Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › Track the Films You Watch (2010)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Track the Films You Watch (2010) - Page 5

post #121 of 1166
(Jeez - I seem to be kind of pigging it up here - Sorry about that...)

The Flame and the Arrow
- A ruthless, power mad Royal called 'The Falcon' exploits the people of a small mountain village and their only hope is a carefree, rascally rogue who shoots a mean arrow when he isn't drinking with his pals or diddling the village dollies. Fortunately, that rogue is Burt Lancaster, so you know he's not going to be a complete wastrel, and when the Falcon kidnaps his son, it's time to kick some medieval butt, Robin Hood style. Jacques Tourneur, the master of moody black & white, comports himself very well in vivid technicolor - each scene looks like an oil painting come to life, and, after seeing this and 'Night of the Demon', I'm really starting to dig old Jacques as an auter in his own right. As for Burt, well he is in his prime here and basically, this is just an excuse for him and his roughneck buddies to show off their circus skills for two hours, but fun like this is nothing if not infectious.
Edited by Holer - 1/26/10 at 6:04am
post #122 of 1166
Pandorum (2009)

This is almost a guilty pleasure for me. I enjoy Sci-fi so this wasn't too hard to like. The acting was good and the story was great but at times it seemed like a jumbled up mess. It was hard distinguishing what was going on in some scenes. A better edit job would have helped this film but despite its flaws I really enjoyed this movie.

Terminator Salvation (2009)

Another movie I know that people love to hate. I think this is a worthy entry in the Terminator saga. Not as good as the first two but certainly better than Rise of the Machines. I really enjoyed Anton Yelchin who plays a young Reese and Sam Worthington lately of Avatar, who plays Marcus Wright a character mostly machine that's believes he's human. Christian Bale I can take or leave. He was adequate enough I guess in the role but seemed to lack that vitality, that spark that makes for a charismatic leader. Not bad but I just wonder what it would have been like in James Cameron's hands. 

Beowulf & Grendel (2005)

Another guilty pleasure of mine. Another movie that uses the Beowulf epic poem for an entertaining story. Gerald Butler is always an interesting actor to watch but Ingvar Sigurdsson as Grendel stole the movie. More than just a bloodthirsty murdering troll there was an air of pathos around this character and I found myself routing for him. The supporting cast is all excellent and the film crew made use of their beautiful surroundings - Iceland. Good movie.
 
Cairo Time (2009)

At first I thought this movie was nothing more than a travelogue since nothing was going on. Patricia Clarkson is Juliette Grant a woman who has traveled to be with her husband who works for the United Nations and is busy in the Gaza. A former co-worker of her husband Tareq played by Alexander Siddig meets her and escorts her around until her husband rejoins her.
The movie is slow and languid mirroring the slowly budding relationship between Tareq and Juliette. The anguish on both their faces says it all as she is slowly riding up on the elevator beside her husband. This is quite a beautiful story of unrequited love and I'm glad I stayed with it and gave it a chance.
post #123 of 1166
 EXCELLENT reviews everyone.

I hate Frewer's Sherlock Holmes.  He makes it unwatchable for me.

Like the "Crank" films a lot, love exploitation film...But not sure about "Gamer" as people say it comes across as just nasty for nastiness sake and is just an unpleasant movie all round.
I may have to give it a go though....



"The Hurt Locker" -

Superb war film making.

No treasonous propaganda, no false-liberal handwringing...all 'for or against' politics are left behind and at last Hollywood has made a film simply about the men in combat and how they face near-death every day.

The bomb squad aspect cranked up the tension to massive levels and you really got a sense of what it's like for one man to literally walk towards death and hold it in his hand...purely to protect civilians and property the supposed 'resistance' could not care less about.

The film also (maddeningly) shows how often troops needlessly face death because they are literally scared about firing their weapons in case they shoot at a civilian (whatever that means in a war where the enemy has no uniform, walks alongside the rest of the population and routinely blows that population up and shoots through them to kill the soldiers). It was shocking to see the taxi scene where a man with obvious hostile intent faced nothing but shouts as he sped towards the soldiers.
And even then no one shot and instead crowded around the car to drag the taxi driver out.
Guess it was lucky, as a whole crowd of American soldiers jumped on his car, he did not also have a bomb inside!

This ever questioning routine of whether or not you are allowed to shoot is shown time and time again in the movie, as soldiers die for no other reason than they don't want to be crucified in the weasel press and even hauled up in front of a court of law!
This 'one hand tied behind your back' way of fighting a war would be bad enough anyway, but when you are fighting some of the most fanatic, ruthless killers in the world...it can literally be suicide.

It also showed how these indiscriminate bombs are so hard to spot, defuse and keep track of (where bombers go so far as to use the corpses of children as bombs) and how these brave guys stay remotely sane is anyone's guess.
And as such Jeremy Renner's (as always) great character essay of a man addicted to conflict and risk is deserving of any and all awards.

Superb performances by all the main cast, nice 'giving death a face' cameos, spot on editing, directing and technical specs all add up to give us one of the most atmospheric and scary war films ever made and at last Hollywwod has honoured its soldiers instead of spitting at them while stroking their enemy's brow.
post #124 of 1166
12 Angry Men: 3/5

The filmmaking on display here is quite good, giving personality to 12 almost nameless characters and life to a couple small rooms. It was interesting to see how seemingly inarguable evidence toward the defendant's guilt could be called into question upon careful analysis.

There were two faults that kept it from achieving a higher rating. The first is predictability. I don't mind knowing the general arc of a story in advance if the scenes are so enthralling that I don't notice. In this case, the only interest came from learning how the others would come around to a not guilty verdict. Once the first man supported Henry Fonda's character, the outcome of the trial was never in question.

The other thing that bugged me is that it was not clear why the 12th juror was clinging to his decision until the bitter end. Did that photo represent some lingering father issues for him?
post #125 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarkin The Ewok View Post

12 Angry Men: 3/5

The filmmaking on display here is quite good, giving personality to 12 almost nameless characters and life to a couple small rooms. It was interesting to see how seemingly inarguable evidence toward the defendant's guilt could be called into question upon careful analysis.

There were two faults that kept it from achieving a higher rating. The first is predictability. I don't mind knowing the general arc of a story in advance if the scenes are so enthralling that I don't notice. In this case, the only interest came from learning how the others would come around to a not guilty verdict. Once the first man supported Henry Fonda's character, the outcome of the trial was never in question.

The other thing that bugged me is that it was not clear why the 12th juror was clinging to his decision until the bitter end. Did that photo represent some lingering father issues for him?

My only real problem with this film is that Fonda's defence evidence is often more dubious than the prosecutions.  It's not so much evidence a lot of the time but melodramatic, skipping through the daisies, psychoanalysis and blanket guesswork.
Still...as a film of performances it's marvellous.

As for Lee J Cobb, I saw the film as saying he has deep resentment of his son letting him down and breaking his heart, so he projects this onto another father's son who has also seemingly let his father down and gone astray.
post #126 of 1166
 "Whiteout" - 

Pretty cliche, nothing groundbreaking or really surprising screenplay/plot wise but the film's snowy wilderness setting and the way it is constantly and cleverly used to define (and re-difine) it's action/chase sequences pushes the film into very interesting territory.

The fact that cop and killer have to go through critical life saving preparations (from what clothes they MUST wear to hooking themselves onto utterly essential guide ropes) before they can flee or give chase is well utilised to crank up the tension and add an extra, unusual, level to the standard cat and mouse set piece.

Kate Beckinsale (looking damn good) pulls off a flawless (at least to these ears) American accent as the snow bound U.S. Marshall and even though they seem to have mellowed (and indeed sexed up) her character in the film compared to her Graphic Novel counterpart she still manages to essay a believably tough character that the film (despite the fact she has to suffer - though we certainly don't suffer - a gratuitous 'bending down in her panties' shot very early on) takes seriously.
And the film is surprisingly tough and unglamorous in how Beckinsale's character is treated and what she goes through.

Nothing new in the plot department most certainly, but the well directed (sometimes grizzly and violent) action and suspense scenes ,as well as the superbly used location, raise it to a higher level than it would otherwise have attained.
post #127 of 1166
I fell behind in updating, here's from the last week or so. 


