The Movies I've Watched

Captain America: The First Avenger

2012-02-05T18:23:00.001-08:00

Trees Lounge

2012-01-29T07:51:00.000-08:00

The Adventures of Tintin - 2011 - Dir. Spielberg

2012-01-29T07:50:00.001-08:00

With all the people behind the camera for Tintin, I feel like I should have set a higher bar it but I went in expecting merely to be somewhat entertained. And I was. But I feel like it should have been more. I have no sense of the source material so I can't have any of that good 'ole fashioned nostalgia some people might have had. Getting right down to it the movie has one BITCHIN' action set piece. One that's pretty good. And then the rest of the movie is okay... I guess. It's not bad by any means. It's charming enough. I know people were kind of bugged by the style, but I got used to it. I understand why it's employed. It allowed it to be cartoon-y and feel like a live action adventure. Actually, there was quite a few bitchin' action sequences. I forgot about the flashback with the boats and whatnot. That was pretty awesome and made me wanna write a movie with pirates... which is not an urge I am used to having. Haddock is pretty amusing. I felt like he could have been annoying but it worked out fine! The ending felt a little sudden to me. Or rushed. But, being that I wasn't emotionally into the movie, I hardly feel like that's a big deal. The movie was supposed to give me some action-packed thrills and it did, but I feel like I should have been disappointed.

EH...

The Dirty Dozen - 1967 - Dir. Aldrich

2012-01-29T07:50:00.000-08:00

It seems that I'm checkin' out some of the "American classics" that I've neglected. Not to be a dick by putting it in quotes or anything but you know... I feel like there were more Early Blockbusters than Classic works of American Cinema. Being that Cassavetes' appearance was more of draw than anything else. So yeah, I suppose I'll be the dick who puts American Classics in quotes. And you know, Cassavetes is his usual goofy ass self. It's sort of that same big budget high concept blockbuster we've all come to know and love. Ensemble cast, ridiculous premise. Super long. Telly Savalas ended up being probably one of my favorite parts of the movie. That guy is just a nut. This might have been my first Lee Marvin movie too and I can saw I was very impressed with the gentleman and see good things for him in the future. The movie is entertaining enough. Perhaps the slowest point is during the actual mission which devolves into a mass of explosions and characters dropping off the map like it's nobodies business. I have to say, I was surprised that the movie got as... not violent... I guess all the people burning to death seemed a little surprising... It's not like the movie is Inglorious Basterds or something!

Fuckin' love Ernie...

The Goods - 2009 - Dir. Brennan

2012-01-28T09:42:00.001-08:00

I just threw this shit on one night. It's one of those movies that would probably be straight to video if it didn't somehow attract a bunch of names to it. It's just one of those loud, crude comedies the kids seem to get such a kick out of these days. It's based around Jeremy Piven being a wise-ass loudmouth. Everyone else has the appropriate amount of quirks. James Brolin wants to have sex with David Koechner. Katheryn Hahn wants to have sex with a Man-Child. Ed Helms is in a Boy band. Basically the movie just works by repeating those jokes until 90 minutes passes. It's sad because I really do like the cast. There's no one in it that I don't think is fully capable of being hilarious but the script is just so broad, so obvious. Jokes are cheap and based on being outrageous and shocking. Even Piven, who seems pretty good at jazzing up lousy writing, flounders as the leading man. There's not nearly enough steam in the character to push through the movie. There's not nearly enough steam in any aspect of the movie to push it through, which I suppose is why it ends up resorting to being loud. But you know... I guess, I dunno. I like Loud. The sequence where everyone is just screaming is great. But I feel like the movie doesn't earn the Loudness. It's not a choice to the people who made it, it's the only thing they can think of.

The Goods staring Jeremy Piven's Face

The Towering Inferno - 1974 - Dir. Guillermin

2012-01-27T09:42:00.000-08:00

Old 70's big budget adventure film spoke to me one drunken evening. And I got about half an hour into it. It took two more evenings before I finally managed to patch this motherfucker up. You know, we've basically perfected this kind of movie at this point but it's kind of fun to see one that is just getting used to wearing the pants of a modern day special effects thriller. I was pretty surprised at how willy-nilly it killed off its numerous characters. Much more immorally than perhaps they might get away with these days. So in a funny way, it felt a little fresh in that sense. Like, they hadn't yet come up with those hard and fast rules that are so infrequently broken. In some sense there is good reason for that. The movie does have stilted, nonsensical, and down right goofy moments. But I mean, it's a fun premise and all. Set up well. At times, it has these funny "If Only We Had All Obeyed Fire Safety Regulation" moments where it really seems like Steve McQueen is moments away from looking imploringly at the camera. The movie is long as hell, too. I watched it in enough chunks that perhaps I'm not the best person to speak of it's pacing apart from that I didn't want to watch it in one single sitting. Then again, it doesn't seem like the kind of movie that really needs to be watched in one sitting anyway. There were some exciting enough sequences. Enough cheesy moments and 1970's star power to make it well worth it. I mean, who would want to miss one of OJ Simpson's many brilliant roles pre-violent crime era!?

I fucking love this.

The American - 2010 - Dir. Corbijn

2012-01-22T15:51:00.001-08:00

George Clooney goes to foreign land. The plot leisurely follows him. Doing stuff. It's all pretty good. Movie's over. That is what The American appeared to be and really that's what it ended up being. So all in all, the whole thing is okay. You know, I like watching George Clooney do stuff, like build a rifle in a small Italian village. I think he's real good at it. The movie looks real good. And the story is put together in a capable enough manner. There's not a lot for me to dislike. Sure, the movie doesn't really pull any new or exciting tricks out of it's hat or anything. In fact, it follows pretty closely to a normal thriller when you get right down to it but it's made well enough that I didn't mind the experience by the time it was over. A sorta fun aspect of the movie is that it spends a lot of time focusing on smaller details of the Village as Clooney methodically searches for escape routes, possibly betrayals, etc. And I would say it's the details that sell the movie. The movie didn't feel particularly thoughtful or anything but it relies more on visuals than dialogue though, so it doesn't feel like a dumb thriller or anything, but it doesn't dazzle by any means. So you know... if you wanna see George Clooney build a gun in a small Italian village, go for it!!

George Clooney being an Assassin.

Odd Man Out - 1947 - Dir. Reed

2012-01-15T08:05:00.000-08:00

I'm at the point where I'll watch a Carol Reed movie just because it's a Carol Reed movie. I've yet to see one that didn't get my brains going or at least one that wasn't filled with just a ton of cool ideas about storytelling. Odd Man Out was no exception. At first, I think I struggled with it a little bit. It didn't seem all that interesting and had a strange tone. And it changes locations a lot, adding and taking away characters as it pleased. I was all... what's this movie about? But eventually, everything fell into place. Maybe this is a bit of wacky comparison, but it's a lot like an early Guy Ritchie movie. A lot of characters, plotlines, and goings ons. All of which based around James Mason being on the run. It's a deeper, of course, and less flashy. It's very concerned with ideas of... well, Ideas. Everyone has an belief of where James Mason needs to be and why he is important. So all of the shifting characters and focuses make the film feel sort of uneven and unfocused. But as the film ended, I found it incredibly satisfying. I felt like I had seem something new and different. Which is how I've felt with all of his film. And I just think that it is damn cool to feel that way about a movie that was made more than half a century ago. And also with such a heady basis, it's nice that the film also has a nice light-hearted streak. It makes room for some silliness amongst the ideals, especially with all of the vagabonds that are introduced.

Looks like the Odd Man Out is gettin' it ON!

The Devils - 1971 - Dir. Russell

2012-01-13T09:53:00.000-08:00

I saw it once in college and thought it seemed neat. I hadn't seem any of Ken Russell's stuff so I didn't really know what I was in for. A little slow and sometimes hard to follow. I left just feeling pretty confused but I really enjoyed the oddities that appeared throughout. But the film always sort of stuck with me. This time around, I stumbled upon the movie and threw it on to see if it still appealed to me. But this time around, I was completely blown away. This movie is so bonkers. So delightfully nuts all the while covering a serious topic still pertinent to this day. Sure, the dialogue might be a little rough to follow at times, but it felt worth it. And I like that the movie has a kind of expansive dialogue. It contrasts so well with the silliness of what is often going on visually. Vanessa Redgrave's performance is absolutely one of the best parts. I feel like the movie has the feeling of Trauma that has a tendency to win me over. Everything is so vivid, emotional, and violent. The film's strangeness is persistent but managed so well that it never changes the tone. We aren't pulled out of the universe of the film. I dunno, I just get damn kick out of the film. It's got all the elements I want and I feel like there's still stuff about the movie that makes me want to rewatch it. And it's not so burdensome that I would ACTUALLY be excited to see it again.

Nun In Thought

Harry Brown - 2009 - Dir. Barber

2012-01-08T07:33:00.000-08:00

I sort of accidentally watched this movie. Just sitting around one day, I popped it on. I mean, who doesn't wanna see Caine go all vigilante in his old age? But the results... MEH. The movie itself doesn't really bring anything new to the genre. Death Wish and all. But being that it's Michael Caine, you know? He's kind of the man... And I'm becoming a bigger and bigger Emily Mortimer fan... even though she's not really doing much in the film. Generic cop who is good but also on Caine's trail. She IS displaying a really bitchin' range, though. Oddly enough, I think I liked the movie more before Caine got all Death Wish on everyone. It's a little over the top especially when the quiet moments are done as well as they are. Like, the youth feel close to Schumacher style gangs. A hair's breadth away from Neon Pants and Make-up. They are so vulgar and awful... it sort of reduced the depth of the film. Rather than illustrating anything interesting morally about vigilantism or old age v. the youth, it's just Caine deciding to kill awful assholes and then trying to not getting caught. It's not all that interesting once you get past the performances. And I can't say I cared too much for the look of the film. Story telling, yes. Very nice. But the lightning and cinematography? FEH. I could feel how hard it was trying to be beautiful and poignant.

Michael Caine doesn't give a FUCK about the Sun exploding behind him.

Hugo - 2011 - Dir. Scorsese

2012-01-07T07:34:00.000-08:00

This movie charmed the pants off of me! I originally didn't care to see it. Had absolutely no interest in it. The Poster, the Trailer... I just didn't give a damn. I understood that the movie was basically filled to the brim is cinema talent and it seemed to be received really well. People were talking up the 3D too... so I gave in and paid the exorbitant fee to see the movie. It was worth it! Or at least... I couldn't have been happier with it. It's just a movie that makes you feel all nice and warm. It's really nice looking. Everyone does a real good job. I personally dug all animate/inanimate themes, gears, clocks, and film history appreciation. Finding your a purpose. And the post-war European-ness of it all. It was all great! Even Sacha Baron Cohen, a man who I am getting pretty close to sick of, won me over. If anything, I was surprised to have not liked Chloe Moretz as much as would have thought. Maybe I set the bar too high for the young lady, but most of the things I've seen her in, she's been pretty awesome. But hey, can't win 'em all... perhaps it was her role. Constantly chirping on about adventure. She had some lines that were just tough sells and often rang untrue. It's use of 3D was nice. Scorcese manages to sneak so many nice layers into it all. Smoke, snow. Rather than just depth, it added to the atmosphere. All in all, I had a great time. I mean, anytime you have a plot involving an automaton, I'll be willing to jump in.

Ace Butts and B Kings.

