Track the Films You Watch (2010) - Page 6

Dave, I've seen most of the early Seagal movies but I went ahead and bought them since you can find them for around $3 or cheaper now that the DVD format is pretty much dead.  I'll certainly rent a couple of those more recent ones though. 

My main reason for breaking down and buying another VCR was simple... THE FREEWAY MANIAC (1988).  I'm sure this movie will be horrid today but I still have memories of renting this sucker week after week when I was younger.  The guy at the video store said I was the only one who ever rented the thing so he eventually gave it to me but of course I sold it when DVD hit.  I haven't been able to find it anywhere except on VHS so I should be watching it here soon.

Once again I've got a backlog but thanks to work being slow I could catch up:


Alcatraz Island (1937)
 

William C. McGann

This Warner "B" picture isn't well known today and it's not really any good but I guess you can give it credit for being the first film to take place on Alcatraz (which was built three years earlier).  The story has a racketeer (John Litel) being railroaded into prison where he eventually catches up with the man who tried to kidnap his daughter.  After being him he's sent to Alcatraz where they eventually meet again and this time the kidnapper is killed but the racketeer must try and prove his innocence even though everyone knows he hated the guy.  Like the gangster drama, the prison film was usually a very good one for Warner but that's not the case here as the film, even at 64-minutes, is just too dull to be that entertaining.  McGann's direction really drags things down as there's never any energy in the film and things remain pretty slow from start to finish.  The screenplay by Crane Wilbur also doesn't do much as we get a pretty familiar story of a criminal wanting to do good for his new relationship with his daughter yet he keeps getting into trouble all of which is due to either someone else or someone trying to frame him.  The movie follows the typical guidelines of a prison drama but the screenplay just doesn't have any edge, soul or even any real surprises.  The final five minutes takes place in a courtroom and how everything ends is among the worst endings I've ever seen and something that I'm sure Ed Wood would laugh at.  I wasn't too impressed with Litel in his role but at least Ann Sheridan makes a good impression in her supporting bit.  Mary Maguire, Gordon Oliver and George E. Stone round out the cast.
 

Seven Miles to Alcatraz (1942)
 

Edward Dmytryk
 

Silly but entertaining "B" picture about a couple cons (James Craig, Frank Jenks) who break out of Alcatraz just after the Pearl Harbor bombing.  They end up taking a group hostage at a lighthouse but their problems grow even bigger when it's discovered that Nazis are about to use a sub to sink San Francisco.  If you're looking for logic then I'd recommend staying away from this film but if you have an hour to kill and want some cheap fun then I'm sure you'll get a kick out of this thing.  This is a pretty wild little story even though the main moral is to preach that Americans, no matter what their profession, should stick up for their country and bring down the enemy.  What really makes the film so funny are a few scenes where Craig gets to make fun of Hitler, which while it's not Chaplin, it was still pretty funny.  Even funnier are the Nazis here who are so over the top that you can't help but laugh.  The female Nazi and her crush on Hitler and her anger when people make fun of his is rather priceless.  Director Dmytryk would certainly go onto do bigger and better pictures but he manages to keep the film moving at a fast pace and he even gets a few nice shots in including a very nice one when the men first get out of the water and reach land.  The entire story is pretty far fetched and the way the men escape and how easy they swim to shore is even sillier.  As far as the performances go, none of them are great but they're at least entertaining with Craig and Jenks both fitting their roles just fine.  Former Nancy Drew's Bonita Granville isn't too bad in her role even if it is a thankless one.  Again, if you want a smart WWII pic then this here isn't for you but if you want some cheap action then you'll want to check this one out. 

Experiment Alcatraz (1950)
 

Edward L. Cahn
 

John Howard plays one of a group of scientists who gather some criminals off of Alcatraz and offer them their freedom if they'll take part in an atomic experiment.  Before this is carried off one of the men murders another but a nurse ends up taking the fall for it.  Howard and the nurse end up teaming up to try and find out what really happened and why.  I can't say this "B" film is a good one but it's certainly weird enough to warrant at least one viewing.  I'm really not sure what the point of this film was and I can't say that I fully understood the story but director Cahn at least keeps the thing moving and it clocks in at a short 57-minutes.  The actual story is far-fetched but I thought it was rather funny at how serious everyone was taking it.  Howard is pretty good in his role as is Robert Shayne in his supporting part.  The one scene that will always stick out in my mind is the most laughable fight I've seen in perhaps any movie.  The convicts are working when a couple slow motion punches are thrown, which eventually leads to one man getting shot.  Now, I'm really not sure if the filmmakers used an outtake or what but I'm trying to figure out why the sequence was shown in a slow motion.  The actual camera speed wasn't slowed but the actor are just playing it out in slow motion.  After the film I actually went back to watch this sequence a couple times and this thing alone almost makes me recommend the film.