Ninja Assassin (2009) 2.5/5 - Ok, I get it.  Ninjas are shadowy death dealers.  That said, I go to chop sockies to watch people beat the shit out of each other, and I WANT TO SEE THE ACTION!  I don't think you see even 2 punches exchanged in this thing before there's a cut, or a ninja goes all ninja invisible.  Fooey!  And don't get me started on how stupid the CGI blood looks.  Give me the 36 Chambers any day. 

That said, it's not terrible.  As far as Ninja films go, it's a great one.  It wallows in it's premise and it's pretty much non-stop action.  The CGI goes way over the top, but there are still a couple of scenes that make it worth sitting through at least once. 

Magnolia (1999) 5/5 - This was my first time seeing this since it's DVD debut, and it still knocks my socks off.  People either love or hate this one, I'm in the love camp and find it to be a masterpiece is every way a film can be. 

Che: Part 1 (The Argentine) (2009) 4/5 - Like most films I end up loving, this was nothing that I expected.  I expected more of a standard bio picture.  Instead, this is more about watching a man turned into myth then dealing with minutia, and because of that, you really get a sense of of who Che is.  It's not about showing his personal relations, it instead shows his drive for what he thinks is right.  So from an unassuming beginning in a kitchen, you feel like you know who Che is by the end of this and the march for Havana,  Great stuff, ho
post #128 of 1166
Thread Starter 

12 ANGRY MEN is one of my favorite films and I think it gets its points across without having to preach.  With that said, I'd go along with what Dave said in regards to the father.  There were a few times in the film where he would discuss his own son and his "anger" would start to show.  I don't think the film was trying to be a mystery in terms of whether the kid killed the father or not.  It's clearly meant to get everyone to go along with Fonda but the acting and how everyone changes is what makes the film a masterpiece. 



Time to Sing, A (1968)
 

Arthur Dreifuss
 

Predictable and entertaining drama about a young man (Hank Williams, Jr.) who has the talent to write songs and sing them but his elderly uncle (Ed Begley) refuses to allow it.  The uncle is holding back a few secrets but a woman (Shelley Fabares) convinces the young guy to enter a few contests to pay the bills and soon fame comes.  I think fans of Williams, Jr. are going to be the ones who will mainly want to check this out but people certainly shouldn't expect the singer most people think of when they think of Williams.  This early period of his career certainly has him singing and sounding more like his famous father but that's really not a negative thing as I've always enjoyed this period.  Williams gets to sing eight different songs here with four of them written by himself.  I doubt most people have heard of these songs but we get some pretty good ones including "It's All Over but the Crying", "Next Time I Say Goodbye I'm Leaving", "Old Before My Time" and the title track.  Williams stands solo with his guitar and really delivers on the musical side but I also thought his performance was pretty good.  One of the problems with the film is that his character is such a jerk and I must say that Williams really does push that jerkiness extremely well.  Williams has a certain edge of toughness that really comes across well and a certain hard head that also jumps right off the screen.  Fabares is also extremely good in her role of the love interest and Begley is entertaining, if over the top, as the old fashioned uncle.  Character actor Donald Woods is also pretty good in his few scenes.  The film's screenplay is pretty poor as it's just way too predictable to be entertaining and the big twist about the uncle's secret is rather lame.  With that said, fans of country music or Williams will certainly want to check it out.

Crooner (1932)
 

Lloyd Bacon
 

David Manners (DRACULA) gets his first top-billing in this familiar rags to riches back to rags tale.  In the film he plays Ted Taylor, a mediocre singer who rises to fame after a gag with a microphone makes him a hot pick.  Soon the fame and money goes to Ted's head and he begins to hurt those around him including his girlfriend (Ann Dvorak).  If you've ever seen this type of drama before then I'm sure you're not going to find anything original here as it follows the familiar story that we've seen countless times.  What does make the film work is some nice music and some good performances by the cast.  This is a Warner "B" picture that doesn't have the greatest screenplay but it does its job, which is to keep you entertained for 64-minutes.  Manners, an underrated actor in my opinion, turns in a nice performance as the young punk who quickly gets in over his head.  I thought Manners did a pretty good job with the more dramatic moments but he also managed to be quite funny when needed to be.  Dvorak is also very good in her role and Ken Murray and J. Carrol Naish add fine support as the agent and club owner.  The cinematography by Robert Kurrle is also pretty impressive for such a low budget film and he seems to enjoy swooping the camera in on the intended target and this really mixes quite well with the style of music being played.  Those who aren't really fans of "B" pictures probably won't find anything here for them but if you like short, to the point films then this one here isn't too bad.
 

Threesome (1994)
 

Andrew Fleming
 

Surprisingly effective comedy/drama about roommates Stuart (Stephen Baldwin) and Eddy (Josh Charles) whose lives turn upside down when Alex (Lara Flynn Boyle) moves into their dorm room.  At first the three don't hit it off but that quickly changes and soon Alex likes Eddy, Stuart likes Alex and Eddy like Stuart.  I remember watching this thing when it first came out and while this viewing didn't live up to what I remembered, I was still surprised at how well it did hold up all these years later.  I think the film, unlike many, tried to be serious about it's subject matter and the three relationships that eventually evolve over the running time.  For the most part the film doesn't hit any false moments as you will really feel as if you are watching three different characters come into their own while at college when sex is running free.  The screenplay by director Fleming does a nice job at developing all three characters and their relationships with one another.  I think the film doesn't shy away from its subject and in the end we're greeting to quite a few dramatic moments as well as some very funny ones.  I think the running joke about all the pizza being eaten could have been left out but I don't fault the film too much for this.  The performances by the three leads are quite effective with both Boyle and Charles really shining in their roles.  Both of them handles their roles perfectly well with Boyle nailing the confusion and frustration of her character and Charles really coming off well as someone who doesn't know who he is.  Baldwin adds a lot of laughter as the sex hungry male. 

Private Screenings: Patricia Neal (2004)
 

Sean Cameron
 

Winning entry in TCM's series has host Robert Osbourne sitting down with Patricia Neal to discuss her Oscar-winning career and her various tragedies that struck her personal life.  Films like HUD, BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S,  JOHN LOVES MARY, THE FOUNTAINHEAD and THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL among many others.  We get to see some wonderful stories about the making of these movies as well as stories on Ronald Reagan, Paul Newman, John Wayne and of course Gary Cooper who she had an affair with while he was married.  Neal doesn't shy away from this affair and goes into great detail about it and her feelings on it including the last time she saw Cooper and her relationship with his wife and kid.  We also get to hear some very tragic moments that started in 1961 with Cooper dying and then the pain of her losing two kids to freak accidents only to then suffer from three near fatal strokes.  Neal, as in her film roles, comes across so charming and tough that you can't help but feel all of her joy and pain as she tells these stories.  Osbourne keeps things moving very well as usual and this ranks as one of the better entries in the series.

 

post #129 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42nd Street Freak View Post

 They all needed to see a dentist at the end of "pole Fighter" and no mistake!



"The Spirit"

Holy hellfire and hamsters!
Perhaps the most annoying movie ever made!

Seems Frank Miller decided to shove all the crap, really annoying, characters he had at the bottom of his waste bin after doing the wonderful "Sin City"...give them to actors who also decided to give really annoying performances...and gave them all really annoying dialogue to say.

Was this comedy? Parody? Homage? Slapstick cartoon? Thriller? Serious crime drama? 40's Noir?

It actually had all of those aspects, all done badly, and none of it fitted together and i actually gave up an hour in and skipped to the end. Damn!
This was just so annoying.
Annoying in every way!
A pox on it!
 


See, this is why Frank Miller should be "Bear Jewed" for this ugly shit storm of a movie. This piece of crap makes all of the characters that appear in it look like throwaways from the bottom of Frank Miller's wastebasket, instead of the fantastic creations of Will Eisner, a man who forgot more about what makes a good graphic story than Frank Miller will ever know. Eisner's SPIRIT stories were written decades ago and they still stand up as examples of well written stories that blend humour, noir, adventure and some of the sexiest, deadly femme fatales in comics. The only thing that, possibly, lowers the series a bit is the visual depiction of Ebony White, The Spirit's Black sidekick. Even Eisner's handling of EW is debatable because the character, IMO, was always handled with respect and was never played for cheap laughs.