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol - 2011 - Dir. Bird

2012-01-02T07:24:00.000-08:00

This movie just seals the deal: I think Brad Bird is great. As far as I'm concerned, it's pretty incidental that this is a Mission: Impossible movie. I don't think I needed more than the first one and certainly could hardly tell you about the rest of the series. I have the idea that I enjoyed the third one, but that has more to do with me insisting that Abrams made a good movie and not with any actual memories I have of the viewing experience. Anyway, this is all a long-winded way of saying I like the way the movie is directed. It's fun. The characters bounce around like cartoons. OR, if you will, like the fucking Incredibles. The movie is Thrilling, which I suppose is all I really wanted. It's a pretty dumb movie. Maybe the dumbest in the series (yes, dumber than the second). But it's a fun dumb. It's like a series of countdowns and incredible feats with minor or half-assed explanations. And then a lot of jokes. Some good jokes. I liked 'em a lot. Perhaps I would have liked to feel a little more emotionally involved... I didn't really care about what was going on. I didn't care about the villain. But I suppose the movie wasn't about Cruise getting the villain... it's about him and his friends doing incredible things. ALSO, there wasn't much of a build-up to the climax. I was surprised to learn I was in the climax of the movie. For a movie that's more than two hours long, that must mean its paced well but it also illustrates how distant I felt from the film. So I dunno, it's some top-notch action and goofiness, but it doesn't have much more going on apart from that. I guess the thing that makes it okay is that... well... it doesn't feel like they were aiming for much more.

Put some damn shoes on, ya hippie!!!

Duplicity - 2009 - Dir. Gilroy

2012-01-01T07:25:00.000-08:00

So I liked Michael Clayton... thought it was a pretty neat movie. So I had reasonable hopes for Duplicity. I know it wasn't received as well and it didn't really look as good either but hey... I'd give it a shot... eventually. And it's okay. There's some funny ideas in it and it is a reasonably good time, I guess. It feels like its aiming a little low, a little too cheap, than it should have been by trying to be a "It's-A-Con-But-We're-All-Having-A-Good-Time" type movie. We've already got plenty of those. And being that the romance in the movie is one laced with betrayal and witty banter, it's not exactly romantic. And since a function of the movie is to just reveal how complicated the Con is, the movie boils down to witty people doing things we don't exactly understand. The thing is, I really like this movie on paper. I think it has great ideas and it handles them in a way that I'd get a kick out of. Just the execution feels insincere... it doesn't take it's plot seriously and the characters don't take themselves seriously, but despite all the not being serious, it still doesn't come off as fun. I suppose it's sort of mean... but that's not right. So I guess that's how it ends up feeling insincere. It feels like there's nothing to pull us into the movie.

Beautiful people... Loving one another...

The Kid Stays in the Picture - 2002 - Dir. Burstein

2011-12-31T18:04:00.001-08:00

I didn't care for this documentary. To some degree, I felt like I was just listening to Robert Evans tell me about himself... something I'm sure he enjoys and has had a lot of practice doing. Considering the doc is based on his autobiography, and features his voice, I think it's safe to say we are very much on Robert Evan's turf in this movie. And I'm not sure I really enjoyed feeling that way. There's a kind of manufacturedness about the story to begin with. Like he so badly wants it to fit into the normal story-telling arc, a nobody to somebody story with him exploding and learning his lesson and then an eventual redemption. No matter how hard he tries though, he can't hide the obvious. His life is not a movie and he never is as sympathetic as much as he would like to be. For example, he talks about his true love: Ali McGraw and how he loses her to Steve McQueen. We're told this was important emotional event for him. The film neglects, however, his six other wives that came before and after. So it just feels like it is there because they needed to have a Girl in the story. Stir up some sympathy for the dope. He's also pictured as extremely passive. Like his discovery is indicative of the rest of his life, he just hangs out near famous people and great shit happens. I dunno, I feel like I could go on and nitpick how the thing continues to fail on several levels... but I think you get the point. It's just very cold and empty.

Robert Evans will make you pay.

Arsenic and Old Lace - 1944 - Dir. Capra

2011-12-31T18:03:00.000-08:00

I think it makes sense that this is the first Capra movie I've seen. Probably in no way appropriate... OR I'm sure I could've found a MORE Capra-esqe movie. I ended up watching it basically due to an interest in a early american dark comedy. And you know, this fits the bill. I always think it's a little interesting to see Dark comedy from a different time. Just to see where the lines are drawn and what is done to make the Dark part of it palatable. In this case, we're given a mad-cap hectic theatrical vibe. Grant is makin' faces and noises, running all around like a Stooge- The ladies are overly innocent and silly. For perhaps the first chunk of the movie, I wasn't really engaged. The movie gets a little bit more interesting when we meet Jonathan and Dr. Einstein. I'm always a sucker for Peter Lorre and always enjoy his performances. But they are really the only thing that raises the stakes. Otherwise, it felt a little too silly... and we spend the majority of the time just watching Grant spaz out, which he is very good at. The real charmers are the old ladies though. Perhaps they make the movie. It's certainly the most memorable and unique aspects. It's a very adorable naivete that they carry around. So, I dunno, it's an all right movie. I can't say I got very much into it. There were a few satisfying laughs. I suppose I'm a little biased against that Wacky Theater Tone it had so much of. I suppose it is pretty impressive that Capra managed to carry that Tone out of the theater and into the film. You don't see it done that well very often. I still don't care for it though!

Such a dashing fellow...

Conan the Barbarian - 1982 - Dir. Milius

2011-12-31T14:28:00.000-08:00

I watched the first fifteen minutes of this a while ago... and then I got bored as hell and turned it off. Second time around, I turned off around the same point. Even Mako's voice over couldn't keep me going! But eventually, I persevered. And yeah... It picks up. I'm not sure how much though. It's the kind of movie I felt I was trudging through. It's long. It takes its time to get going. The movie kind of insists that there is a lot of depth to this world which doesn't surprise me with Milius. I always get the impression that the guy takes masculinity very seriously. I dunno, I guess this was a treat or something for fantasy fans back in the day. That this in some way raised the bar. So maybe I'm from the spoiled Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings generation where fantasy didn't just have to be muscle-y guys with silly hats. We do get to see early Arnold and you can see why the man got more work. He looks the part but he's sympathetic enough looking too. He's a little silly naturally, unintentionally, but it makes his barbarian a little more likable. I dunno, I guess the movie never feels particularly fun but always feels too silly to take seriously. It's a long son of a bitch too. I mean, I like all the basic ideas on paper but the whole thing felt too vast and yet, not at all epic.

Silverado - 1985 - Dir. Kasdan

2011-12-26T07:40:00.000-08:00

It's a Big Classic type Hollywood western with big ole actors and charm and shootouts. And I dunno... I felt EH about it. I haven't yet seen a Kasdan picture that really got me up and going but I'm not really sure that's something that's bound to happen. I mean, I'm not going to lie... it IS a charming movie. It's pretty referential to classic westerns without being indebted or winking at the audience. Maybe to some degree, it stands out perhaps most because of the cast. There's a lot of Big Faces showing up in the movie, and it's fun to see 'em. And they seem to have a good time. Brian Dennehy is an absolute delight to watch. I wouldn't say the performances are OUTSTANDING or anything. But you know, they're fun or you know... they're just good performances. Glover and Glenn probably are responsible for that department. The enjoyable performances help because Plot-wise, the movie doesn't exactly feel too assembled. There's a lot of story lines and I can't really say any of them are very interesting to follow or plotted out in a particularly enthralling way. They basically crash into one another as the movie goes on... and not in the satisfying way. I felt the movie could have profited from some trimming. It just feels like a long ass time. There are plenty of filler sequences considering the amount of directions the movie attempts to move in at once. It's got the nice feel of a classic western except with big shot 1980's actors.

Aaaahahahaha... AAAAHAHAHAHAHHA!

Shame - 2011 - Dir. McQueen

2011-12-25T07:41:00.000-08:00

I had a pretty good idea of what I was going to get when going into Shame. And I was pleased that I got what I wanted. Just a mostly quiet, character driven piece. Not a lot of fire works. Not even a lot of out right conflict when you get right down to it. It ends up being quieter plot-wise than I even expected. There's no nasty reveals. There's suggestions that nasty reveals are to be had though. Even, to be honest, there's not a lot that's shocking about the film. We're just quietly sinking with our hero. The movie is absolutely beautiful. There are some just... incredible shots. But I suppose that's the thing with McQueen. It saves us from sneaking into melodrama at times (If I see one more movie in theaters with a man shedding a single tear, I will shed THREE tears). If I had to throw a weakness out there was the Dude Dialogue. It sounded... part insulting, part tongue-in-cheek, and then just part white noise. Like we were just supposed to ignore it, but... there's not A LOT of dialogue in the script. And I think a good chunk of it was supposed to be white noise. But some of it is done so well, like the flirtatious dialogue. His sister and his boss. Granted, I'm not someone who should judge what men like that sound like when they are together, but it rang false to my ears. All that bitchin' is for a pretty minor part of the story. We spend most of the time with Fassbender, alone. Which is awesome for a script about sex addiction. Also, lemme just say that as a man who no longer lives in the NYC area, this movie made me homesick. WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT ME!? Oh wait... I thought Carey Mulligan was excellent in this. Fassbender was good. Hell, he's carrying the whole movie on his back. But I do feel like Mulligan had a trickier role in this and she just does a great job.

Shame: A Great time to Have in the Big Apple!

My Neighbor Totoro - 1988 - Dir. Miyazaki

2011-12-19T07:49:00.001-08:00

I'm not gonna sit here and act like I don't think Totoro isn't charming as shit. I'm not going to do that to you people. I mean, seriously. We're talking Totoros. It's charm goes a long way because it has a pretty simple bare bones story. With almost no conflict whatsoever. I think it we were watching your usual children's fare... or really just a normal movie. You know, you would put up roadblocks for our characters. "Adults don't believe them" or "Some Lumber magnate is threatening the forest" you know, crap like that. But we're in exploratory mode with this movie. Just watching kids discover mystical creatures of the forest. Then a kid is lost for a short period of time, but it's certainly nothing we're hinging the movie on. It's merely the highest point. I suppose the closest thing to the conflict throughout is the sick mother... at least, it's the source of drama for the script and what eventually leads the little sister to get lost. But that is about the long and the short of it as far as drama is concerned. Miyazaki can get away with this of course because of the aforementioned charm and the damn visuals that we've all mostly familiar with. You know like a giant cat bus and whathaveyou. Just so we're clear: if you have a giant cat bus, your movie can be whatever it wants to be.

OMG LITTLE GIRL IT IS A TOTOROS!!111

The Constant Gardener - 2005 - Dir. Meirelles

2011-12-11T08:12:00.000-08:00

I had always kept this film in mind. Knowing it made a big splash when it came out but I never really knew anything about it and never pursued viewing it in anyway. After seeing Tinker Tailor, I figured "Hell! Might as well see some other adaptations!" Obviously, they are pretty different. In fact, Constant Gardener is not your usual spy flick. It's a lot more of a... romance? Or Drama? Set in a world of espionage and Big Pharma with a Kenyan backdrop. The mystery and conflict arises more through the relationship between Fiennes and Weisz. Confusing? Well, it's got a few different faces. Thankfully, they are work together pretty well. In fact, pretty damn seamlessly now that I think about. You'd think it'd be wwwwaaaaayyyy more confusing and fractured than it is. Perhaps because Fiennes and Weisz provide such a sturdy emotional backbone for the film and the tone maintains itself throughout. Even as Fiennes is fleeing Raiders, we don't feel like we've suddenly been jerked into action movie territory. So yeah, it's an engaging enough and well made picture. It didn't exactly blow my socks off, but I got involved and liked it enough that I didn't feel cynical about the dream-y close-ups and occasional overly-ponderous moments.