Scarlet Dawn (1932)

William Dieterle

Extremely light "B" movie from Warner about nobleman Nikita Krasnoff (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.) who along with his servant (Nancy Carroll) is forced out of Russia.  The two try to find a better life for themselves but each place they land just erupts in more violence as the revolution grows stronger by the day.  Okay, Warner gave director Dieterle 57-minutes to tell an epic story about the Russian revolution so it should come as no surprise that the end result really isn't all that good.  You really can't blame the filmmakers or the cast but what can you do with such a short time.  Different characters keep coming up every few minutes and they'll make a brief appearance and then just disappear.  We don't get to know that much about them and we really don't get to know why they're there to begin with or why they go away so fast.  The movie features Fairbanks in a pretty good performance as he at least manages to put some fire in the character and make you feel like you're watching something real.  Carroll doesn't have the same luck nor does Guy Kibbee in his supporting role.  The sets aren't at all believable and not for a second did I ever believe I was in Russia or anything where a revolution was really going on. 
 

Two Seconds (1932)
 

Mervyn LeRoy
 

Interesting Warner drama about a man (Edward G. Robinson) about to be executed in the electric chair.  Before the execution a doctor tells the people watching that he will live for two seconds after the switch is pulled and in those two seconds his entire life will flash before his eyes.  His entire life doesn't but we see how he ended up in this situation, which is do to falling for a questionable lady (Vivienne Osborne).  I was happy to finally get the chance to see this after hearing some nice things about it over the years.  For the most part the film does live up to its reputation as being a pretty strong pre-code that has some nice performances wrapped around a downbeat story.  I think the best thing the movie has going for it is the performance of Robinson who really digs deep in a role many won't expect to see from him.  I was really surprised to see Robinson handle the role of an every day's man who simply goes to work and comes home without much fan fair.  I thought the actor was very believable in the role and he certainly made you feel for the character especially after the certain events take place and change his life.  Osborne is also very good as she too perfectly fits in the role and really delivers as being that "nice guy" Robinson falls for only to quickly change into a snake.  Guy Kibbee has a brief supporting role as does J. Carrol Naish and Preston Foster as the best friend.  I think the film does go a bit over the top towards the end in regards to everything plays out.  I won't spoil anything but what takes place with Robinson was just a bit too much for me but the courtroom scene was quite effective.   

Descent (2007) BOMB
 

Talia Lugacy
 

Lame and painful "drama" about a bright, young college girl (Rosario Dawson) who is raped by her date (Chad Faust) and soon finds herself at sex clubs doing cocaine and taking home various men.  Since the rape her life is spinning out of control but she soon bumps into her rapist and decides to turn the table on him.  I normally don't watch extras on a DVD unless it's a movie I enjoy or one I'm interested in but this horrid film had me curious so I checked out a few interviews with Dawson and her friend, director Lugacy.  It's clear both women thought they were making something that "needed to be done" and something very important but it appears neither one had seen the film.  I say that as a joke as I'm sure both had seen the film but this is a complete disaster from start to finish and in the end I couldn't help but find myself bored out of my mind.  Lugacy must be a fan of Kubrick because she has dialogue and scenes that just go on and on and on.  Clearly she wants these long scenes to draw the viewer in but let's face it, she's no Kubrick.  These scenes are so mind-blowing awful that I couldn't help but want to hit the fast-forward button.  The dialogue is poorly written and not once does any of it make you want to think.  The incredibly bad sequences inside the sex club just go on forever and at the end of the scenes nothing has happened.  We get bad sequences of Dawson standing in front of a mirror talking to herself or her involved in sex scenes yet she's fully dressed.  The movie has the atmosphere of an exploitation movie but it never crosses into that territory until the final ten-minutes when the actual revenge takes place.  I won't ruin the ending but it has an interesting twist that just doesn't work because by the time it comes most viewers, myself included, will either be sleeping, have turned the film off or simply won't care.  The ending also doesn't work like it should just because the direction isn't strong enough to make it work.  Dawson is someone I like but she's not very good here but a lot of this can be blamed on the screenplay.  This is certainly trying to be a character study but her character never grows and instead of learning anything about her we just see her enter various stages but without any emotion behind them.  The film received an NC-17 rating but I'd question this as there's not any nudity until the end and there's really very little profanity.  The rape of Dawson is very tame so I'm guessing the MPAA once again struck the rating because of the male nudity that happens at the end.  I've read other negative reviews saying you have to at least give the film credit for being brave but I'd disagree with that.  I didn't find this film brave at all as the dark subject matter is hardly looked at and not once did I believe anything I was seeing.  There might be a good story or idea here but everything is carried out so poorly that nothing works and in the end this movie started to get on my nerves by the fifteen-minute mark.  Torture is something used in this film but the main victim is the viewer.