Now, for all eternity, there will be this Frank Miller shitpile that, like it or not, will define these characters for a large proportion of future generations, because their introduction to these characters will start and end with this fiasco of a film. Anybody who doesn't have a clue about the origination of these characters will never bother to go looking for the originals after watching Miller's filmic f&*%up. Frank Miller should have a restraining order imposed on him that would ban him from coming witihin a thousand miles of any of Eisner's SPIRIT characters ever again.
post #130 of 1166
Five Guns West - The confederacy, desperate for men at the end of the Civil War, pardons five convicted felons (two soldier of fortune types, a grizzled old cowpoke and a pair of psychopath brothers) and sends them on a mission to intercept a large shipment of gold destined to support the Union Army's war effort. Almost immediately, the men fall to bickering and plotting against one another and it's hard to imagine what the Rebs had in mind when they cut this bunch loose. This is one of Roger Corman's few westerns and, while it's kind of rote, it does have some nice exploitation touches. The young Candy brothers keep things lively with their constant threats to carve up anyone who calls them short or loco or anthing else for that matter. Most of the movie takes place in an abandoned stagecoach waystation manned by an old drunk and his (naturally) beautiful niece, who stirs up even more trouble among the men. Like any good Corman movie, there is lots and lots of sitting around talking. When one of the shorty loco brothers finally erupts because he can't stand all this sittin' and waitin' for something to happen, it's pretty easy for the viewer to sympathize.
Edited by Holer - 1/27/10 at 2:49pm
post #131 of 1166
Die Hard (1988): 4/5

This is an exceptionally well-crafted action movie. In particular, I like the way that McTiernan handles set-up and foreshadowing. For example, the first scene on the airplane gives us a couple of major plot points through exposition, but the character interplay and Bruce's joke at the end make the scene feel more natural.

There are a couple of things that don't make logical sense after first viewing, but they may become clearer after discussion and listening to the commentary. One such item is why McClane jumps Karl's brother (Fritz?) instead of keeping the gun trained on him from a proper distance. He may not have wanted to use lethal force at that point, but I think he had other options that did not involve taking a lot of physical punishment only to end up killing him anyway. Also, what kind of building actually keeps $640 million in bearer bonds on hand, let alone has such ineffective human security to guard the vault?

My other problem with the movie is a personal dislike of the amount of swearing going on. It may be true to life, but I prefer to have action movies where the profanity is used sparingly to make a point instead of filling the script.

It's easy to see why Die Hard has earned such a great reputation, and I did have a great time watching it. I'm interested in seeing what happens in the sequels.
post #132 of 1166
Thread Starter 

I love the first three DIE HARD movies but I still haven't watched the fourth one yet.  I plan on going through all of them this year.  I'd say part two is the best overall but the third one is a personal favorite just because of how fun Willis and Jackson are together.


Saw VI (2009)
 

Kevin Greutert

The latest in the seemingly never ending series has Jigsaw (Tobin Bell) dead but that's not stopping him and his "workers" from torturing more people.  This time out they're going ofter the insurance company, their man main (Peter Outerbridge) and anyone who might get to pick who lives or dies based on insurance.  I keep going into these new films really with no expectations as the series has produced some good, some fair and some horrendous entries so you never really can tell what you're going to get.  On one hand, I find it rather laughable at how many ways they're keeping this series going and keeping Jigsaw in business.  On another hand, I also find that some of the games being played are getting rather tiresome.  One would think that means it's time to give up but this sixth entry turned out to be the third best in the series because of a fairly good story and one masterful game.  The story in the last couple entries really wasn't too believable but I thought what we had here worked quite well and they could also bring back Jigsaw in the flashbacks and it would fit the story well.  I think going after the insurance companies was a smart move as having someone force to pick who lives or who dies made for some interesting moments and there's no doubt that the film got a tad bit political in terms of who and what should control health care.  For the first hour of the film I really wasn't digging any of the games and I thought the opening game was extremely weak but then we got to one, which might be my second favorite in the series.  I won't totally ruin the scene but it involves a shotgun and had quite a bit of imagination behind it.  Bell is his typical good self but the real surprise for me was Outerbridge who really gave a good performance as the man the games are wrapped around.  I believed him as the snake insurance guy but also during his more dramatic moments of having to spare lives while killing others.  In the end I really can't say this is a masterpiece or anything close to that but I think it's one of the better films in the series.  Who knows where part seven goes from here.
 

This Is It (2009)
 

Kenny Ortega
 

This now somewhat legendary film captures interviews, rehearsal and backstage footage of the preparations of Michael Jackson's fifty sold-out shows in London.  The documentary runs just under two hours and for the most part it's all Michael doing his thing on stage.  If someone is expecting anything other than a concert film then they're going to be rather disappointed because this film, thankfully, leaves out all the melodrama and instead just takes a look at the music being prepared for what seems like a fantastic show.  I can't say I'm the biggest Jackson fan in the world but I still enjoyed this film quite a bit.  The lighting, setting and dancing all seemed quite impressive to my eyes and Jackson himself comes off very well here.  I think the most fascinating thing about this film is just being able to see all the behind the scenes stuff that goes into making a big production like this.  It was fun seeing Jackson sitting back and watching the dancers auditioning for the concerts.  It was fun seeing Jackson watching everything come together and we even get some nice moments of him just (apparently) having fun.  It's also fun seeing some of the young dancers tell their stories of growing up watching Jackson as a kid and now being able to perform beside him.  None of the music sequences are full blow, hard rocking versions since these were just rehearsals but they are certainly good enough to really making you want to dance around.  They Don't Care About Us, Thriller, The Way You Make Me Feel, Man in the Mirror and especially I'll Be There are the musical highlights.  It's doubtful Jackson haters will watch this film and walk away feeling anything different but fans will certainly eat this up and those semi-fans like myself will enjoy seeing all of this but it will lead to an eventual sadness because we'll never know what the actual concerts would have been like.   

post #133 of 1166
I think 12 ANGRY MEN is an exceptional and riveting film, but it does have an agenda, and that bothers me somewhat. Henry Fonda's do-gooder character is a phony, in that I really think his mind is made up from the very beginning to find the boy "not guilty", and he'll do whatever it takes to accomplish this. Sure, sure, he says he doesn't really know if the kid's guilty or not, but just watch the steps he takes to make sure he gets a 100% "Not Guilty" verdict. Hell, he even broke the law to buy an identical knife to get this kid off. He's on a crusade not even to settle for a hung jury. The one thing that really exposes him to me is that he happily takes even Jack Warden's "Not Guilty" vote, even though it's obvious that Warden only wants to get out of there and see a ballgame, and will change his vote to whatever it takes to accomplish this goal. I think that if Fonda was sincere in wanting a "true vote", he would have to discredit Warden's, because he knows the man is just voting "Not Guilty" to get out of it as quickly as possible -- it's obvious in the film. So at best, if Fonda's Juror #8 were honest and sincere, he'd have to settle for a hung jury because of Warden.  
post #134 of 1166
White Apache - Johnny Moon has a problem. Everywhere he goes, he is hunted and haunted because he is mistaken for his twin brother Natho, or Nacho or something like that. The brothers are identical but for the color of their eyes and the fact that Natho never wears a shirt. They are half white and half comanche, and brother Natho has chosen to live with his Indian brothers and eat copious amounts of Peyote, which apparently compells him to rob, pillage and kill. When Johnny can take no more, he challenges his brother to a showdown in a small western town, but can he stay alive long enough in the meantime? This is William Shatner's only Spaghetti (technically Paella) western, done during his Captain Kirk prime, and with such a great premise, it should have been a lot better. Anytime Shatner played twins on Star Trek, it was a tour de force of ego and overacting, but here, even as the Peyote-saturated Indian brother, he shows a lot of restraint, something he didn't often do. It's not a terrible movie, it's just that Shatner's films are usually so crack-brained or uniquely odd that I came in expecting something more. With Joseph Cotten as the town Sheriff, looking like he is just waiting around for the check to clear.

Impulse - Quote: "People like you ought to be turned into Dog Food!" Now this is more like it. When Matt Stone was a boy, he killed his mother's lover with a Samurai sword, so naturally he grew up to become an effeminate gigolo psychopath who preys on older women. After strangling his latest 'keeper', Matt seems to find true love in a beautiful young widow, but then Harold 'Top Job' Sakata shows up (as Karate Pete, so says the side of his motor home) and  makes it clear that Matt is still his bitch and needs to come across with some green. As his life (and mind) begin to unravel, can Matt find a way to keep it together or will his psychotic rage be his ultimate undoing? You know, there are actors who have made more and better exploitation films, but few show the sheer commitment that William Shatner does. Even in a cheap, sleazy piece of crap like this, he absolutely throws himself into the role. He turns Matt Stone into a seething, leisure suit wearing scuzz bucket and you can't wait to see him implode. This thing plays like a TV movie from another dimension and is one of the great bad-film experiences of all time. See it with someone you love.
Edited by Holer - 1/28/10 at 7:43am
post #135 of 1166
 Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (1956)

Well I decided to watch this one again after watching that train wreck, the remake with Michael Douglas. I have some of the same complaints about this version as I did about the re-make. It also doesn't help that you know what the outcome will be. It lessens the impact considerably and it's not a good enough movie to overlook that fact. One thing this film has that the other didn't - good acting.