Hey now, Pete! Button up!

The Season of the Witch - 2011 - Dir. Sena

2011-12-10T08:13:00.001-08:00

You know... I kinda wanted to like this movie. I mean, Cage and Perlman? In plague times!? And I think the premise of dudes transporting someone suspected of a witch has a bit of clout. At least, it gets my imagination going as to what could happen. But I suppose it should come as no surprise that this movie is horrible. It's awful. I stopped the movie twice, and I have no excuse for why I resumed watching. And you know it's a bad sign when you feel like if Topher Grace would have played the priest, it would really elevate the material. The movie tries too hard to be cheap and fun too early on and then tries to be too ponderous when it's too late. Nicholas Cage seems bored, probably because his character is a bore who goes nowhere and does nothing. Perlman just kind of hangs out. The movie doesn't make much of an attempt to maintain suspense or you know... keep us involved apart from asking us "What will the Witch do next?!" repeatedly. I wouldn't have minded a bit more of a period of time where we are actually wondering if she is ACTUALLY a witch. The movie is good enough to at least provide us with some terrible plague imagery. Christopher Lee probably is the high point of the film and gives the performance of his career by laying in bed wearing make-up. And lemme just throw this out here... SPOILER ALERT EVERYONE. WATCH OUT! I'm gonna spoil this movie. But she's not a witch... She's a demon! And the movie tries to act like this is a twist. Like it's pulled the carpet from underneath our feet. A shitty attempt to get us to give a fuck about what it's doing- WAIT? This movie is for teenage boys and not grown men? Oh... (awkwardly leaves). Oh man... the battle/drinking montage in the first ten minutes is so shitty... This movie is so bad...

Dignity.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy - 2011 - Dir. Alfredson

2011-12-10T08:13:00.000-08:00

I didn't know much about the source material going into this one like how friggin expansive it supposedly is. Expansive enough to be a mini series, at least. The film certainly seems to try to cover as much material as possible too. You have to prepared to take in a lot of information and make a lot of inferences. Scenes are short, edited on top of each other, and often include cuts to small moments. It's storytelling at it's least verbal. Paradoxically, there's also a lot of talking, people speaking over scenes. Now that I think about it, the sensation of watching it is a lot like Primer. Reminiscent, at least. Visually, the film is great to look at. Not only costuming but just the entire style. It's sparse but attractive. At times, visually a little surreal. If anything, like any story told in this fast-paced style, it doesn't exactly get you on any emotional level. And since I felt like I was playing catch-up throughout, I don't think I ever really connected with the film. I just really enjoyed watching it and being in that world. Acting helps incredibly, too. Especially Toby Jones, who does a lot with less screen time. There's just some terrific faces made in the movie! Any Cumberbatch fans will be pleased with the film, he's got some fine chunks in the film. And a really nice tie. I have to say though, there are one or two reference to characters being homosexual in the film, which is just starting to feel slightly cliched. At least, I'm at the point where if I'm watching a period piece with Man's men, I feel like it's expected that at least one of them is gay. I dunno. So anyway, definitely scratches the heady spy itch you might have and a delight to watch!

Where's a Handsome Spy when you need one?

Cronos - 1993 - Dir. Del Toro

2011-12-04T18:04:00.000-08:00

I think I meant to watch the Devil's Backbone because as soon as I saw Ron Perlman, I was all "Oh, I've seen this one." But you know, I'm glad I re-watched it. I remember thinking it was pretty good when I first saw it back in college but clearly not much stuck with me. Except Ron Perlman's awful gray outfit... and his Charming Demeanor. I'm not a huge Hellboy fan but I get pretty excited about Del Toro's other movies. I feel like they're horror movies for adults but there's so much in it that is reminiscent of fairy tales and often times a child's perspective. I dunno, they make for really pleasant viewing experiences as fully grown man suffering from arrested development. First of all, it should be no surprise that Ron Perlman is terrific in this. It's funny because his character often feels like an aside. Or a henchmen with too much screen time. BUT HE'S SO GREAT! I think maybe he sort of overshadows how solid of a horror movie it is. Del Toro is so good at bringing a nice touches like Pearlman's character or the backward suit which balance out Luppi's controlled performance and just a well crafted "classic feel" of a horror story. Luppi is awesome. The whole film has such little dialogue and Luppi knows just how much to express. He holds his cards so tightly and lets just the right amount sneak through at the right points. If anything, sometimes the ending feels a little anticlimactic but for the most part: A fine viewing!

This creep just loves gum.

The Descendants - 2011 - Dir. Payne

2011-11-27T07:23:00.000-08:00

I'm a big fan of Payne but I always end up at his movies somewhat begrudgingly. I don't know why. So I begrudgingly made my way to the theater preparing to see what would be a really well made movie with thought behind it and everything. And it was! And you know what, it's not nearly as much of a bummer as it looks like it's going to be. I mean, a movie about a guy reconnecting with this daughters after the wife/mother is dying in a coma? That could've been... a hell of a time. Payne's know-how and Clooney's stupid ass running around keeps "hell" at bay. Clooney has really mastered looking goofy while sneaking/running and he's in full force in this movie. He's at he usual Clooney awesomeness, of course. Woodley plays the teenager daughter like an expert. She's clearly a source of friction but she's not a brick wall. Her character relents has tangible weaknesses, we can access her, which I feel like infrequently happens in these types of movies. It's a really well-paced movie, especially for Payne. I was pulled in and stayed in for the entire movie. The Hawaii locale makes for nice eye candy. I especially liked the plotline involving Clooney's cousins and thought it had a lot of impact in the film. It also allows us to see that sheriff from Twin Peaks with a goofy ass tan. Oh wait!? And can I say that Matthew Lillard was awesome in this? I can and will!

Limitless - 2011 - Dir. Burger

2011-11-27T07:22:00.000-08:00

I have no idea why I watched this fucking movie. It's okay, I guess. It's worse than I thought it would be. I expected something a little tighter, a little smarter. I'll admit to being surprised at how doofy this movie ended up being. It's like the writer said "What if-" and started writing... and then realized that everything had to be tied up by the end and never bothered to go back and rewrite. Why is Bradley Cooper's climactic challenge a Russian mobster? Even on the Enhancement drug, he never seems like a valid threat. Even the supposed twist is so underwhelming that I'm baffled by how disinterested in it I was. I mean, it's a fun premise, but it just seems like Burger made no attempt to make it interesting or to dig deep. It's all drug addiction, Wall Street jerks, and Russian mobsters. Sometimes it seemed nearing Crank style ridiculousness which just seemed... strange. I guess, it was an attempt to jack energy into it. I'm not sure I really jived with it, though. It just felt like electrocuting a corpse. Bradley Cooper is okay, I suppose. It sorta felt like the entire cast was just made of nondescript good looking people. No one spurred much of anything. Probably he most interesting thing is Cooper playing a dweeb... which he does well... but it isn't THAT interesting. I dunno, I suppose it'll work as empty entertainment... but I'm sure you could do a lot better.

The hair desperately trying to get you to believe that Bradley Cooper is geeky.

Lenny - 1974 - Dir. Fosse

2011-11-20T19:44:00.000-08:00

I wasn't sure I was going to enjoy this movie basically because I never gave much of an "eff" about Lenny Bruce. Understanding that he was an important early foul-mouthed comedian. He never really struck me as all that funny. The film gives me a little spanking for that. Much of the film follows Lenny's obscenity trials and I suppose I'm someone who has a good time watching some musings on our first amendment rights so I had a pretty good time with the movie. No, you know what? I really liked this movie. I got into it. It also helped not having any idea what happened to the man so the movie had nothing but surprises. It's filmed in the usual Fosse manner of having character interviews interspersed between sequences. Some of the party sequences are just awesomely assembled and are probably some of my favorites in recent memory. Hoffman makes for a great Bruce. He has a ton manic energy as very subtly shifts into out of control Lenny. It's fun to see it early on, where he's just brimming with the stuff and has no outlet. If I had to nitpick, the whole arch revolving around the Wife sometimes feels a little artificial. She's so unimportant in the second act that her role in the third sometimes seems a little unwarranted. But hey, I suppose Biopics have a tendency to do that, don't they!? Anyway, a fine film. A fine film, indeed!

Bruce struggles with the Solo Pull My Finger gag...

The Expendables - 2010 - Dir. Stallone

2011-11-20T13:21:00.001-08:00

I was pretty psyched for this movie to come out but when it did... I made no attempt to go see it. It got perfectly decent reviews... but I think I just felt... out there in the universe, that this movie would not give me what I needed. I was right... The movie exists uncomfortably between the "seriousness" of Stallone's newest Rambo and the silliness of the 80's action flicks it's clearly influenced by. That struggle probably hurts the film more than anything else. It's not goofy enough to be fun, but it's goofy enough that it is hard to take it as seriously as it'd like us to. Apart from a decent car chase, there aren't really many interesting action set pieces to lift it up. As much as I might have felt "feh" about the new Rambo, I felt at least I was getting some kind of visceral experience. Expendables feels like the action is a lot of overly large boys brawling and firing weapons randomly. The Terry Crews second half of the film is a welcome pick me up but is so artificially inserted that it hurts. Hey, guys, forgot all that other stuff we were talking about: Check out Terry Crews with a big gun! Maybe it's the lack of charisma that makes Crews a sudden bolt of life. Stallone sorta lurches around in front of the camera, making dismal wise cracks with a mopey Statham. Jet Li ends up looking like the golden boy of comic timing compared to most of the cast. So... yeah, I could be happier with the movie. A lot happier. Will I see Expendables 2? Most certainly. I'm a sucker for the genre and I'm willing to see what the "best" and the "brightest" churn out. Even if it isn't that good.

They are have different Hat statuses.

The Castle - 1997 - Dir. Haneke

2011-11-13T18:40:00.001-08:00

I think this was being taken off Netflix so I popped it on. I like Haneke. He seems to enjoy making movies with neat hooks but remain interesting throughout. Often challenging. And you know... Kafka's all right, I guess. Haneke's style mesh really well. It's kind of a strange movie to comment upon because, like the book, it ends mid sentence. And it kind of drones on... so without an ending, you feel like you just witnessed a series of pointless events. Or at least... the movie is repetitive. We watch K bang his head against the bureaucracy of in several different forms. Then it ends. We could play the game where watching the movie could mirror K's experience. But I don't feel like playing that game, even though, you know... I wouldn't be surprised by Haneke pulling that. The movie is fun (to me) though. I like watching that kind of conflict a Man against an overly complicated system. Haneke is more subtle than others, the system doesn't visually loom and scream at K. It crawls. We're treated to several walking sequences. Back and forth. Characters shift spasmodically at times. There are plenty of Funny Games alum about which is fun to see (Plenty meaning three). If this sounds like its up your alley, it probably is. It was up mine. I like Haneke can make a hell of a movie, so there!

Am I in Funny Games, right now?

The Dead Pool - 1988 - Dir. Van Horn

2011-11-13T11:36:00.001-08:00

FEH. I'm not a huge Dirty Harry fan. Well, I've only seen the first one apart from this and I don't remember anything about it. I mean, I like Clint. But I suppose the series suffers from too many rip offs or something. It was the original, you know. But by the time this movie came out... I don't think that's an excuse. This is just goofy as hell. Jim Carrey and Liam Neeson are in it. And they are both just... dumb... Carrey bows out pretty early on but Neeson is a train of obnoxiousness because clearly, that's what the movie calls for. So I blame the movie on Liam Neeson's bad acting. The series seems to be winking at the audience at this point ("An Asian Partner!?" "You better watch out, Det. Chang or whatever!"). I can't say I was particularly amused or interested in the movie apart from the initial premise... which is very much the premise of a movie that will not be that good. Gambling on Celebrity deaths. Movie making. Serial killing. FEH! I just... it feels SO dated. TO the point where it's just painful to watch. Patricia Clarkson's all right, I guess. And Clint, too! Their scenes are probably the better ones... Maybe. I dunno. It's a bad sign when I'm considering the romantic subplot to be the better part of the movie. Oh man! And that ending is so disappointing. FEEEEEHHHHHH!!!!