Robocop (1987)
 

Paul Verhoeven
 

This extremely entertaining and original action picture was a box-office hit when first released even though the controversy of its violence would cause a firestorm even after the MPAA took out several seconds of footage.  The film takes place in a crime filled Detroit where various psychopaths are killing cops at an alarming rate.  One mastermind (Kurtwood Smith) has killed over two dozen cops and adds Murphy (Peter Weller) to his life.  A local company, building for the future, takes what's left of Murphy and turns him into the machine Robocop.  What they don't expect is for the robot to have memories of his human life and soon he sets out for revenge.  I think the reason this movie grabbed crowds in 1987 and remains so fresh today is that the screenplay really went for broke and tried to mix everything it could.  Not only is it sci-fi and action but we also get a lot of nice humor scattered throughout the ultra-violence and gore soaked story.  It also helps that the screenplay was smart enough to make sure it builds up our human cop to where we care for him and want to see him get his revenge.  It also helps that the bad guys here are among the greatest scum ever gathered in a movie.  Smith is downright masterful as the head psycho and you can't help but want to see this guy beaten to a bloody pulp and the same holds true for his supporting cast.  Weller is very good in his role as both the human cop as well as the machine.  Nancy Allen also adds nice support even though her role isn't all that big.  Verhoeven does a terrific job at building up this futuristic setting but he also manages to make it quite dark and moody.  I think people forget what a great director he can be and he really puts his mark on this film and especially with the graphic violence.  Seeing this thing in its R-rated form is certainly not the way too go even if you can't stomach the strong violence.

 

Bullfighters, The (1945)
 

Malcolm St. Clair
 

Laurel and Hardy's final American film finds them playing detectives in Mexico looking for a woman.  They end up with a seedy promoter (Richard Lane) who wants to pass Laurel off as a famous bullfighter.  The boys have to go along with the plan so that the promoter doesn't turn them over to an man they wrongfully sent to prison years earlier.  Going through L&H's final films at Fox, I think one could agree that they're not the best work from the boys but at the same time they're not nearly as horrible as their reputations would have you believe.  This film here certainly isn't the greatest but there are enough laughs to make it worth viewing and the 61-minute running time goes by rather quickly.  The best gag in the film happens early on when the boys are sitting next to a fountain and Laurel accidentally shoots Hardy with some water.  Hardy, thinking it was a man sitting next to them, starts a water fight and this rather long sequence just keeps getting funnier and funnier as it goes along.  What's so special about this scene isn't the water being thrown around but the facial expressions of Hardy as he keeps getting into a bigger mess.  It's also priceless just seeing the look on Laurel's face as he sits back not understanding what's going on.  The rest of the gags are hit and miss at best and this includes a misfire involving the boys and some eggs.  The final gag inside the bullring isn't as funny as it could have been and the very final gag is a complete disaster and comes off rather embarrassing.  With that said, there are enough laughs here so fans will certainly want to check it out but those new to the group will certainly want to try their earlier work first.

Sherlock Holmes' Fatal Hour (1931)
 