The Final Destination (2009) no stars

This would not have been my choice to rent at the local video store but there you have it. I think I've seen one in this series and I remember thinking it wasn't that bad. No plot here and I wasn't impressed with any of the acting but mercifully it was short.

Men in Black (1997)

I've always enjoyed this movie and I was surprised when my daughter came home with this on blu-ray since she's not a Will Smith fan. Though I like my sci-fi more on the serious side this was alot of fun. For anyone not aware, Men in Black represents a secret organization that monitors, controls and generally hides the existence of aliens among us from the general population. Both Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones were great and had good chemistry but the one that stole the show for me was Vincent D'Onofrio's hilarious turn as Edgar aka The Bug.
The cockroach crushing scene was especially funny. My only complaint is Will Smith swagger or cocky attitude is repeated in practically ever movie I've seen him in and it becomes tiresome after awhile.


Edited by PatW - 1/28/10 at 7:52am
post #136 of 1166
Thread Starter 
Fonda does jump on Warden for changing just for the ballgame but there's really nothing you could do with a character like him.  Warden was clearly going to vote with the majority.  I'm not sure if agenda is the word I would use as every courtroom drama has an agenda to follow in order to reach the verdict that the filmmaker wants.  Even (other) masterpieces like INHERIT THE WIND and THE VERDICT have this agenda to prove or disprove something.  Plus, it's doubtful they judge would have allowed a hung jury in that short a time.  I'm sure several of the men could have been kicked off the jury for what they were doing. 


Re: THE FINAL DESTINATION

Certainly the worst film I watched from 2009.  Even the 3D effects were horrible and they were hardly ever used to make matters worse.
post #137 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Elliott View Post

Re: THE FINAL DESTINATION

Certainly the worst film I watched from 2009.  Even the 3D effects were horrible and they were hardly ever used to make matters worse.


For me, that dubious honor is a toss up between Paul Blart: Mall Cop and The Final Destination.
post #138 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Elliott View Post

Fonda does jump on Warden for changing just for the ballgame but there's really nothing you could do with a character like him.  Warden was clearly going to vote with the majority.

 

But the thing is, since Fonda knows that Warden really thinks the boy is "Guilty", in good faith he should not accept Warden's "vote". But it doesn't matter to Fonda; he just wanted the kid to get off however possible, so it seems, to the point where he'd even take one "bogus" vote! 
post #139 of 1166
Thread Starter 
I think, in Warden's case, he was just hopeless no matter what the case or clues were.  I'm sure quite a few people get on jury duty, are pissed about it and couldn't care less about the outcome as long as they get it over with quickly. 

That's what makes the film so special to me is that all twelve men have good and bad things about them.  They all have reasons as to why they voted guilty and they have reasons why they changed their mind.  The same with Fonda as he states quite often that he doesn't know whether the boy is guilty or not but his reason for voting not guilty is because he doesn't want to kill someone without talking it over.  There's even a time later in the movie where he almost changes his vote. 

I think you could leave the movie as is and have the boy be guilty in the end.   
post #140 of 1166
It Happened One Night: 3/5

I consider It Happened One Night to be a product of its time more so than most movies. It gets my respect for introducing a romantic comedy formula that has worked well for generations. However, the execution of this type of story has improved greatly over time. There are some nice moments between the two leads, but their journey certainly feels much longer than the running time of the picture. I also have a hard time getting past the 1930s gender roles, film technology, and overdone soft focus on the leading lady.
post #141 of 1166
Thread Starter 

I wasn't too fond with IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT the last time I watched it.  Over the past couple years I've become a major fan of Capra and Gable but this one just didn't work for me.  It's a good little film but hardly what I'd call a classic.  I think the 1930s was one of the greatest years for pictures but at the same time I'd probably have more objections to the films that won Best Picture at the Oscars during this decade.


Blue Lagoon, The (1980)
 

Randal Kleiser
 

Silly love story of two shipwrecked children who grow up alone on an island and as teenagers (Brook Shields, Christopher Atkins) start to experience their sexual growth.  I know this thing is popular among women but for the life of me I can't help but think this is one of the dumbest movies ever made for numerous reasons.  I think the story of two shipwrecked kids could have made for an interesting story but this film seems more interested in showing off the naked bodies of their two young actors than actually trying to make a good movie.  It's rather amazing that this film can be seen as anything other than soft porn but I'm sure teenage girls would blush over the sight of the fully nude Atkins and I'm sure many people flocked for the stuff dealing with a nude 15-year-old Shields (a double was used at times).  The story of young sexuality has been the subject of many great movies but this isn't one of them and at times I couldn't help but feel dirty for watching this thing.  One of the biggest problems, as I said, was the fact that it seems the director just wanted to show off the flesh of the two actors.  Another major problem is that both actors give horrid performances to the point where you can't help but laugh, which isn't a good thing in a drama.  It also doesn't help matters that you got insane scenes like the "Stone God" or the stupid native killings.  The ending, which I won't ruin, is just about as dumb as anything that came before it, which is pretty shocking considering how many dumb things there were.  The screenplay never really seems to know what it wants to do as at times the material is handled seriously but then you'll get something so stupid that you'd think you were watching some sort of spoof.  The movie is bad on many levels but it's this badness that makes the film so entertaining to watch.  I'll admit that I was never bored with the film, which is something that thousands of movies can't say.  Boredom is certainly the death nail to any film so at least this thing avoids that.  With that said, I still scratch my head as to why people do love this film.  I think the idea of the story is a good one but the execution is extremely poor.

Threesome (1994)
 

Andrew Fleming
 

Surprisingly effective comedy/drama about roommates Stuart (Stephen Baldwin) and Eddy (Josh Charles) whose lives turn upside down when Alex (Lara Flynn Boyle) moves into their dorm room.  At first the three don't hit it off but that quickly changes and soon Alex likes Eddy, Stuart likes Alex and Eddy like Stuart.  I remember watching this thing when it first came out and while this viewing didn't live up to what I remembered, I was still surprised at how well it did hold up all these years later.  I think the film, unlike many, tried to be serious about it's subject matter and the three relationships that eventually evolve over the running time.  For the most part the film doesn't hit any false moments as you will really feel as if you are watching three different characters come into their own while at college when sex is running free.  The screenplay by director Fleming does a nice job at developing all three characters and their relationships with one another.  I think the film doesn't shy away from its subject and in the end we're greeting to quite a few dramatic moments as well as some very funny ones.  I think the running joke about all the pizza being eaten could have been left out but I don't fault the film too much for this.  The performances by the three leads are quite effective with both Boyle and Charles really shining in their roles.  Both of them handles their roles perfectly well with Boyle nailing the confusion and frustration of her character and Charles really coming off well as someone who doesn't know who he is.  Baldwin adds a lot of laughter as the sex hungry male. 

Green Porno: Shrimp (2009)
 

Isabella Rossellini
 

The newest entry in Rossellini's rather impressive series of short films takes a look at the sex life of a shrimp who starts out a man only to peal away the hardness of a shell to become a female and then mate.  As usual, this film is pretty surreal and very strange to watch but this is what makes it so original and in the end it's what makes it work so well.  This time out we have the intro of Rossellini about the cook the creature and then she goes into the sex story.  We've also got a new ending as biologist Dr. Claudio Campagna is also offering tips on how catching shrimp could be done better so that other animals wouldn't have to be killed and then just thrown back into the sea. 
 

Green Porno: Squid (2009)
 

Isabella Rossellini
 

This time out Isabella Rossellini is playing a squid as we learn how they have sex and how they're drawn to the light at the top of the water, which can also lead to their capture.  If you're a fan of this series then I'm sure you'll get a kick out of this one.  This is only the second film I've seen from this third group of films and I really can't say I'm overly thrilled with the new format, which includes an opening of Rossellini cooking and then a closing with Dr. Campagna telling us how it would be safer if such bright lights weren't used to captured the squid.  As normal, the sex talk is pretty funny and it's certainly original in the way that it's delivered. 