Liam Neeson is probably teaching Clint Eastwood something in this scene.

Don't Be A Menace - 1996 - Dir. Barclay

2011-11-07T18:07:00.000-08:00

You know, I remember this movie from back when... but I never really showed any interest in it. A general bias against the Wayans, I suppose. Well founded if we take the Scary Movie series into stock. I ended up watching it simply because I've recently moved to Los Angeles and for some reason it seemed appropriate. I was in the mood for silliness. AND MAN it delivered. I had a fine time watching this. Maybe I just thought Shawn Wayans overly naive and mild protagonist was funny as hell. That guy... and the repeated jokes about his Dad just charmed the shit out of me. It's pretty upfront about being a parody. The plot is secondary to them just making sure they get every stereotypical sequence out of the mid-80s to 90's street gang movies. So I suppose... it's not well-made in the traditional sense. It resembles the modern Family Guy style parodies that we have been getting, but it just feels less churned out. It feels like they are amusing themselves rather than mugging at the camera. At times, I wish maybe it felt a little tighter... maybe a few less winks for the audience (yeah, they do do SOME mugging [I guess I'm just not a huge fan of mugging!]). But overall, I got a real kick outta the movie. Maybe I'll rethink my feelings about the Wayaneseseseseses.

The Frame of the movie Bernie Mac is in.

Into the Abyss - 2011 - Dir. Herzog

2011-11-06T18:07:00.000-08:00

Probably sedated for what people expect of Herzog these days. You know, being that it's about people on death row (that's the starting point, at least). The man has respect for his subjects and the topic of the death penalty. And it clearly shows, there's no goofy voice over, no albino alligators. So if you are going in with that narrow view of what to expect, you may be a little disappointed. It feels like his older documentaries. It's not a somber Death Penalty film by any means but more of an document of how a group of people are coping with the aftermath of a violent crime. Herzog's strengths do really show in this picture though. I feel like he has a great eye for America. It's depicted with great admiration but he is still very aware of its blemishes and never shies away from them. His tangents are more controlled, more thoughtful. I admit, I'm pretty biased. It's Herzog doing what he does best, being himself, so I had a great time watching it. I like that we get to watch a movie about people on Death Row and we don't have to hear about Death Row the entire time. I like the amount of perspective given from the criminals, to the victims, to an almost complete stranger whose rants Herzog clearly fell in love with. It just feels like a refreshing documentary on perhaps a somewhat tired topic.

This guy is so mad to be stuck in such a tiny picture.

13 Assassins - 2010 - Dir. Miike

2011-11-05T18:08:00.000-07:00

I'm so biased towards this movie that it's painful. Samurai? Miike? Yakusho? That's it. There we go. Yes, I would like to see this action movie please. The movie is basically setting up the huge forty or so minute set piece at the end. We get to know our awful motherfucking antagonist. The Badasses that are going to kill his ass. And then them planning on how to do it. Even then... when it happens... there are still tons of surprises that make you say "GODDAMN IT, YEAH!" It's just a really well put together action movie. I am so impressed with Miike. That guy has a lot of range. Sure... it's generally a pretty violent range, but he feel fleshes out of the spectrum of violent movies. And Yakusho... perhaps not typically cast as an "Assassin," he still plays the Leader of the Pack with APLOMB. The man gets so passionate about the assassination that he cries a little at the thought of it! Yakusho is also so good at bringing silence or a quietness to a role. He's an excellent contrast to Miike bombastic style. And when the film explodes by the third act... it feels good. Naritsugu is a great antagonist. A complete sonuvabitch. And I can't help but like a bad guy who gets overly philosophical about all the awful shit that he does. So, yeah, it's just a really tightly made movie about some samurai killing a real dick.

I'm Koji Yakusho and I'm gonna FUCK YOU UP!

Carre Blanc - 2011 - Dir. Leonetti

2011-11-05T18:06:00.000-07:00

Saw it on a whim at the AFIFest. All I knew about it was that it involved an overly strict corporate future. And you know... that appealed to me. The film is exceptionally well handled. I think especially considering that this future has some pretty outrageous ideas on how to function, the whole thing could have blown up in our faces like most dystopian future films. I think one of the reasons it works so well is that we never delve too deeply into the mechanics of it. Leonetti seems to know that less is more and letting us scratch the surface while we must imagine the rest gives the film a lot of steam. Naturally, this makes it a little confusing and... but I would say it's an ultimately rewarding experience if you stick it out. There's also a really nice vein of comedy flowing through the film which gives it a significant sense of balance because the film can be pretty fucking dreary at times. It's fucked up enough that gorehounds, pessimists, and the like would probably be kept satisfied but approached in a thoughtful enough manner that you can feel like you're not just watching a Clockwork Orange knockoff or whathaveyou. In particular, I do really like what the film suggests about cut-throat tactics in modern day life and I appreciate it's lack of heavy-handedness. Sometimes, I feel a little dissatisfied with where our protagonists are left off by the end... but all in all, a really satisfying experience.

He... Hellooo?

Night of the Hunter - 1955 - Dir. Laughton

2011-11-03T07:45:00.000-07:00

This is my first time seeing it in years. It's a natural edition to someone who is beginning to get into "FILM" and I did so in my early years. For no particular reason, I decided to revisit it. Probably one of the most well-known "under-rated" movies. Certainly not spoken in the same breath as the classics of that time, it's a movie that seems to be catching up. It's a strange creature. Part hilarious, part creepy, part beautiful. And sometimes it's just boring and crappy. It's certainly not what you would call a "well-made movie." All those elements prevented it from hitting the big time, and probably create a barrier for most people going into it. The movie feels more like a silent movie. Sneaking lighting cues from German Expressionism, we're also treated to some pretty broad, campy acting. It fits in this strange beast, but the kids can be somewhat rough to watch at times. Mitchum steals the show which is apparent very early on. He's still probably one of the highest ranking movie psychopaths in my mind. Switching between somber and cartoonish with unbelievable ease. I knocked the movie a bit, I realize that. But it really is an enjoyable watch. Like I said, it's a strange beast from another time. But I wish we had more strange beasts like this one.

Oops! Do you kids smell a Toot?

Bombay Beach - 2011 - Dir. Har'el

2011-10-26T19:38:00.000-07:00

Har'el popped up on a list of new filmmakers to keep and eye on. I'm a fan of Beirut's music and the trailer looked interesting enough so I made a point to see the film when I had a chance. And I'm glad I did! It follows the lives of three people who live in one of the poorest communities in Southern California. The area looks like a barren wasteland, desert as far as the eye can see littered with the decaying remains of society. The film is filled with the skeletons of cars, trailers, homes, and animals. Dead Fish everywhere. A Donkey corpse tangled in barb wire. There's some pretty gritty stuff. Meanwhile, we have a young boy on a plethora of prescription meds raised by his ex-militia parents, an old man who barely manages to take care of himself selling bags of cigarettes, and a teen for South Central with dreams to play for the NFL. It's beautifully shot and balances its seriousness and playfulness beautifully. Probably the most interesting aspect of the film is the infusion of choreographed sequences. All of a sudden, these people begin to dance or... well, they have their own little music videos. They could have come off as excessive or cheap but Alma pulls it off well. They feel like personal and intimate expressions of the subjects. A very well-balanced and engaging documentary.

Tragedy.

Wet, Hot American Summer - 2001 - Dir. Wain

2011-10-23T07:38:00.000-07:00

I never really sat and watched this movie through. I don't think I really "got" David Wain for a while. Like, I wasn't convinced that he knew that we was being campy and funny. I thought maybe he was just some Idiot running amok. Now, I think he's great. The movie is Wain at the top of his form. At least, a lot more successful at being a movie than his later attempt The Ten. You know, the guy doesn't tell much of a long form story or anything. So, it's really a lot of camp stories jammed together told in a CAMPY manner. :D The strongest point of the film are the performances. Generally, letting everyone be as big as possible, Wain has a nice, simple straight-forward way of shooting so as to let us focus on the goofiness of the performances. Paul Rudd is easily my favorite, he's at home playing the smirking douche. Oh wait... David Hyde Pierce and Jeanne Garofalo have awesome chemistry together. MAYBE THAT'S MY FAVORITE PART!? Either way, it's a goofy comedy. It's a lot of fun and really, really dumb. And the cast is real good. Bradley Cooper and Amy Poehler play a pair of theater jerks. Chris Meloni plays a psycho (big surprise). Not to mention the whole cast of Wain regulars. It's good fun!

Get that fucking Face off your face, Paul Rudd!

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil - 1997 - Dir. Eastwood

2011-10-22T07:12:00.000-07:00

I was expecting a murder mystery when I started watching this. It is not a murder mystery. I also didn't realize that it was based on actual events, whatever that might mean. I certainly wasn't expecting anything so... strange. So yeah, clearly, I didn't know anything about what I was getting into. It's a bizarre, uneven film. It seems that Eastwood either didn't know what he wanted to do with the film or he knew but couldn't pull it all together. The film leaps between Courtroom Drama and quirky southern character pieces. The Courtroom aspect bothered me quite a bit. It felt completely dramatic. Perhaps it's the mix of both Spacey and Cusack. Spacey's Southern Gentlemen seems to smile through the charges, as does his lawyer. While Cusack seems to remain distant from the entire procedure. Clearly he's rooting for Williams, but always seems to want to avoid being too involved. So, there never feels like too much is driving the story forward. A by-product of the film's attempt to re-create the feeling of the South? Maybe. The problem is that the "feeling" isn't much more interesting. Characters are lightly quirky, but never deep. He get mere sketches of these people so their existence is simply factual and helps color the film, but it doesn't save it from it's lull. Irma P. Hall ends up being the most interesting by far. Or maybe it's just my love of Voodoo ladies. Geoffrey Lewis' role is bizarre. Easily the strangest of the cast of characters, it goes really nowhere. And the "Fly" effects are pretty terrible. They were so bad that I thought maybe it was on purpose when we first see them. It's well-acted and strangely well-paced. For a two-and-a-half hour long movie as problematic, I'd expect this to drag a lot more. It's pretty interesting in the sense of I felt like I was trying to sort the movie out the whole way through, but by the end, realizing there was nothing to sort, I felt let down... and crabby.

It's a JAR, Cusack! You ain't never seen one of these before?

Blue Velvet - 1986 - Dir. Lynch

2011-10-14T11:05:00.000-07:00

I mean, as a weird jerk in high school, I ate this movie up. What weird teenage jerk wouldn't?! I had seen it so many times that I didn't need to watch it for well... a really long time. I completely forgot about the movie except for Dennis Hopper screaming which is engrained into our counter-cultural memory with a Dental Drill. A drill shaped like Dennis Hopper's head. And you know, even though I'm long familiar with the rants, seeing it again. That man is still shockingly fucked up in this movie. He's unendingly weird and loud. And then you have Kyle McLaughlin, who is basically a strange twelve-year-old boy in the movie. He's perfect... in a way that just feels wrong through and through. Like an aesthetically pleasing whitehead. And I'm going to say the he did it on purpose. Which makes him the best actor. Everyone is just great in this movie. I'll just say that. And I love Laura Dern. All of a sudden, I'm realizing that she's an awesome actress. Especially with Lynch. The movie is just a pretty straight-forward noir. Like, it's a story you would recognize, except Lynch adds all these details that skew it. And like Hopper, everything is amplified. It's hyper-suburban. I remember feeling like the movie was pretty slow back when, probably because Hopper was a kind of centerpiece and it takes a little while for him to show. Now, I don't think I got that. Considering some of his other movies, this is a jog through the park.