Leslie S. Hiscott
 

British film was originally released under the title of THE SLEEPING CARDINAL but was renamed in the U.S. to put Holmes in the title.  The film has a man shot dead in a bank yet no money was stolen and there appears to be no witnesses, no suspects and no real clues as to what happened.  Holmes (Arthur Wontner) and Dr. Watson (Ian Fleming) are soon on the case and it might be Moriarty who has something to do with the killing.  Based on the stories "The Empty House" and "The Final Problem", this Holmes effort was considered lost for many decades until a print finally turned up in the U.S. (with the American title) but the end results are pretty disappointing.  I think the biggest sin any movie can make is being boring and sadly that's the case here because I really lost interest in the movie around the thirty-minute mark and hard to struggle to make it through to the end.  There are some good things here but more on those later.  I think the biggest problem is the screenplay that simply has way too much endless dialogue that just keeps going and going and going.  It seems each scene could have been wrapped up with a few lines but instead everyone kept talking and sometimes the same things were being said over and over to the point where I really lost interest in what was going on.  It also doesn't help that the majority of the actors are speaking very slowly and drawn out.  Wontner would play Holmes in five different movies and I must admit that I enjoyed his performance.  He gives a "thinking" performance as he takes his time to react to anything said to him and you can see the "thinking" going on with the character.  Some might think this goes back to my complaint of things going too slowly but even thinking, Holmes moves faster than anyone else here.  I also enjoyed (no not that) Fleming in the role of Watson as he plays it very serious without any humor.  The rest of the performances weren't all that interesting to me.  In the end, it's always a good thing when a lost film is discovered but as often is the case, the movie in question really doesn't turn out to be anything special.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1913)
 

Herbert Brenon
 

Originally released as a two-parts, this 26-minute short is certainly the longest of all the early versions of Stevenson's story and it also probably has the smallest budget.  The film has King Baggot play the kind Dr. Jekyll who turns into the murderous Mr. Hyde after drinking the wrong potion.  To me this is certainly the best of the early versions I've seen as Baggot really does have to do pretty much everything himself and in the end I think it makes for a find Mr. Hyde.  The budget appears to be very small as the special effects are certainly lacking and are really far behind the work various other artists were doing including the master Melies.  One can't help but wish the producer's had spent a little extra green trying to do more with the make up as pretty much all we get are a few shades under the eyes and not every scene even has that.  What makes up for this is the performance by Baggot who really gives it his all and delivers a different type of take on Jekyll.  Since there's no make up to hide behind, Baggot must instead create a real character and he makes a few interesting choices including playing Hyde as an almost hunchback who is basically a cripple, kneeling around and hobbling all over the place.  This certainly doesn't make for anything scary but it's an interesting and different take.  I think Baggot also manages to come across very intelligent with Dr. Jekyll and makes us feel as if we're really watching two different characters.  The extra running time gives us several more scenes of Jekyll being destructive and this includes a rather shocking scene where he attacks a cripple boy just for the fun of it.  The direction could have been better but I did enjoy the costume design and the sets were impressive for such a low budget.  This isn't the easiest version to get your hands on but if you can find it and you're a fan of the story then this here is certainly worth watching.

Avatar (2009)
 

James Cameron
 

A paraplegic marine (Sam Worthington) gets a shot to continue his career by taking part in an experiment that will place him among the people of Pandora.  Once there he has orders to learn their way of life so that the military can eventually throw them off their land but soon the marine begins to feel that the Pandora way of life is the way to be.  Okay, I'll admit that I was very skeptical going into this movie after hearings months worth of buzz saying this film was going to change the way we view movies.  I became even more skeptical after it became a hit and just recently became the most successful film in history.  This type of movie normally isn't my cup of tea but I was left amazed countless times and in the end I have to admit that Cameron has done it again.  There are only a handful of films that actually change the ways movies are made.  We can look at 1915's THE BIRTH OF A NATION as one.  GONE WITH THE WIND would be another.  I have no doubt in my mind that AVATAR is another film in line with those two classics and I'm sure one day people will study this movie just as we have studied those other two for decades now. 
 

I'm not a fan of CGI but what we have here is something truly amazing because it doesn't look like something fake nor does it seem like a phony marketing device.  As the movie goes along Cameron does such a masterful job at building this alternate life that one really begins to forget that they're watching a movie.  I've heard stories of people becoming depressed after watching this movie when they realize that Pandora isn't real and I understand how some could feel this way.  While watching the movie there wasn't a single second where the idea of me watching something fake entered my mind.  The characters, their wildlife, the forest and all the creates in that forest were extremely real to me and the way Cameron brings all of this to life constantly had my jaw on the floor and my eyes bugged out.  I honestly don't think I blinked once during this film because I was worried about missing something that I hadn't seen before.  The amazing neon colors of the flowers or the look of the glowing eyes, no matter what you're looking at on the screen you can't help but feel as if you're seeing something for the first time and it's unlike anything you've seen before.  This alternate lifestyle or universe that Cameron has created is something truly breathtaking and something you want to take it as much as you can.
 