Green Porno: Anchovy (2009)
 

Isabella Rossellini
 

Another entry in the third group of short films by Rossellini that shines a spotlight on fishing practices.  This time out we learn about the anchovy and how it's best for them to stay in the middle of their school if they want to survive getting eaten by other animals.  We then learn that they reproduce through orgies where the eggs and sperm just fly around until they connect.  As usual the sex talk is pretty funny and creative but I can't say that the tacked on fishing tips were any good.  Dr. Claudio Campagna is once again explaining why certain ways the anchovy is caught are causing other animals to do without food. 
 

Green Porno: Seal (2009)
 

Isabella Rossellini
 

The final film to be released in the third group takes a look at seals and their mating habits.  This episode is pretty much completely different from the previous entries as this one here uses real footage, hand drawn animation and a puppet show to explain how seals mate and eventually had the babies are born, cared for and then released on their own.  This is certainly the best entry in the third group because the subject matter is told in a pretty interesting way and for the most part it's a straight-forward way.  The live action footage was extremely impressive as we get very close the the seals and also get to learn various things about them including how much the babies grow in a short three week period. 
 

post #142 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Elliott View Post

I think, in Warden's case, he was just hopeless no matter what the case or clues were.  I'm sure quite a few people get on jury duty, are pissed about it and couldn't care less about the outcome as long as they get it over with quickly. 
 

Right. And in such cases, in all fairness you'd have to have a hung jury --- that is, if you KNOW that a juror is just switching his vote to one side or the other only because he wants to agree with the majority and get it all over with. And Fonda knew that about Warden, as the man made it blatantly obvious. Fonda would not accept an insincere "Guilty" vote from anyone in that room, but he'll gladly accept an insincere "Not Guilty" vote without even hammering away at Warden for it!

That's what makes the film so special to me is that all twelve men have good and bad things about them.  They all have reasons as to why they voted guilty and they have reasons why they changed their mind. 

Yes, but all the others changed their opinion from GUILTY to NOT GUILTY because they honestly began to feel that way. But Warden never really came to honestly think the boy was NOT GUILTY. And you can't have a sincere 12-0 unanimous verdict that way. Fonda should have never accepted it, if he was so self-righteous. And this is one major problem I have with an otherwise great film.

 The same with Fonda as he states quite often that he doesn't know whether the boy is guilty or not but his reason for voting not guilty is because he doesn't want to kill someone without talking it over.  There's even a time later in the movie where he almost changes his vote. 

Yes, he "says" all that to make it look good, but I think he's a bleeding heart from the get-go who never would have condemned that boy. I don't think he ever came close to changing his vote, and if he did, what would that say about his honesty and integrity? If he would have voted GUILTY just to "go along with the majority", then he would have been as wrong and insincere as Jack Warden's character. 

I realize this is a very hot topic, but I think the jury system is pretty poor. I think you can ALWAYS find "reasonable doubt" in any true murder case (even when the defendant is guilty), if you look hard enough or can spin things. There are always cracks the defendant can slip through. 
post #143 of 1166
01/18/10: SUNDAY ENCOUNTER (Marc Allegret, 1958)
 
Yet another slight French film from a director past his prime; presciently, at the same time, it signaled the debut of one of the major icons of the “Nouvelle Vague” – actor Jean Paul Belmondo, who somewhat inconsequentially here plays the second romantic lead. Two of the three stars involved, in fact, had been leading ladies since the late 1930s (Danielle Darrieux and Arletty) and whose careers had understandably started dwindling by now; the third is comic Bourvil whose career would peak during the next decade. The film is a bittersweet romance with Bourvil still pining for the woman (Darrieux) whom he had met during WWII and who had left him 5 years previously: unbeknownst to him, she is currently in a relationship with one of his war buddies and, by chance, he notices her aboard a bus and catches up with her but they part ways soon after; however, he follows her and storms the office she had entered – where he comes face to face with his ex-colleague, but then leaves in dismay. So, Bourvil concocts a plan – with the help of his landlady (Arletty), her daughter and the latter’s unruly trumpeter boyfriend (Belmondo) – by which he gives appointment to Darrieux, ostensibly to discuss their divorce settlement, at his office (where he purports to impress his ex-wife by letting her believe he is top man) and, later, at a country villa actually owned by Arletty (having also borrowed his real boss’ swanky car for the occasion)! Incidentally, Bourvil has to act quickly if he wants to regain the woman he loves back – since Darrieux (who even gets to sing here) is to emigrate to Canada on that same day; the titular outing, then, is fraught with incident (having taken a gun and toyed with the idea of killing her if she insists on leaving, Arletty & Co. embark on a race-against-time to stop him) but also reminiscences of their life together. Of course, this being an old-fashioned French film, our couple gets back together in the end – with Darrieux even happy that Bourvil still owns his rickety ancient car. A pleasant enough effort, then, if strictly minor (and, ultimately, pretty forgettable) fare.
 
 
01/20/10: COME DANCE WITH ME (Michel Boisrond, 1959)
 
This and another early Brigitte Bardot vehicle, UNE PARISIENNE (1957), had been available for rental at a local DVD store for a long time but I kept postponing getting to either, believing them to be minor frothy affairs; however, having just acquired and being on the point of watching a similar effort of hers – Marc Allegret’s MADEMOISELLE STRIPTEASE aka PLUCKING THE DAISY (1956) – I thought I might as well check them out too while I am at it. Anyway, I opted to start with this one being ostensibly a thriller and, while I was expecting it to involve some nudity from the star (which technically there is none), I was surprised – especially when considering the film’s essentially light touch – at the amount of sleaze on display (from explicit situations and dialogue to a subplot involving gay bars and drag queens!). The premise, in fact, revolves around the Police investigation into the murder of blackmailing dance teacher Dawn Addams; incidentally, the Inspector on the trail of the assassin is Luis Bunuel regular Paul Frankeur and Serge Gainsbourg, popular yet controversial singer/songwriter and later film-maker, makes an early appearance as the victim’s accomplice (photographing her in compromising positions with wealthy patrons). Their latest victim is dentist Henri Vidal (whose last film this proved to be, expiring from a heart attack at the young age of 40 – he was married to star Michele Morgan, having met on the set of his best-remembered movie i.e. the Italian spectacle FABIOLA [1948]); Bardot is his wife, whose father (Noel Roquevert, from a number of H.G. Clouzot titles) is an industrialist. Vidal had run into Addams at a nightclub after a row with his bride: she even goes to his clinic, where Bardot works as his assistant, and supplies him with incriminating photos of their dalliance. On his part, not intending to pay, he visits Addams at her studio and causes a scene – but then relents and makes an appointment for the next day at the same place; when he arrives, Vidal finds the woman dead and is then surprised in the room by Bardot who had followed him there! Of course, he has to confess everything and though Roquevert does not readily believe him, Bardot does and determines to establish his innocence (since his description was given to the Police by Addams’ dance colleagues) by finding the real killer. To this end, she takes a job as a dance teacher there and even ingratiates herself with Frankeur; incidentally, it appears that the killer could not have exited the room before Vidal’s entrance as there is no other way out: this actually reminds Bardot of the Gaston Leroux novel “The Mystery Of The Yellow Room” (whose 1930 film adaptation by Marcel L’Herbier, along with its sequel THE PERFUME OF THE LADY IN BLACK – nothing whatsoever to do with the atypical Italian giallo from 1974 – I have also just gotten my hands on!) and from here on in, as the saying goes, the plot thickens. Despite the generic and downright misleading title, this is a fairly enjoyable picture (especially easy to take in pleasant color); mind you, the suspense reaches no great heights (given that the murder method is given away all too soon and the motive emerges to be characteristically weak) – and, yet, the viewer’s attention is engaged throughout and one is genuinely curious to discover the guilty party’s identity (what with the variety of suspects being fingered along the way).
 