This guy...

Sweetgrass - 2009 - Dir. Castaing-Taylor

2011-10-08T22:43:00.000-07:00

"Anthropological" gets thrown around a lot when I hear talk of this movie, which I dunno... I find that term to be a little... iffy? I suppose it applies, but I feel like the word is used as an attempt to remove the film from the arena of Cinema and into Science, as if that makes it more trustworthy or reputable. True, it would be hard to call the film biased, but like anything and like science, IT IS. It has an argument, a perspective. One of those. Of course, since the director is an Anthropologist... it seems even more apt. But let me refrain from continuing this non-argument that I've already wasted so much time with. You can call the movie whatever the fuck you want (Let me just point out what a waste of time all those sentences were). The movie is about Sheep. Sheep being led across mountains. Which is not done anymore. I watched it for two reasons, 1) I like Sheep. I think they are fun and great to watch. 2) It promised to be minimal. I love a good minimalist documentary. I just want to watch stuff happen. No voice-over or wonky editing. I don't want some fat prick telling me what he thinks and then cracking wise. The movie delivered on both fronts. Therefore, it is a slow movie. There's very little explanation of what is going on. Almost none. So you spend a lot of time watching farmers do stuff. I would also say that it is a beautiful movie, though. There are some gorgeous shots in it. There are these strange protuberance of humor in the film, especially around the halfway point. But you know... it's not laugh out loud or anything. NO LULZ HERE. You know, I'd say, you probably know the kind of movie this is. If you're in that mood, DO IT.

Sweet, grass.

X-Men: First Class - 2011 - Dir. Vaughn

2011-10-07T12:54:00.000-07:00

To be honest, I'm pretty vague about most of these characters. So I went into the movie being "Who the fuck is Sebastian Shaw?" I mean, having met him, I'm glad I did. He seems like a fine villain. So I felt like a bit of a n00b as you kids love saying. Perhaps this is the comic book movie that feels MOST like a Superhero, Comic Book to me. It toes a really fine line between badass, goofy, and melodramatic. Badass easily embodied by Fassbinder's Magneto who I've heard so much about and he deserves every fine thing said. I MEAN! THAT FUCKING THING WITH THE KNIFE!? Fassbinder did that without special effects. McAvoy, however, I'm not sold on. EH, I guess he's all right. In fact, everyone else. EH, I guess they're okay. Kevin Bacon makes a good german doctor, though. Sigh... This movie just has really great sequences in it and then okay stuff in between. It's just that the sequences are so friggin' cool and well done and everything else is just... bland. And I suppose I could have done with less... kids in the movies. But I suppose we're getting to the point where the majority of movies will be less and less for me. We want the kids to feel included in the superhero movies you know...

X-MEN! YEEAAAAHHH!!! LOOK! THEY'RE MUTANTS! YYYEEEAAAHH!!!!!

Take Shelter - 2011 - Dir. Nichols

2011-10-07T12:53:00.001-07:00

This is a real movie. Not real in a stupid way... but like... It's a great movie. It definitely didn't blow me away. In fact, leaving the theater, I could best be described as being a little disappointed. Perhaps because the film respected me... and didn't do what I figured it would. The majority of this lies in where the majority of the conflict takes place. Rather than it being something where Shannon is trying to solve a puzzle, accomplish a set goal, or find what is giving him nightmares. It's about him living with his nightmares. With his anxieties. And the struggle that comes from making that choice. Shannon is perfect as the struggling husband. I've only seen him in off-kilter roles but to see him playing an ordinary fellah. It really showed his range. He's convincing as all hell and rarely distancing. Chastain is at her best as well. All of a sudden she's popped up, taking very different roles and doing a great job with each. I expected the film to be a well-made thriller rather than a well-made drama and I think the movie excels in that regard. It will probably not satisfy the thrill seekers. And to be honest, when I think about the resolution, it doesn't always feel like it fits. But a really solid drama. There's not a lot of bells and whistles. Enjoyable, tense, and well put together. I may just throw it out there... It feels like a bit of a rarity these days.

Whoa! Hey now! Let's uh... Let's not do that to the girl, okay?

The Verdict - 1982 - Dir. Lumet

2011-10-05T16:57:00.001-07:00

Mamet, Newman, and Lumet. Oh, and I guess, Mason too (I just don't know him as well, I'm not trying to knock him or anything). They're all big fucking deals, right? So we already know that we're going to get a certain caliber of work from these fellas. And you know, Verdict is good. I'm not gonna get too excited about it. It didn't exactly feel like a standout picture as far as those involved are concerned. It's your basic courtroom drama. Doesn't really pull many surprises. Paul Newman always makes an excellent drunk. He's just such a nice man! And then we wants to booze it up and be sad! It's always a great thing to watch. I would say, the opening of the movie is pretty awesome though. Just him drinking and playing pinball? It's awesome. Probably what I like most about this is the relationship between Newman and Rampling. Both of whom are excellent and give absolutely nothing away as far as where the relationship is headed. Also, it's just a relationship that quietly hurts by the end, which is cool. It takes up exactly the amount of time it should. And Mason is an appropriately shitty guy. Maybe he's too good, because you want him to get a little more of his comeuppance then he ends up getting. Like you want a pie to hit him in the face during the entire conclusion.

"Jack... I'm trying to do a scene here, ya mind?"

The Last Dragon - 1985 - Dir. Schultz

2011-10-04T10:25:00.002-07:00

It's a sorta of tricky movie to talk about, because I feel like I should like it more than I do. And I didn't dislike it. I enjoyed it. A cult film I really knew almost next to nothing about until a few weeks ago. It had the simple ingredients of funk, kung-fu, and blaxploitation all rolled up into one film, so it seemed like a pretty safe bet that I would in some sense enjoy the film. I figured at the worst it would boring and poorly assembled like most exploitation films and I've seen plenty of those. It ended up being most like an 80's action movie, perhaps similar in tone to something like "Big Trouble in Little China." With it's over-the-top villains, bits of magic, and pretty much a cookie cutter story-telling. It was campier than I think I expected it to be. Bordering on a cartoon-ish movie. Especially enjoy Sho'nuff. The Shogun of Harlem who seems to have been ODB's father. The whole film is a very reasonable precursor to the Wu-Tang Clan's combination of urban living and kung-fu philosophy. I was surprised I hadn't heard of it sooner. Although, I suppose it comes from a generation slightly older than mine. Or perhaps of the older folks of my generation. The same people that love "The Warriors." Like "The Warriors," it's stylish and a nice snapshot of what an 80's movie is, but ultimately perhaps for reasons I'll never know, my heart remains cold to it.

Sigh... Kanye jokes...

Drive - 2011 - Dir. Refn

2011-10-02T19:41:00.001-07:00

A weird, mutant of a film. To some degree, I'm surprised it's gotten the praise it has. It seems like a movie for a certain kind of Idiot. And I'm that kind of Idiot. It's not really one kind of movie... but seems to constantly wish it was a kind of movie. A strange, shifting tone. But perhaps I shouldn't be surprised considering Refn's other work. He seems to love a kind of Ambient hyper violence. The movie is dream-like, unreal. It's 80's soundtrack hums us through the movie. Our unnamed protagonist and his love interest communicate in silent glances. He drives at night, aimless. For a large portion of the movie that is what the movie is. Then tons of violence is heaped onto us. And you know... It's fucking awesome violence. Refn can make a beatin' scene. I'll just throw out the Elevator scene as perhaps the high point in this regard. The violence doesn't even really feel that cathartic because the tension level always feels pretty low. It's a muted b-movie. A well-made B-movie perhaps. Either way. I got a kick out of it. I like the 80's keyboards. I like driving around. I like cute girls and cute relationships. And I like incredible violence. I have no problem with all that stuff jammed together. I'm surprised about the praise... and I wonder if it deserves it. But maybe... everyone wants to see a guy with nothing kick the shit out of assholes.

My name is... Drive.

BASEketball - 1998 - Dir. Zucker

2011-10-01T19:41:00.000-07:00

Despite not having kept up with them in the recent years, I'm a big fan of Parker and Stone's work. This merely has them as actors and their influence sneaks in but the film is clearly a Zucker production. I feel like I always have to be a little easy on Zucker due to his involvement with Naked Gun and Airplane but I'm generally less amused by his more recent attempts. BASEketball is more of the same (looking at his filmography, this is probably the last one I'd bother seeing). It's got the corny Naked Gun-style jokes and Parker and Stone blend well with it. One might even say, it's seemless! But I feel like overall it's very much "Medium" entertainment. Probably what I enjoyed most was Parker constantly going "Awww! Aww!" In fact, both of their performances are probably the high point of the film. You know, I like puns and idiocy as much as the next guy, I just wished the movie tried a little harder on the story-telling front. There's almost no kind of tension or conflict... or, at least, any kind of substantial conflict. It's generally just a lot of goofy stuff and rich old mean guy. It's likable and if you want to round out your Parker/Stone viewing experience... well, I imagine you've already seen it.

Both of you... Stop having that hair!

The Debt - 2011 - Dir. Madden

2011-09-04T15:32:00.000-07:00

It's not exactly a memorable movie. To be honest, I think my favorite thing about it is the score. It's a refreshing change to see a female-lead spy-espionage movie without her being a sexpot. The Debt never really goes to that arena of spy-movie, which as I said, I appreciate. I just don't think the movie goes very far outside the theater. It's well-acted. I never really formed an opinion of Sam Worthington and this doesn't really help me any. He can act. Perform the action of acting. He's not a drag to watch or anything. Helen Mirren is great, but I rarely have a bad word for the lady . You know, there's the Nazi Guy and he gets to be all villainous and he does a bang-up job, but I'm not really sure how hard it could have been. Jessica Chastain ends up leaving the biggest impression, but I think I'm just feeling more impressed with her recent output rather than reacting to the actual performance. I mean, she's just picks varied roles and been consistently good at them. But the movie itself is just generally straight-forward with some adjustments here and there. Everything is just fine and dandy and TENSE. I mean, maybe I'm just not a huge fan of spy movies. I feel like I under react to the Bourne movies too.

People walking out of a plane? In a Movie!? No way!

The Fly - 1986 - Dir. Cronenberg

2011-08-29T15:34:00.000-07:00

What can I say!? I like this movie a lot. I've seen it a handful of times. It's great! Jeff Goldblum turning into a Fly? What's not to like? Not only that, but before he becomes a Fly, he turns into a hyper weirdo! The first shot is Jeff Goldblum's weird face! He manages to change tracks several times in the movie without making it feel strange or sudden. Able to hold both the Old Brundle and the Brundlefly at the same time. And the movie is just paced so well. It's all "BAM! Let's do this Transporter thing!" It's basically everything I like about Cronenberg at it's very best. Strange, body-horror, sex/pregnancy stuff that's weirdly funny the whole way through. AND RIDICULOUS SPECIAL EFFECTS! It has those nice 80's practical effects where they are treated like set pieces, like freakish ape and Brundlefly. There's nothing in this for me to not like. Actually, that once sequence where he's speaking and crawling on the wall always seems a little disjointed to me, but apart from that it's all good. Davis is great as our heroine. She's not one of those forehead-smackingly dumb or overly emotional. But she's not a cold-hearted/super hero female. She has great judgement and I think that's some too appreciate in a horror movie character. We also get a smirkingly fantastic performance from John Getz, who basically just plays the shithead role perfectly. It has a really nice cathartic ending, too. It's just an entertaining movie that deserves it's status. Also, Jeff Goldblum's hair? I mean... C'mon... Jeff Goldblum's hair!