The 3-D effects are also masterfully done because Cameron doesn't just sit there and throw things out you.  With only a couple exceptions, the 3-D is only used to put you into this universe and I must admit that I've never seen 3-D like this and I can only hope more movies will use it to this effect.  The 160-minute running time flashes by without any slow spots and the performances are all top-notch with Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver and Stephen Lang really delivering the goods.  The music score by James Horner is epic and Mauro Fiore's cinematography really puts you in the center of all the action.  Many have complained that the story is pretty unoriginal and light, which might be true but it really doesn't take away from the film as it's still good enough to keep you interested in the characters, their actions and everything they're feeling.  Walking out of this movie I really did feel like what those in 1915 would have felt coming out of THE BIRTH OF A NATION.  I felt as if I had seen something not only epic but groundbreaking and the start of something new in cinema history.  Perhaps Kubrick's 2001 also made people feel this way.  Either way, a lot of credit has to go to Cameron who has once again delivered something truly special.
 

Precious (2009)
 

Lee Daniels
 

Hard-hitting drama about 16-year-old Precious (Gabourey Sidibe) who has just been kicked out of school because she's become pregnant for the second time by her father.  With her life going no where and living with an abusive mother (Mo'Nique), Precious finds support in a teacher (Paula Patton) who sees something in her.  This certainly isn't the most cheerful movie in the world and there's no doubt that you'll leave in a state of depression so this here will be enough to keep people away from seeing this movie but they'll be missing out on something really special.  What the film is is proof that you don't need big bucks to tell a good story.  You also don't need big bucks to find great performances.  This movie is one I respect very much because there were so many chances for this thing to go soft or pour some sugar on the subject matter but it never does that.  The movie is smart enough to know that if you live in the ghetto, can hardly read and you're pregnant for the second time by your father then there's only so much you can hope for in life.  What I found so endearing about this movie is that Precious might have dreams of being a model but she knows her life is a horrid one and that she's been delivered some ugly things.  She doesn't hope for something super but instead just stuff most people take for granted.  Sidibe turns in a marvelous performances and it's rather shocking to see she's a newcomer because it's doubtful many professional actors could have turned in a performance like this.  The rawness of her performance makes you feel as if you're watching a real person going through these issues for real.  I had to pinch myself several times while watching this thing just to remind myself that I was watching an actress and not a real person.  Like many, I was skeptical of the musicians in their roles but Mo'Nique is downright brilliant and makes for one of the most memorable villains in film history.  Where she dug down to pull the evilness of this character from is truly eye-opening.  Mariah Carey and Lenny Kravitz have small roles and both do fine jobs as well.  I think Patton deserves a lot more praise than she's getting as she's really a lot of the heart of the movie and she's terrific in her role of the teacher.  The caring teacher is something we've seen countless times in movies but Patton really delivers a touching performance.  The movie's subject matter is extremely dark and ugly but it's actually a lot uglier than what I've said because I want to avoid a couple spoilers.  This isn't a movie that will make you feel good but it's certainly a powerful movie with some great performances and a winning story.  Director Daniels does a terrific job at keeping the viewer in the movie and I loved his laid back approach.  Several times he could have sugar coated things or started preaching but he never does that and instead just lets the film play out as it would in real life. 
 

Julie & Julia (2009)
 

Nora Ephron

Mildly charming film tells the story of two different women separated by forty-years.  Meryl Streep plays Julia Child, the woman who would eventually grow famous for her book on how to cook French food.  In current times, Julie Powell (Amy Adams) is an unknown woman who decides to write a blog about cooking from Child's book.  The goal is to cook everything in the book within one year.  It took this movie quite a bit of time to actually warm up and get off on the path it's going to take but in the end the two lead actresses make it worth viewing if you're a fan of theirs.  I think the biggest problem is the screenplay that doesn't really seem to know what it wants to do.  The film tries to cover both women equally but in the end I think this really hurts the movie and I must admit that I really didn't care about the Child story.  I'm sure there's a good movie to be told about her but we don't get any of it here.  We learn what she was doing before getting famous, we see her start to cook and then we see her deal with publishers about her book.  There's nothing overly interesting here and the story is rather boring.  When it comes to Julie, I found her story to be a lot more interesting but the first half of it is pretty much wasted as we have to deal with all sorts of boring aspects like a silly dinner date she has with three of her friends.  What this scene had to do with anything is beyond me.  The film really starts to pick up as Julie's blog begins to gather speed and get her a lot of attention.  This is where the movie works but all of this happens towards the end.  What makes the film worth viewing are the two leads, both delivering fine performances.  Streep got the Oscar nomination but I must admit that while the performance is good, I'm not sure I'd call it one of the best of the year and it's certainly not one of the best of her career.  Adams is as charming as ever and to me steals the movie.