 
01/21/10: UNE PARISIENNE (Michel Boisrond, 1957)
 
Even more frivolous, thus less rewarding, than COME DANCE WITH ME (1959; see my review elsewhere), this is really nothing more than a Hollywood-type sex comedy (with the heroine – once more, Brigitte Bardot – forsaking true love temporarily for a fling with a suave but ageing prince played by Charles Boyer, no less!) spiced up with the new-fangled French naughtiness. Actually, the movie’s two halves barely jell together as we first see the central couple (the man, by the way, is COME DANCE WITH ME’s Henri Vidal and, throughout this lengthy initial sequence, we also get to see Noel Roquevert from that same film) being forced into marriage after she is surprised in the hero’s bed during a week-end hunting party by her father, the current Prime Minister. Eventually, the two have a row and she vows to throw herself at the first man she meets: of course, since all of this occurs at the visiting Boyer’s welcome festivities, it is he who becomes her ‘target’; needless to say, he is happy to oblige…while spouse Nadia Gray who, naturally, is aware of his foibles covers up for him during engagements of state (especially when he flies off with Bardot to London)! This interlude, in fact, occupies the film’s latter stages and even includes Boyer being mistaken for a gangster (perhaps a nod to his celebrated turn as Pepe` Le Moko in ALGIERS [1938]) in a pub – from which he and Bardot have to fight their way out! As I said at the start, UNE PARISIENNE is basically fluff which, though good-looking per se, does not have enough substance for it to be elevated beyond that.


01/23/10: HOLLYWOOD REMEMBERS: BRIGITTE BARDOT (TV) (N/A, 1990) 

Included on the R2 DVD of UNE PARISIENNE (1957) released by C'Est La Vie was this 25-minute pseudo-documentary about the French sex kitten. Exclusively featuring narration over scenes from a handful of her (thankfully) rarer films, these include a few that I happen to have in my collection, namely: Anatole Litvak's ACT OF LOVE (1953; a Hollywood-French co-production starring Kirk Douglas), Marc Allegret's MADEMOISELLE STRIPTEASE (1956), THE NIGHT HEAVEN FELL (1957; directed by her "Svengali" husband Roger Vadim  and co-starring Stephen Boyd and Alida Valli), Serge Bourguignon's TWO WEEKS IN SEPTEMBER (1967; with Laurent Terzieff and James Robertson Justice), Edward Dmytryk's SHALAKO (1968; an exotic Western that boasted an impressive cast: Sean Connery, Stephen Boyd, Jack Hawkins, Peter Van Eyck, Alexander Knox, Woody Strode and Honor Blackman) and her penultimate film, Vadim's DON JUAN OR IF DON JUAN WERE A WOMAN (1973; with Robert Hossein, Maurice Ronet, Robert Walker Jr. and Jane Birkin). Needless to say, Bardot's most famous films are also included - ...AND GOD CREATED WOMAN (1956), CONTEMPT (1963), VIVA MARIA! (1965) and SPIRITS OF THE DEAD (1968) - but the ones I most welcomed, personally, were those of films that are now virtually untracable: BABETTE GOES TO WAR (1959) and PLEASE, NOT NOW! (1961)...which promises to be especially naughty and, in hindsight, might just fall into my lap one of these days! Title notwithstanding, Bardot had very little to do with Hollywood and this inadequate featurette only serves to highlight the fact that, most of the time, her star vehicles had little except her beauty and charm to commend them. 
post #144 of 1166
Thread Starter 

I'm finally done with the month-long Bogart marathon, which I also had this time last year.  I've seen most of his movies now so perhaps TCM will get around to showing the rest sometime soon. 

Hopefully next month I can put the high class of Warner on the back burner and dig into some Euro trash.


Across the Pacific
(1942)
 

John Huston
 

Suspenseful war-time thriller from Warner has Humphrey Bogart playing the bitter Rick Leland, a man who turns his back on his country after being court martialed.  He finds himself on a Japanese vessel heading towards the Panama Canal where he meets Dr. Lorenz (Sydney Greenstreet) who has spent the past thirty-years working in the orient and a strange woman (Mary Astor) who maybe hiding many secrets of her own.  Soon Rick discovers an attempt is going to be made to bomb the canal but he's not quite sure who's in on it and when the attack might come.  It's interesting to know that this was originally going to be about an attack on Pearl Harbor but after it was really attacked they changed the location even though they set this film around the same time as the real attack.  Having Bogart fight off the Japanese the day before we know about the real Pearl Harbor adds some nice suspense to the film because it makes us realize that this type of plot really could have happened and this is one of the best examples of mixing fact and fiction to create a neat little thriller.  I really like the fact that the film starts off with us not really sure what's going on and not knowing which character we should be rooting for or against.  We learn what Bogart is up to early on but I think the film does a very good job at keeping us guessing while still trying to figure out what type of attack is coming.  Huston does another wonderful job at keeping the film moving at a brutally fast pace and he also manages to milk every ounce of suspense out of the story.  Bogart delivers another strong performance and I must say that this was the type of character he was born to play.  Ultimately tough but at the same time he makes you question whether or not he's a coward or something more sinister boiling underneath his nature.  He perfect fits the worn-down, court martialed aspect early on but we also believe him as the tough guy.  Astor is also extremely good in the film as she perfectly gets all the mysterious qualities needed for the film to work but she also gets to display a pretty good love interest for Bogart and she gets to show off some sexuality.  I'm not sure what else can be said about Greenstreet but he once again makes for the perfect snake and surely does live up to being one of the greatest actors to play villains.  It seems a dozen or so war movies were being released during this period of Hollywood's history but this one here comes off feeling very realistic and it manages to get real drama on what were very real fears back in the day.  The great cast and direction really pull off a very entertaining stories making this a must-see for fans of the genre and even though who typically don't enjoy war pictures.
 

Conflict (1945)
 

Curtis Bernhardt
 

Nice thriller about a husband (Humphrey Bogart) who murders his wife because he's in love with her younger sister (Alexis Smith).  The husband is in a bad car wreck but he fakes how serious his injury is so he will have an alibi as to why he couldn't be the murderer but soon he starts seeing his wife and begins to fear he might not have killed her.  I was pleasantly surprised to see how good this picture was even though some stronger direction would have helped matters.  While watching the movie I was entertained every step of the way but at the same time I couldn't help but wonder what this would have been like with someone like Hitchcock behind the camera.  What works best are the performances with Bogart leading the way and doing a very fine job in the role of the husband who slowly begins to crack once he realizes he might not have done a very good job in terms of his murder plot.  Bogart manages to play the character's nerves quite well and makes the role very believable.  Smith was also very good in her role bringing a certain type of innocence that really makes her register with the viewer.  He own scenes of doubt over whether she should be falling for her sister's husband were well done.  Sydney Greenstreet plays the friend/psychologist who tries to keep Bogart calm throughout the matter.  Greenstreet's calm, nurturing voice certainly makes him perfect for the character.  The screenplay also works very well as we're given two different mysteries to keep in our mind.  The first being whether or not the wife is actually dead or is something more supernatural going on.  The second is, if she's dead, will Bogie get away with it.  This film really has a lot of elements of a horror film or at least the Val Lewton productions that were being made around this time.  This film is quite dark and really fits into that genre so fans of the Lewton films will certainly want to check this out.

Two Guys from Milwaukee (1946)
 

David Butler
 

Warner comedy has Prince Henry (Dennis Morgan) landing in America but not wanting to do the normal Prince stuff like meetings and royal dinners.  Instead he wants to see NYC and meet Lauren Bacall.  He meets a taxi driver (Jack Carson) and the two hit it off until the Prince starts to have feelings for his girlfriend (Joan Leslie).  I've read several positive reviews for this film but I must call it a pretty big disappointment for several reasons.  I think my biggest problem with the film was that I simply didn't laugh at anything.  I didn't laugh at the Prince getting drunk for the first time and I didn't laugh at anything that followed.  The movie was fairly boring, although I give Morgan and Carson a lot of credit because you can tell they're giving it their all to try and get laughs but the screenplay really lets them down.  For me the movie dragged from one scene to the next and none of them got any better or had any real energy that would keep me into the story.  I think it was pretty predictable that the Prince would end up falling for his friends girlfriend and in many ways this isn't all that funny because I personally felt bad for the taxi driver.  There's a running joke of the two men telling everyone that they're from Milwaukee but I didn't find this funny either.  I think the film would have been better had the Prince actually done his first goal in trying new things.  The movie seems to forget this and by the twenty-minute mark he pretty much knows his way around.  The movie does end on a very good note when the Prince's main dream comes true but he also meets her better half.