This is why you can't leave a Jeff Goldblum in direct sunlight.

Star 80 - 1983 - Dir. Fosse

2011-08-28T15:34:00.000-07:00

It was recommended and getting taken off of Netflix so I figured I'd best make I way to see Fosse's last film. It's... well, it's not All That Jazz. You can see how they were made by the same fella but Fosse's holding back directing-wise. The real centerpiece of the film is FUCKING Eric Roberts. Who is SO weird and pathetic and threatening all at the same time. I mean, I'm really impressed by how many terrible emotion balls that man juggled in this film. Fosse was clearly interested in his psychology rather than Stratten's, who deftly handles her growing fame. Even Hefner and the Bogdanovich are mild. Robert's Clingy Overwhelmed Boyfriend just goes mad in the light of these characters. This does flatten the scenes he isn't in which are usually just about how to handle Eric Roberts. The fact that we know how it will end and the lack of any other proper drama leads to a pretty slow movie. We want it to move faster than it does. We know where we are headed, we're just along for the ride. The nuances of his decline are interesting, I give you that but not portrayed THAT differently from what is a pretty familiar story. I say, a fan of Fosse, Roberts, or nutcases should follow up. But I'm sure you could find better stories about Stardom, Playboy Bunnies, and even creepy boyfriends (although perhaps the boyfriends won't be as weird of Roberts).

No! NO! NO! YOU WEIRD CREEPY FREAK! >:(

Catfish - 2010 - Dir. Joost/Schulman

2011-08-23T18:08:00.001-07:00

I gave into the viral marketing campaign and made sure it seek out the film to find out it's SHOCKING TWIST. Which you know can't be that shocking because... well... it's a documentary. But I bit anyway. And the shocking twist is about as shocking as you might expect... and probably IS what you would expect it to be. To start off, let me just say that I wasn't a fan of our subject, Nev. He kinda... seemed like a douche. That aside, the premise of the film takes over pretty quickly and holds our attention as unlikable as I might have found our subject to be. It's paced slow enough, and everyone in the theater knows something shifty is around so a lot of the movie is seeing if you could figure it out before they do. Or at least, trying to solve the mystery. When it's revealed. It feels pretty good and it is actually handled pretty well considering. It's an emotionally satisfying ending, I suppose. A lot of people question the authenticity of this documentary... as well they should: It's a documentary. But honestly, with something like this I have no issue with thing re-filmed/staged/whatever. It's not like it is making much of an argument. To be honest, I found it engaging and entertaining. If it's completely fiction, I don't give a damn. A fine little piece of entertainment.

Why, hello! I'd like to Friend you on Facebook!

The Conversation - 1974 - Dir. Coppola

2011-08-21T12:25:00.002-07:00

I always forget Coppola did this. It's a lot quieter, less ambitious, and less... well... less dynamic than say Apocalypse Now or the Godfather films. But to be honest, this probably ranks up as my favorite film of his. I had seen it long ago and entirely forgot about it. It's a taut, character-driven thriller. Hackman, always excellent at making unlikable characters watchable, draws us in as Caul. The film is a nice reminder of how enjoyable a movie can be when you have a strong character leading us. Caul is faced with a conspiracy but the majority of the film isn't about him unraveling the conspiracy. Rather, we are given almost all the information up front, but it follows Caul as he struggles with himself regarding the information he has. Information he doesn't understand but struggles to without leaving his safety zone. Generally, I suppose, people get all up in arms about the sound design. I'm not really sure I know very much about it's place in sound design history so I won't really speak on that. But hey! It's got a lot of great sounds and uses sound really well. Which is good based on how much of the film is about sound and HEARING and EARS. Anyway, the ending is great. Pitch perfect. And we also get to watch John Cazale act which is always dandy. And Harrison Ford! As a douche!

Hackman trying to understand toilets.

The Paranoids - 2008 - Dir. Medina

2011-08-20T12:25:00.001-07:00

For some reason, I was really excited about this, even though the trailer set it up to be a kind of run of the mill, artsy loner type movie. And it is. From the overly ponderous opening shot, which I feel really only has a tenuous connection to the movie. It's the kind of opening shot where I feel like I can hear the director say "Wouldn't it be cool if..." From there we get to explore our Protagonist and how much his life is shit. He's shy, with a crappy job, and he can't do what he loves cause he's screwed up, and he also does too many drugs. It's the usual bag. I think Hendler does a really good job doing that and it's directed well, but it's familiar territory. Throw in an old friend who has become successful and is a complete douchebag, things get slightly more interesting, but not much more. Some familiar story-telling tropes get thrown into the mix. I shook my head when the experienced older fellah started giving advice. It's kind of like an Urban Argentinian Garden State, which has good points and bad points to it. It was never an unenjoyable experience and I certainly didn't feel like the film spoke down to me or insulted my intelligence, but I don't feel like it really pushed or pulled me any one way.

Oh yeah, babe, blur your arms for me some more!

Graveyard of Honor - 2002 - Dir. Miike

2011-08-14T09:04:00.001-07:00

A Miike remake of a Fukasaku film seems like an appropriate enough thing to exist. The two men certainly have their similarities. Although, let's not fool ourselves, this is a Miike movie. It is unendingly violent, loud, and strangely enough slow and boring. The man just seems to want to show us someone who can't not hurt people all the time. So, you know, we're never really rooting for the guy. We're just waiting for him to hit the wall. And good god, does it take forever... more than two hours of this jackass screaming and doing insane shit, getting fucked up on drugs. There's an arc of a kind. But the film is like a Punch and Judy show, where the character is a vehicle for violence and that is kind of the long and the short of it. We don't really get many insights into why or even a goofy quirk (like say Ichi the Killer might throw that our way). We're just dealing with a violent dude in a violent movie. This isn't Miike at his strongest. It's not his worst. There's some fun sequences... but they can be pretty far apart. Pretty, pretty far apart. So, I dunno. If you wanna watch a lot of fighting and blood and screaming (that actually sounds more appealing then the movie is), check it out. I think you could do better though.

Guys! I'm Batmmmaaaaaann?

The Omen - 1976 - Dir. Donner

2011-08-13T14:29:00.002-07:00

Probably better and more engaging than I thought it would be. Anytime you have the main conflict of a film be whether or not parents are going to kill their child. I mean, you generally want to see how that turns out. Having Gregory Peck play the father helps a ton, too. Sure, it's no "To Kill a Mockingbird" or anything but that guy brings his shit wherever he goes. Also, Jerry Goldsmith's score is a classic 70's horror score. Probably makes the movie. I mean, it's not exactly a "scary" movie. It's certainly tense enough and has plenty of strong sequences. It also doesn't rely on the pale five-year-old boy to bring the scares. In fact, what I kind of appreciated was that to some degree the film doesn't exactly ever condemn Damien. We're never like "GET THAT MOTHERFUCKING KID" because he doesn't do anything. Awful shit just seems to happen around him. So when Peck is debating whether or not to kill his son, it seems more like a debate because we haven't just watched scene after scene of Damien dismembering people with an evil glint in his eye. The kid is a kid, who just happens to be the son a Satan. So yeah, it's a pretty good movie. It's not a stand-out by any means, but it seems like just a very solidly made picture. And David Warner is in it too. That never hurts.

Quit bein' such a prick, kid!

Iron Man 2 - 2010 - Dir. Favreau

2011-08-10T18:21:00.001-07:00

I had a bad enough feeling about Iron Man 2 that I didn't pursue it in theaters, despite having a good enough time in the first one. I did well to save my money. Iron Man 2 is a simple illustration of why I am often hesitant about super hero movies these days. First of all, we spend chunks of the movie without a reasonable threat to our protagonist. Except that he's dying... which really just spurs on Tony Stark to act more like an asshole and create tension between himself and his pals, which is the sole point of drama in the film. Sure, there's some Russian guy who is dispatched less than half-way through and Justin Hammer who is so goofy that it makes Sam Rockwell's comic relief the high point of the film. There's absolutely no build up to the climax. Oh great... the final bad guy is... Many Robots? Even the locale is just a series of random environments. The film just fucks around, winking at fanboys and nudging everyone else. The film takes the easy way out of every situation whenever it can and simply runs off of it's assumed charm and light-hearted manner. In the end, it just feels tiring and boring. And naturally, for some reason it thinks it needs to be more than two hours (by a minute, but still, we couldn't have pulled in a hour forty-five for this... it only deserves 90 minutes anyway). There aren't even enough action sequences to really even warrant that running time. It's mostly filled with watching a unsympathetic rich guy mope around and crack wise.

Lars and the Real Girl - 2007 - Dir. Gillespie

2011-08-06T17:55:00.001-07:00

I had put off this film for a while, fearing it would be a two hour examination of how pathetic and delusional one man can be. Sort of like an emotional car crash, where you can't turn away from the wreak of a man in front of you. It's actually more like a really nice bus ride with old people. It's charming, slowly paced, and any bawdiness is enveloped by it's charm. Assuming the old people aren't the filthy disgusting type of elderly people. The film rarely gets mean, rarely gets too sentimental. It doesn't really take many risks once you get past the premise. It actually ends up just being a much nicer movie than one might expect. Lars' delusion never gets cringe worthy and is often more about his progress to healing than his illness. Sure... I dunno. I suppose if you're looking for hard drama or... well... anything harder. You won't really get it from Lars. Solid performances from the main cast keep it from feeling to light and fluffy. They play it honestly and rarely cheap. The harder to swallow moments come from the townspeople... who as less developed characters, often highlight the Hallmark Card sentiment line that the film is toeing. It was a pleasantly light surprise, the kind of film that really sets out to do a certain job and does it very well.

Get the hint, Gosling! She's trying to read!

Capturing the Friedmans - 2003 - Dir. Jarecki

2011-08-02T17:52:00.001-07:00

If you like movies about Child Molestation, then this is the documentary for you! It creeped me out, which I suppose isn't a stretch considering it's subject: the convicted Father-Son team of child molesters in suburban Long Island. Perhaps what ends up being the most disturbing aspect of it is the film's own ambiguity in regards to whether or not their guilt is justified. It doesn't take a strong stance exactly, but simply repeatedly suggests that all is not what it appears. So by the end of the film, we're left hanging, having either seen the up close and personal lives of a family where two of the members committed awful acts OR the jailing of an innocent. To be honest, the family dynamic exposed by the plethora of home video the Friedmans' kept is unnerving enough but to have the insinuations of child molestation underneath is the Icing on the cake. The terrible, terrible cake. Their constant clowning throughout the process, either as a bizarre way of coping with the situation or just... I don't know what, becomes pretty surreal at times. Either way, it's a well-crafted documentary and Jarecki seems to have pretty surprisingly open access considering the situation (that he got the home videos and interviews at all seems lucky). Worth the watch if you want to feel unsure and unsettled.

GOOD TIMES!

