a Crowd) - B- (1963)

Originally a TV pilot which wasn't picked up and then was subsequently released to theaters. Animation directed by Friz Freleng, live action by Richard Donner. Solid animation mesh with live action and I'm a fan of William Shallert's work in Dobie and Patty Duke. The story is typical sitcom stuff - Philbert is cartoonist Shallert's creation come to life. He tries to save Shallert from getting engaged to a woman who is secretly a harpy (she wants to get rid of his dog and his bearskin rug!) - and much of the humor hasn't aged well.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

Just watched this agian in it's entirety for the first time in a long while. Last few viewings were just to watch some of the battles. I'd actually give this for the harrowing combat scenes, but I think a lot of the story is a bit weak and the characters don't really ring true to me. This is also my first viewing since seeing Band of Brothers (2001) (a few times, once on HBO and a couple of times on DVD), and story and character wise I think it pales to that masterpiece of a miniseries.

He's one of them, but I've seen even worse. I think we talked about this briefly before, but you should try Andy Milligan (well, no you shouldn't, really -- but put THE GHASTLY ONES/SEEDS OF SIN on your Netflix queue!) Or how about Ted V. Mikels (though in truth I'm only judging Mikels by ASTRO-ZOMBIES).

02/01/06: DILLINGER (Max Nosseck, 1945) ***

Although it would have been much more appropriate as part of a subsequent Gangster DVD Collection from Warners (rather than the Film Noir in which it was included), DILLINGER is a solid B flick buoyed by a fast pace, a bevy of familiar character actors (Edmund Lowe, Eduardo Cianelli, Marc Lawrence, Elisha Cook Jr.) and a terrific turn by Lawrence Tierney in the title role. Although John Milius' 1973 remake is much more factual and despite an over-reliance on stock footage from bigger-budgeted films - like Fritz Lang's YOU ONLY LIVE ONCE (1937) - the film is also notable for an unusual narrative structure for this type of film in that the events are "told" to a theater audience by John Dillinger's father as a warning against the perils of living life on the wrong side of the tracks! This film also proved to be Monogram's most prestigious production as Philip Yordan received an Academy Award nomination for Best Original Screenplay!


02/02/06: WAKE ISLAND (John Farrow, 1942) ***

While nowadays this may seem quite indistinguishable from the many flagwavers rushed into production in its day, at the time WAKE ISLAND was very well received garnering 4 major Academy Award nominations (Best Film, Best Direction, Best Original Screenplay, Best Supporting Actor - William Bendix); true, the characters and situations are pretty stereotypical but even so, it is certainly well enough made and well-cast (Brian Donlevy, Macdonald Carey, Albert Dekker, Robert Preston, Walter Abel) to be remembered when WWII films are discussed. Once the Pearl Harbor attack gets underway, it becomes an engrossing and poignant depiction of men-in-war facing insurmountable odds; the downbeat ending was quite fresh at the time and seems to have led to a spate of similarly pessimistic WWII movies like BATAAN (1943), SAHARA (1943), THEY WERE EXPENDABLE (1945), etc.


02/02/06: BORN TO KILL (Robert Wise, 1947) ***

This is a pretty tough and cynical film to come from the typically tasteful Robert Wise: an exemplary noir with both Claire Trevor and the indomitable Lawrence Tierney at their very best; BORN TO KILL also offers memorable roles to such sterling character actors as Walter Slezak, Elisha Cook Jr., and (especially) Esther Howard. The film was intended to put leading man Tierney into the Hollywood big league but, ultimately, his erratic and violent behaviour off-screen put those plans to rest; he still managed to work steadily over the years, eventually becoming an iconic figure which undoubtedly led to his landing a pivotal role in Quentin Tarantino's RESERVOIR DOGS (1992). The Audio Commentary on Warners' DVD offers some hilarious anecdotes about Tierney's off-screen antics, even in his old age: at a 1999 screening of the film at Grauman's Egyptian Theater, among other things, he verbally berated director Wise (who was the guest of honor) for claiming "authoriship" of the film. It's a pity that when I was there (on numerous occasions) a few weeks ago, nothing quite as colorful took place! Unfortunately, my disc seems to be incompatible with my Pioneer DVD player as it pixilated like crazy when I inserted it; however, it played without a glitch on my computer's DVD-ROM!!


02/03/06: VIVA MARIA! (Louis Malle, 1965) ***

This vastly enjoyable romp features Brigitte Bardot and Jeanne Moreau at their loveliest as two saloon entertainers who (inadvertently) not only find themselves in the middle of the Mexican Revolution, but also invent striptease in the process! VIVA MARIA! sees Louis Malle return to the "anything goes" territory of his earlier success, ZAZIE DANS LE METRO (1960); here he is aided immeasurably by an engaging cast (which also includes Luis Bunuel regular, Claudio Brook and an understandably daunted George Hamilton!) and an impeccable crew (co-screenwriter Jean-Claude Carriere, cinematographer Henri Decae, composer Georges Delerue, assistant directors Juan Bunuel and Volker Schlondorff)! While the film is uneven in spots, the last half hour is a succession of hilarious sight gags which border at times, perhaps unsurprisingly given its credentials, on the surreal and the anti-clerical.


02/04/06: LA VIE DE CHATEAU (Jean-Paul Rappeneau, 1965) ***

Another delightful French pastiche, this time set around the time of the D-Day landings in Normandy; a fine cast headed by Catherine Deneuve, Pierre Brasseur and Philippe Noiret lend themselves admirably to the spirit of the thing. LA VIE DE CHATEAU takes in everything from the issues of class difference (farm girl Deneuve is married to wealthy good-for-nothing Noiret), collaboration (Noiret's family flaunts its supposed Nazi sympathies for their own material gain while secretly despising their opressors) and heroism (it's Noiret who ultimately emerges as the unexpected - and perhaps unwilling - hero, eventually winning back the straying affections of his wife). Director Rappeneau recently returned to the same stylistic territory and historical background with equally terrific results for his BON VOYAGE (2003).