Passage to Marseille (1944)
 

Michael Curtiz
 

Big-budget Warner war film about a group of Devil's Island escapees who join up with the French to battle Germans.  I had held off on watching this film for many years expecting your typical WWII drama but that's certainly not what I got as the movie is quite different from other movies and in the end it comes off quite fresh and original.  The movie is pretty much told via one flashback after another as we jump around in the story but this never get confusing as the screenplay perfectly builds off everything that happened earlier in the movie.  We have Humphrey Bogart and Peter Lorre playing two of the escaped convicts and getting to know their backstory just added to everything that would follow when it came time to escape and then when it came time to fight.  The film has an all-star cast that not only has Bogart and Lorre but we also get Claude Rains, Sydney Greenstreet, George Tobias, Philip Dorn, Michele Morgan, John Loder and several other familiar character actors from the studio.  The performances by the entire cast are very good but the film clearly belongs to Bogart who once again proves he was one of the all-time great tough guys.  Only Bogart could pull off a role like this because he makes you understand why he hates his country yet, at the same time, you can tell that deep down he's going to have courage and be ready to fight when that time comes.  Towards the end of the film when everyone is on a boat, which is about to be taken over by the Germans, a great battle follows and this entire sequence contains one great action piece after another and in the middle of it all is Bogart and you believe everything he does.  The rest of the cast are all good and add a lot of entertainment to the film as one would expect from such veterans.  Curtiz once again shows why he's one of the most underrated director's in the history of this era as he not only handles the action sequences but he also does a marvelous job with the quieter moments and he's perfectly capable of letting the drama build up over time.  Many people have called this CASABLANCA-light as this film has pretty much all of the same talent behind it but it's really unfair to compare the two films as they are quite different on all levels.  This film here certainly isn't a masterpiece but this is still a very solid action film that deserves a better reputation than it has.
 

Brother Orchid (1940)
 

Lloyd Bacon
 

Gangster Little John Sarto (Edward G. Robinson) decides to take a break from his gang so he travels across the country for a trip.  When he returns he expects to jump right back in but the new guy (Humphrey Bogart) throws him out on his face.  Sarto ends up at a monastery where he begins a new outlook on life.  This Warner film contains both laughs and gangster drama and the terrific cast makes it a must see for film buffs.  Not only do we have Robinson and Bogart playing gangsters but we have Ann Sothern as Robinson's love interest, Ralph Bellamy playing a rival, redneck, Allen Jenkins as comic relief and Donald Crisp as the head of the monastery.  D.W. Griffith fans will also find Wilfred Lucas in a small role as one of the brothers.  The performances by all makes this a must see with Robinson leading the way in his typical tough guy role.  He has no problem playing the big shot and neither does Bogart when he gets the shine.  Seeing the two men acting together is always great fun even if we know what's going to happen in the end.  I was also very impressed with Crisp and his calm performance.  Bellamy clearly steals the film each time he's in a scene as that dumb, loveable redneck character he plays is so dead-on believable that you can't help but smile.  The comic moments really aren't as funny as one would hope but that doesn't hurt the film too bad as the film is very fast-paced and full of nice drama.  Again, the main reason to see this is for Robinson and Bogart so fans will certainly eat this up. 
 

Two Mrs. Carrolls, The (1947)
 

Peter Godfrey
 

A psychotic husband (Humphrey Bogart) murders his wife so that he can run off with his new squeeze (Barbara Stanwyck) but a few years later he sets his eyes on a new woman (Alexis Smith) so he has another woman to get rid of first.  This is a pretty interesting film that was made in 1945, the same year that Bogart made CONFLICT, which was a fine where he killed his wife to try and get her sister who just happened to be played by Smith.  Both films are very much alike so it's no shock that Warner decided to keep this movie on the shelf for two years.  This here is certainly the lesser of the two films for a couple reasons.  For starters, both Stanwyck and Bogart seem to be out of their comfort zone as I never really bought either one in their roles.  Both have prove to be great actors but I couldn't help but be somewhat disappointed because neither come off overly well.  Bogart does the better of the two as he at least manages to play the psychotic part well but he doesn't come off overly well as the brilliant painter.  Not for a second did I buy him as this painter and I also didn't buy Stanwyck in her role.  Perhaps this type of character was just too soft for her.  Smith, on the other hand, nearly steals the film with her good performance and we get Nigel Bruce playing a drunken doctor and this role will certainly remind you of Watson.  I think the biggest problem with the film is its screenplay, which is all over the place.  The movie runs 99-minutes but we never really get to know any of the characters or the reasons that Bogart is so crazy.  We never meet his first wife, we never really see his relationship build with Stanwyck and there's no good reason for him to want to kill her for this new woman.  Everything just seems to happen but without reason.  The ending is quite effective as the film turns pure horror and manages to get a few good sequences.  The final bit coming down the stairs, which I won't ruin, is pure gold with the line said.  I really wanted to like this movie a lot more than I actually did but in the end the screenplay just isn't good enough to make it a winner.  CONFLICT, while flawed, was much better and pretty much dealt with the same story.
 

All Through the Night (1941)
 

Vincent Sherman
 

Bizarre, silly and over the top picture from Warner has a racketeer (Humphrey Bogart) getting mixed up with a strange woman (Kaaren Verne) who just happens to be involved with a group of Nazis (Conrad Veidt, Peter Lorre).  Towards the end of the picture there's a joke involving Superman and that type of pulp adventure is what's best to expect when going into this film.  I was really shocked to see so much humor thrown around considering the subject matter but this isn't your typical WWII flick.  The movie mixes the gangster, spy and comedy genres fairly well and while the end results aren't a classic film, at the same time it's so original that you can't help but be entertained.  I think the best thing going for the film is its cast even if a few of the members are underused.  We get Bogart doing nice work as the tough guy we all love to see him play.  He handles all the action scenes quite well and he even gets a few good one-liners.  Veidt is rather stiff in his role but I mean that in a good way as his stern performance mixes up good against the humor in the film.  Lorre doesn't get enough to do but he adds fun whenever he is on screen.  Warner funny man Frank McHugh gets several good scenes and we can also spot a young Jackie Gleason in a supporting role.  I really wasn't too thrilled with Verne who I found to be quite boring as she didn't add any chemistry to the film.  None of the genres mixed in here work on their own but seeing them mashed together in one film at least keeps the thing moving even though it's incredibly silly.  Nothing great and certainly not a classic but fans of Bogie will want to check it out.
 

post #145 of 1166
Fantasia 2000: 5/5

Every time I watch this, the ending of the Noah's Ark sequence gets to me. Also, Pines of Rome is one of the great pieces of music of all time, and it is only enhanced by the story of the flying whales.
post #146 of 1166
Edward G made a handful of those redeemed gangster movies and I thought 'Brother Orchid' was one of the best. There was something really moving in the way he went through his little period of self discovery that I think elevated that movie above the norm. In the end, I would say it was downright inspiring. I also give props to 'All Through the Night' - agreed it's very silly, but enjoyable and the cinematography in that movie was amazing!

Last night I prepared myself to watch a Japanese Pinky Violence double feature, but then I couldn't even get through the first film. Pinky Violence is just softcore porn with blood, hence the name, and with very few exceptions, it's just as un-watchable. Admittedly, I am a bottom feeding exploitation hound that can pretty much sit through anything but this is one genre I think I've outgrown.

And speaking of ridiculous exploitation films...

Frankensteins Daughter - An elderly scientist, working on some formula that will basically cure everything, has a lab assistant that, unbeknowst to him, is actually Frankensteins grandson. Naturally, this guy spends every spare moment plotting to create monsters. First he experiments on the scientists niece, feeding her a fruit punch that turns her into a bug-eyed gremlin, then he takes the girls sleazy blonde friend and turns her into a giant ugly beast in a track suit. With each success, he grows bolder, finally revealing a plan to fill the world with twisted creations that will do his bidding. But first, let's have a barbecue. There is really only one reason to watch this ridiculous teen monster flick and that is for the unhinged performance of Donald Murphy as Oliver Frank(enstein). Looking like someone who could easily work in Ward Cleaver's office, he careen's wildly from being the epitome of cool to a raging, mincing lunatic, becoming more and more deranged as the film progresses. Also of note is the debut of Harold Llyod Jr., who sings 'Daddy Bird' with the barbecue band and jerks around like there is a noose tied between his neck and his genitals. Brother, it's a gas!
post #147 of 1166
I had a couple of the guys over last night and we were in the mood for some sleazy sexploitation trash. There were a lot of DVDs one of them brought over to choose from, but we settled for:


The Abductors (1972)

As soon as this movie started it was like a breath of fresh air from the non-PC days where anything went! A fun, down and dirty flick like this wouldn't stand a chance in today's climate, which is why I seldom bother with modern action films anymore, unless Quentin Tarantino has a hand in them. Anyway -- I learned later that this is the second movie in the so-called "Ginger Trilogy", starring the sexy and mouth-watering blonde Cheri Caffaro as Ginger, a female James Bond of sorts. An organization of seedy white guys are kidnaping young women, forcing them to strip from top (none of the girls here are well endowed there, if that's your primary interest) to bottom, and then selling them off to rich men who'll do with them what they like. Ginger steps in undercover to crack the ring, and is not beyond teasing her men to extract what she needs from them.  Miss Caffaro is alluring enough to keep me interested, and this is just one of those wild and enjoyable sexploitation romps with lots of skin plus funny dialogue and acting that will entertain anyone in the mood for such outlandish smut. I'm going to try and see Cheri's other Ginger films.  