Beginners - 2010 - Dir. Mills

2011-07-31T15:35:00.002-07:00

I swear I've seen Mills' previous film Thumbsucker, wrote it off as being like every other indie film at the time and moved on. I can't remember anything about it. It left absolutely no impression on me whatsoever, to the degree that I am no longer even sure that I've seen it. So I was skeptical about Beginners. The trailer hinting at more of the same, but Plummer seemed charming and I wanted some light fare. BACKSTORY COMPLETE. Christopher Plummer is so fucking charming. In fact, the cast all around is great. I rarely have anything bad to say about Ewan and my admiration for Laurent's performance grows as I think about it. The film so dangerously dances near the edge of forgettable indie-quirky romcom tripe that I WAS ON THE EDGE OF MY SEAT (okay, not really). But between a subtitled dog and the playful editing, there's a lot to be suspicious about. What saves the film is that despite the goofy storytelling, it seems to come from an honest and genuine place. And the cast knew this and keeps an honest face throughout. It actually makes the playful/quirky aspects of it more welcome as the film progresses. What could have destroyed it, actually succeeds and keeps it playful. What emerges is a emotional comedy, that has enough depth that I was still chewing it over after leaving the theater.

QUIT LOOKING SO COOL, PLUMMER! >:|

Bridesmaids - 2011 - Dir. Feig

2011-07-29T18:38:00.001-07:00

Bridesmaids made a big splash because of the amount of ladies in it, being hailed as a kind of rising of female R-rated comedies. To some degree, I'm pretty shocked that it got that level of praise. I think perhaps what initially bothered me about Bridesmaids is that it seems mildly condescending that the new female comedy hit is about Weddings. It is smarter than it might appear, emotionally more mature, although I'm divided as to whether this is because that was the goal or if they were being somewhat restrained from letting women look too goofy (ugly/stupid) in the film. I suppose it's an accomplishment that they were able to look as silly as they do. The film is cast really well. Wiig, who I'm not generally a huge fan of, is AWESOME. The movie ends up being more about Wiig's relationship with Rudolph and her new friend Byrne. Leaving Kemper and McLendon-Covey SUPER underused and McCarthy is thrown in anytime a raunchy joke needs to be made. So to some degree, I like to think that Bridesmaids is a somewhat misleading title. BUT I DIGRESS. Wiig plays the mid-thirties loser (read: Liz Lemon) with skill and with more earnestness than we may be used to seeing. Her relationship with the doofy policeman is perhaps the high point of the film. They're scenes are light, charming and they play off of each other really nicely. The film deserves the praise for being a good female driven comedy, but apart from that, it's a pretty basic comedy. Female roles plugged into a somewhat cookie cutter script. It's done well and perhaps the casting gives it a bit a fresh air, but not exactly as groundbreaking as we may lead to believe.

Tree of Life - 2011 - Dir. Malick

2011-07-26T03:18:00.001-07:00

Not my favorite Malick, but perhaps the one that most gets me excited about him. Partially because what he fails to do and partially what he does with flying colors. Firstly, it's undeniably beautiful. To the degree where you don't even mind that it is achingly slow. Small moments of a childhood in the 1950's have never been so gripping. The film's scope is practically boundless, with a chunk of it following the creation of the universe/world. To have that in contrast with the smaller (perhaps SMALLEST story) layers the film beautifully and gives me more than plenty to chew on. However, it should not be a surprise that the film at times dips into pretensions, the existential pleadings heard in the voice over are perhaps too on-the-nose. Often times removing me from the film. It's perhaps the first time where Malick didn't completely blow me out of the water with his voice over. Often times, I felt handed several pieces of a puzzle with no real idea of how to put them together. Or what I was expected to do with them. The film may be beautiful, but I can't say I'm driven to rewatch it in an attempt to put it all together. In some sense, just having them was enough. Rather, it leads to me want to watch something else of his. Still, there is something exciting about the scope of the film, that it has been tackled by a filmmaker during a summer of what seems to be pretty ordinary fare.

Stop playin' with all them Baby Feet, Brad!

The Battle of Algiers - 1966 - Dir. Pontecorvo

2011-07-20T09:14:00.001-07:00

I actually thought this movie was a documentary before I saw it. It was just so highly lauded as a political film that it never occurred to me that it was a dramatization praised for even handedness. And when you get right down to it, it certainly seems to make both sides out into violent brutes. There's no justification or silver lining to any of the violence in the film. These elements make it stand out in many ways, but at the same time, I'm not sure it really leaps out why this film is so well respected. It's kind of a cold re-telling and to some degree, maybe the film can be a little slow. Being critical for criticism's sake. We have no one who we really like and the film feels like a watching a series of terrorist incidents followed by the Occupation's reaction. The film still reflects our current political situations to a pretty surprising and horrifying degree. The story is told in a gritty black and white which feels absolutely perfect for the film. And as usual, Ennio Morricone still makes the hell out of those musical notes. When the Army is flooding the streets to the main theme, it sticks with you. It's a fine film, perhaps not as apparent off the bat why it is so highly lauded, but certainly deserves it's place in Cinema History and perhaps it is an important film to watch based on our own foreign policy.

That guy back there just LOVES checkpoint duty.

My Fair Lady - 1964 - Dir. Cukor

2011-07-17T16:21:00.001-07:00

I'm not a big musical guy, which is something I say before I ever give my opinion about musicals. But I like My Fair Lady. It's silly, got a bit of sass in it, and it's charming . BUT WHO WOULDN'T BE CHARMED BY HEPBURN AND HARRISON!! I mean, both of them are a ton of fun to watch, and I do enjoy a musical based around the way people speak. Harrison plays a uppity dick ever so well but never so well that I want to smack him in the mouth. Hepburn plays a big-mouthed upstart but again, never so well that I want to smack HER in the mouth either. I guess, when you have a musical where the two main characters are jerks, I'm more likely to be a fan. But I suppose what works is that the tone is never really all that cynical. It's silly. Fun, in the spirit of a light-hearted bet. The emotion that gets injected into it is subtle. When everyone congratulated Harrison on a job well done, Hepburn's face is all you need to see. And the movie knows well enough to give us only that. It's can wander around sometimes. The scenes with the father are nice tough if a little tangent-y. It's one of those movies that kind of runs on charm rather than tight or compelling story-telling. It's not a bad story, but perhaps it's strongest trait is that it takes a backseat to the characters and music.

Audrey Hepburn, Filthy As Usual

Les Diaboliques - 1955 - Dir. Clouzot

2011-07-17T09:37:00.002-07:00

I can say I easily enjoyed this more than Wages of Fear, which Clouzot made directly before this. The films are two completely different beasts of course. A classic thriller regularly compared to Hitchcock, Les Diaboliques follows the story of a woman and her husband's mistress plotting to murder the abusive husband/lover. Even if it wasn't for the famous twist, the movie is still very strong. Paced well. Keeps us wondering what could be going on. When our two main protagonists become overwhelmed with the situation, we could shift focus too the more light-hearted teachers and students of the boarding school they work at. Through them, a simmering tone is maintained without becoming two heavy. We try to continue to piece together what clues we can find. The problems that arise are both baffling and ordinary and our imaginations can go in any direction. We are given just enough information to keep us hooked and not frustrated but never so much that it has become obvious. OR I'm just an idiot that didn't see the ending coming miles away. Sure, it's not friggin' M. Night Shyamalan or what have you. But it's a nice classic thriller! So get off my back! It's a nice movie! For nice people!

Ted Raimi or Moe Howard?

The Parallax View - 1974 - Dir. Pakula

2011-07-15T09:38:00.002-07:00

Certainly no All the President's Men, Pakula's middle entry of his paranoia trilogy is a straight-forward thriller. It seems to struggle to get started and then when it does so fails to really pick up much steam. It just feels uneven as hell and Beatty plays the unorthodox reporter on a big scoop about as well as anyone else might. Although, it bothered me as hell with how capable he was at basically everything. The man could even throw a punch! It was one of those characters whose flaw is that he loves the Truth TOO MUCH. Perhaps it is a little impressive in that it is about as entertaining as a generic paranoid thriller made these days (Compliment?). Except you get to look at Warren Beatty's ridiculous hair (Compliment!). I was caught off guard (shocked even) with how badly executed the Dam sequence is. That being said, the final assassination sequence is top notch! It is strange to think that it is the same movie. I don't suppose the ending will really catch anyone by surprise, but I'm not going to hold it against them. The third act is probably the strongest portion where Beatty struggles to tip the odds in his favor. So, a pretty ordinary paranoid thriller from the 70's. I imagine it's on a shelf a bit higher than it's peers at the time but that is something I should look into. OH! The opening sequence is pretty sweet too.

Wilson from Home Improvement is starting shit!

The Cave of Forgotten Dreams - 2010 - Dir. Herzog

2011-07-10T17:14:00.001-07:00

God bless, Werner Herzog. That's all I have to say. The man knows how to get me going. I have to say, that this wasn't exactly my favorite of his films. The subject matter itself didn't strike me as exciting or as interesting as say The Antarctic or a Man who lives with Grizzlies. Herzog manages to sell the material though. His passion pushes us through it, excites us. Or at least, it excites me! But if anything, there's something very impressive (and telling) in what he managed to assemble considering the limitations put upon him. He had limiting shooting time and limited crew, so a little has to go a long way. He finds a story and thoughts worth pondering in the smallest details of the paintings, in the curves of the walls. Herzog wants us to inspect every minute detail of the painting. 3D only aids his case. It doesn't take over the film by any means. The opening credits are pretty stunning, though, and perhaps the most showy of the 3D. The film is still filled with expected Herzogian rants and tangents. Playful handling of his subjects. He made no qualms about exposing the epilogue with the radioactive albino alligators. Clearly, doing so amused him. Which is what works in this film and in most other Herzog films: he follows the trail he wants, and if we're willing to go along, we'll probably enjoy ourselves.

Which one is the bigger nutcase? You'll be surprised.

The Machinist - 2004 - Dir. Anderson

2011-07-04T09:24:00.003-07:00

It's funny to have watched this and Shutter Island so close together because each film plays with our protagonist's sanity as the film goes on. My problem with The Machinist is that I feel like we come to the conclusion that our protagonist is nuts long before the film is willing to admit such a thing. I never bought that Reznik was the victim of a conspiracy. He's a nobody, who is obviously unhinged. So the film becomes more about how much damage is this guy going to do, how much has already been done, and how crazy is he going to get? The problem with this is that Trevor spends most of the movie alone. So the movie is watching Christian Bale lose his mind. Bale is a fine actor. He can be pretty muted/distant/cold at times, and this is not an exception. Sometimes it works, but it also makes it a little hard to feel for him. The strongest aspect of the film are the repeating motifs, sequences, images. In fact, they work REALLY well. When everything comes together, it's pretty satisfying. It does have an ending that redeems all the BS you go through from the start and the movie is good with Red Herrings, perhaps because our attention is drawn in several directions at once. And I just wanna throw it out there, John Sharian is awful! So, an engaging enough distraction with some storytelling issues, but satisfying nonetheless.

STOP. THAT.