Orgy of the Dead (1965)

Terrible movie that was "written" (you mean there was actually a script to this??) by Edward D. Wood Jr. though he didn't direct it. You could have fooled me, as the incompetence of  Stephen C. Apostolof is just as bad - or maybe worse! There's nothing that happens in this film after a man and woman driving in a car have an opening scene crash and then become captives of an "emperor" in a Dracula cape (the nutty Criswell) and his vamp assistant who looks a lot like TV hostess Elvira.  The victims are tied to stakes and forced (as we are) to watch a bevy of topless women  individually introduced to do all sorts of long and ultimately boring solo dances. Some of them are less sleep-inducing than others (the cat woman was okay), but they all drone on too much amidst an atmosphere of gloomy fog which often obstructs our view of the best parts anyway. What's unintentionally funny are the occasional inserts of Criswell watching from the sidelines and making lame expressions when he's not obviously reading from cue cards. He's also got at least one funny politically incorrect line which he says to his male captor: "Nobody wants to see a man's ass!" (Heh Heh Heh). Things get even more ridiculous when The Wolf Man and The Mummy (two guys in cheap Halloween costumes) drop by to watch the festivities.   
post #148 of 1166
Catching up, watched CHE: PART TWO a couple of nights ago, and a slew of stuff yesterday at a friends place.  Here's the sordid details:

Che: Part 2 (Guerrilla) (2009) 4/5 - I had high hopes for this one after really liking the first one, and it didn't disappoint.  It's the polar opposite to the first one, as you see the legend break down.  It's tight film making, and one of the better combat pictures you'll see.  Del Toro does a great job, and taking both pictures as a whole, it's a 5/5 achievement.  

Bigger, Stronger, Faster (2008) 3/5 - Good documentary on steroids that stays interesting by neither condemning or condoning and instead shows that like with most drug use, it's a big grey area of good and bad.  With the director and his brothers being so close to the issue, you get more of a perspective that you might not get otherwise, while still giving a pretty good history of the drug.  That said, it doesn't really blow the doors off or anything.

Chicken Hawk: Men Who Love Boys (1994) 4/5 - I knew going into this that it was about NAMBLA.  What I didn't know is that it's not about NAMBLA as in a history of the organization, but instead profiles the membership.  One of the creepiest, most cringing and disturbing documentaries I'll probably ever see.  They could of called it "Delusional".  The film makers do the right thing and take no sides, which makes the subjects comfortable and as a result, they bury themselves.  Badly.  Interesting but disturbing stuff.

The Haunted World Of El Superbeasto (2009) 2.5/5 - The good is found in the quality of the animation and some of the satire to horror films past. Otherwise it goes on too long and even makes the constant cartoon boobs boring. The humour tries to hard, so it's just like the comics it's based on.

Planet Hulk (2009) 2.5/5 - Another direct to video marvel cartoon that just doesn't work. This one appears to have better production values, but the story is so "been there, done that" you just never get into it. When you can guess what's going to happen plot wise in the first 5 minutes, the movie is in trouble.

Moon (2009) 4/5 - If you make a movie that's basically a one man show, you better make sure you got a hell of an actor in the lead.  Sam Rockwell is up to the challenge in this one, and it's his performance that not only holds your interest, but in many cases keeps you on the edge or your seat.  A small film that deals with some big questions that kept me thinking after it was over. 
post #149 of 1166
The Shop Around the Corner (1940) 

An interesting charmer that I never seem to get tired of. Though I enjoyed You've Got Mail and have it in my collection, Shop Around the Corner is the one I come back to over and over. There is just something more romantic about letter writing over e-mail plus I enjoyed the relationships more. 

Deadliest Seas (2009) No stars

Well this was a total waste of time. A rip-off of the Perfect Storm only this time set in Alaska and filled with unsympathetic characters and poor acting. 

The Dream Wife (1953)

I love Cary Grant but this has to be one of his worse movies. The way Muslim women are treated and treat their men results in an engagement between Cary Grant and a princess of Bukistan after his relationship fails with a more 'modern' woman. There is a few cute scenes courtesy of Mr. Grant, but the plot is thin and downright silly. This is certainly one of the few missteps in Grant's career. 

Journey to the Centre of the Earth (2008)

This is quite a popular movie in my house and though I usual only watch bits and pieces, I decided this time to sit down a watch the whole thing. This certainly keeps to the spirit of the original if more updated. The plot is exceedingly dumb but Brendan Fraser makes for an attactive hero and the rest of the cast were good. I know this can almost be classified as a guilty pleasure because it's not a good movie but it has its moments. Fits right up there with the majority of summer fare.

post #150 of 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi View Post

I had a couple of the guys over last night and we were in the mood for some sleazy sexploitation trash. There were a lot of DVDs one of them brought over to choose from, but we settled for:


The Abductors (1972)

As soon as this movie started it was like a breath of fresh air from the non-PC days where anything went! A fun, down and dirty flick like this wouldn't stand a chance in today's climate, which is why I seldom bother with modern action films anymore, unless Quentin Tarantino has a hand in them. Anyway -- I learned later that this is the second movie in the so-called "Ginger Trilogy", starring the sexy and mouth-watering blonde Cheri Caffaro as Ginger, a female James Bond of sorts. An organization of seedy white guys are kidnaping young women, forcing them to strip from top (none of the girls here are well endowed there, if that's your primary interest) to bottom, and then selling them off to rich men who'll do with them what they like. Ginger steps in undercover to crack the ring, and is not beyond teasing her men to extract what she needs from them.  Miss Caffaro is alluring enough to keep me interested, and this is just one of those wild and enjoyable sexploitation romps with lots of skin plus funny dialogue and acting that will entertain anyone in the mood for such outlandish smut. I'm going to try and see Cheri's other Ginger films.  
  
Glad to see you liked this Joe.  It is indeed lots of fun and yes, the dialogue is packed with gems!  Not seen the other films because this is meant to be, by far, the best of them.
 
Cheap, 3rd rate companies still try to make Sexploitation films today but they just can't pull it off.
This film and it's ilk are products of their time. A time when huge billboards screamed out that "Ginger is back" and the Grindhouses were full of similar trashy treats. 
Now we simply get silicone-enhanced starlets pouting inanely from lifeless covers as one cheap bit of crap fights with another for Home Video obscurity.
But our 'Ginger' comes from a different period, a period where trash was out there, big and bold and in your face.
They don't make them like this anymore, and the movie World is a much poorer place for it.
 


"The Keeper" -   .5

Stevie the Seagul joins up with the same director as "A Dangerous Man" but to lesser effect.
Not that this is a bad film..just not as good.

Some nice and messy gunshot hits, quite a lot of action and smattering of martial arts (mostly just punches and blocks and much arm bending).
But the pace is a bit off, the story less than gripping and Seagal's very bad stand-in for the back of his head (WHY??), during conversations, is very distracting.
The ending has some good sniper rifle violence, but is otherwise a bit low key.

But...a fun enough, violent, romp with people worshipping Seagal so much, you have to wonder if he had a hand in the screenplay.
When (after recovering from being shot) a female fellow police officer states "You survived something that would have killed most men, you're an inspiration to everyone who wants to join the force" and when he has the young woman he's protecting going all drippy and moist over him... you have to wonder if Stevie Seagul flapped through the open window of the deserted script conference room and quickly added a little bit of self-love to the script when no one was watching.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movies (Theatrical)
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › Track the Films You Watch (2010)