Dreamcatcher - 2004 - Dir. Kasdan

2011-07-03T09:25:00.001-07:00

Doesn't Kasdan make real movies? I mean... that's a thing, right? Well, I guess everyone is allowed to fuck around in the snow with a bunch of other dudes. This movie is harmless. Completely empty entertainment. Probably too empty? Yeah. It gives in to certain level of goofiness that just betrays the movie. From the get-go, we're asked to believe in an extraordinary level of fantasy. Hurled from mind-reading to a goofy, sudden suicide. The movie just doesn't take a breather, barreling forward, adding more and more details, more and more ideas. It's like four different movies. If anything, it's impressive that it manages to somewhat explain it all, but the bar is so low that really, any explanation would do. It's kind of sad considering the level of talent involved in the picture. There isn't one person in the movie that I don't enjoy watching... and I don't enjoy watching any of them. AND WHY THE FUCK DOES THE ALIEN HAVE A BRITISH ACCENT!? The movie is full of fine ideas, fine characters, a fine premise. You have a monster that bursts out of asses and the good sense to call it a Shit Weasel (that's just good horse sense [probably also my favorite portion]). It just had to PICK one and stick with it. God knows, the movie is too long as is. It's sort of a good illustration of Stephen King at his worst. You've got packs of childhood friends being brought together to fight a vast evil but then man just goes and doesn't know when to call it quits and then all of a sudden you've got a thousand page book with a villain with giant white eyebrows shooting at an alien dying of leukemia from a helicopter. Evil clown, I can handle. Freeman's eyebrows, NO SIR.

EEERRRRR!!! ACTING MOVIES!!!

Shutter Island - 2010 - Dir. Scorsese

2011-07-02T09:29:00.002-07:00

Shutter Island is everyone doing what they do best. No one does a bad job in this movie. No one does a great job, either. This is just movie being the most moviest that it could possibly be. If I were to criticize anything, it's that Leonardo DiCaprio looks like a nutcase from Shot 1. We know the dish we're being served when we see that sickly looking motherfucker, we're going to spend the rest of the movie challenging his sanity. And you know... we do, but I think that's that major difference between this and The Machinist is that Scorsese never gives too much away. As crazy as DiCaprio is (We know he's a little deranged... a little obsessed. But HOW MUCH?), Scorsese doesn't let us write off the idea that this is all just a conspiracy taking advantage of a man under duress. And Scorsese can sell us that, I certainly bought it. And even though, the ending doesn't exactly come as a surprise, Scorsese makes it HURT. So yeah, it's well-crafted. Nothing really stands out EXCEPT: Ted Levine. WHO IS AWESOME. Like, his scene... man... I get so excited about that scene. It's just a perfect illustration of Ted Levine's ability to be a restrained nutcase. His character is almost completely useless (almost) in the movie, but man am I ever glad that he gets that one scene. Perhaps the movie runs a little long, as I think about it. But hey, I love a nice old fashioned nut house and I'll wander around it with everyone else as much as the next guy.

Oh no! I'm having a traumatic time with deceased wife... again...

Wild Strawberries - 1957 - Dir. Bergman

2011-06-19T11:44:00.001-07:00

Although not exactly my favorite, I always appreciated Wild Strawberries for having an incredible tone. It's optimistic, dreary, crabby, fun, and painful all at once. Any time you have an old man thinking about his life, I feel like we're on a shaky path to depression but Wild Strawberries never actually feels sad while still being filled with sadness. I had only seen it once a very long time ago and was struck with how nice it felt to watch. Borg is the perfect old man, he's a curmudgeon but one that we want to watch, one we feel for, but I never find myself pitying him. I never feel like I'm watching a sad old man surrounded by youth, lingering on his own. There's a kind of peaceful acceptance of his place. One thing that I forgot (and I'm surprised that I did) was the dream sequence in the beginning, which is pitch-perfect. I always forget that Bergman masters the disorientation of a dream. They are not chock full of strange and disturbing imagery, but we feel it nonetheless. Small details make up our unreality. Also Bork and his Nurse are ADORABLE! They set-up the movie so nicely! Visually, I find it less striking than... say most of his others. But it is also one of the earliest films of his that I've seen. It's easy to see why this is thought of as one of Bergman's best films. It's well-rounded and illustrative of most of what Bergman does best.

Any of you kids want my Wild Strawberries?

Pickpocket - 1959 - Dir. Bresson

2011-06-19T08:51:00.002-07:00

A much lauded film, for some reason I went into it expecting Italian Neo-Realism. I honestly don't know how I made that mix-up. I've never seen a Bresson film. Known for severing ties between Theater and Cinema, Pickpocket does just that. Voice-over runs throughout the film and hand movements, subtle gestures move much of the action forward. Our protagonist after all, is a pickpocket. It's hard to find a critic or auteur who does not praise the film to the skies. I struggled with it though. It runs awfully slowly and jerks around at times. The story is very jumpy. To some degree the film kind of occupied a space between cinematic and well... neo-realism, I suppose. We have a minimal story and character motivation is difficult to pierce, non-professional actors, but I don't think I ever really bought it. Voice-over makes it difficult to treat as real, so I felt like it should be treated like a story. But the story is neglected, at least, non-visual story-telling. Scenes and sequences are executed well but on a whole I feel like the film never really congeals. I also have to say I don't think I really gave a damn about the characters, which I'm sure didn't help any. I feel like it was a film where I appreciated the smaller parts rather than the whole. I can't say I was unsatisfied by any means, but I don't think the film really stirred anything in me. I can see how it was an important entry into cinema history (or at least Bresson's approach was) and certainly can see that.

Shit! Have they found me out!?

Elevator to the Gallows - 1958 - Dir. Malle

2011-06-18T10:16:00.001-07:00

Malle's first feature follows the story of a murder gone wrong when the culprit finds himself stuck in a malfunctioning elevator. The premise is a little more appealing than the film ends up being, we spend little time in said elevator as we follow around two No Good Teens who have stolen the culprit's car. I couldn't help but feel slightly bothered by that rather major aspect of the plot. Maybe it was a cultural thing, but those teens seemed to be awfully random and seemed to do things for no reason whatsoever at times. This wouldn't be a problem but they are also the prime suppliers of steam the film needed. Our pair of murderers are either wandering around or stuck in an elevator. It's unfortunate because I felt sympathy for the murderers and wanted to see how they ended up, but was inconstantly side-tracked by these teens. The movie has a great feel aided by Miles Davis' sax and Moreau wandering the City by night. Perhaps this dispels some of the tension but it also embodies some of the more memorable moments. It's not a standout film by any means, impressive for Malle's first and apparently it's quite a breakthrough in terms of Moreau and Malle's relationship but I don't know nothing about that. I do like sad sax in the city though.

Elevators seem inconvenient in France.

Rashomon - 1950 - Dir. Kurosawa

2011-06-18T10:15:00.003-07:00

I probably wouldn't have watched this movie a second time, I enjoyed it the first time many years back but didn't get too excited about it. Never really saw the point in seeing it again. But then I read an article when asked about the favorite Kurosawa, any good screenwriter worth his salt would answer "Rashomon." I don't exactly remember why that was the case, and naturally, I just don't agree with a statement of that nature. Famous for it's use of disparate viewpoints in storytelling, Rashomon follows two men telling the story of a rape/murder as told by those involved. Each version is significantly different from the one before. Naturally, it can seem a little overhyped being that that storytelling method has been employed so frequently by now. I not sure I feel any particularly strong feelings script-wise. The number of frames in the story are interesting and I would say that the "Rashomon-effect" is done with subtly, leaving us with the feeling that the futile pursuit of truth is not necessarily the pursuit of goodness. The film's cast is made up of Kurosawa regulars. Mifune is a wildly bombastic bandit... perhaps over the top considering his other roles, but he's a lot of fun to watch. And I'm always a big fan Shimura. Perhaps the best aspect of Rashomon is the lighting though. It's spotted and filtered through the trees, making for some absolutely beautiful shots. A nice visual metaphor for the theme.

Ha! Awesome...

All That Jazz - 1979 - Dir. Fosse

2011-06-14T19:05:00.003-07:00

All That Jazz was way crazier than I expected it to be. Although, I suppose I should have expected it, I only had secondhand info about Fosse. Maybe it's because of Black Swan but it seems like Aronofsky takes a lesson from the book of Fosse. Larger than life characters, wild, snappy editing, shaky realities, repetition. First of all, I've never seen Roy Schneider to a role like this and it completely blew me away. I feel like it must have been particularly hard to sell such a dirtbag-ish character but Schneider does so with ease. I'm not a huge musical guy, but Fosse is fun to watch and it works particularly well in the film. Although, I feel like the end number is way longer than it needs to be and kind of kills the mood. Easily my favorite part of the film is the editing, it's just nice and insane. The scene where almost all of the sound is cut out is just absolutely awesome. At first, it's a little hard to keep up with but eventually you manage to piece it together. The movie has it's slow points and I feel like the major criticism I have is that it's a pretty shallow film, you don't get much more out of it than the experience of the viewing. It doesn't seem like Fosse aimed much higher than that though, so I guess he did a perfectly fine job. And I had a blast watching it, so I'm not complainin'. Oh... and did I mention that Schneider kinda charmed the pants off of me?

Ben Vereen is terrified to be touching Roy Schneider's Head.

Tentacles - 1977 - Dir. Assonitis

2011-06-11T12:39:00.002-07:00

Oh, Tentacles! What could I say about Tentacles that hasn't already been said? I'm not sure exactly. An Italian-American attempt to capitalize on the Jaws money, it's a pretty poorly conceived movie. The basic idea is: If we have a bunch of people attacked while they are in the water, it will basically be the same thing. To be honest, I was pretty shocked by how poorly put together this movie is. It doesn't even try to hit on some of the same tropes that we are used to in mediocre horror movies. Do the villains get their comeuppance? No. In fact, you'd think they were in a different movie by the way they're treated. Do the heroes save the day? No. Bullshit saves the day. Stupid, stupid bullshit. I'm really surprised by how this movie is plotted. It's a series of octopus attack sequences with character who are barely introduced interspersed with scenes of actual actors doing a really shitty job of acting. I mean, fucking Henry Fonda blows ASS in this movie. John Huston is a big ball of bullshit, too. I mean, these guys are REAL ACTORS. If I can say anything positive about this movie is that the score is awesome. It's got hot 70's synth and bubble sound effects. I actually really liked it and tried (unsucessfully to download it) In light of how bad it is, I suppose it's pretty fun to watch. But man, this is a bad movie. Let there be no mistake, but it is entertaining... Sorta...

Oh no! Tentacles!

The Most Dangerous Man in America - 2009 - Dirs: Ehrlich/Goldsmith

2011-06-11T05:40:00.001-07:00

Knowing absolutely nothing about Daniel Ellsberg, I was wondering how he became the most dangerous man in America. I suppose leaking Top Secret documents revealing some of America's secrets about the Vietnam war would do that. The documentary follows Ellsberg's early life as a fine, upstanding Patriotic American, who enthusiastically and voluntarily served time in Vietnam to his eventual shift to becomes an Enemy of the State. I feel like there is a somewhat uneven storytelling issue when is comes to Ellsberg's family life, if only because it can be pretty focused on how he met his wife (which was, naturally, a great sea change for him) but then I feel like I miss chunks of it and then all of a sudden he's divorced with two children. I don't mean to be a Nosey Nancy by any means but there was a lack of narrative smoothness in that respect. The rest of the doc is smooth as smoothed butter. Oh! Except for the animated sequences, which are rare but stick out like a shitty looking sore thumb. Anyway, Ellsberg's story is particularly potent because of his 180 degree change and I feel like it's rare to get such an indepth look into the whistleblower and the whistleblowing in general. The subject matter is especially interesting these days with all the wikileaks and talks of transparency and whathaveyou. It's strong documentary except for such nitpicking and certainly leads to some pondering about our relationship with our government (Man, Nixon sure was a hostile SOB!).

DANGER!

Prince of Darkness - 1987 - Dir. Carpenter

2011-06-11T05:39:00.001-07:00

Lemme say, I just wish I looked as cool as Victor Wong in this movie. Also, I'm glad I don't look like Jameson Parker in this movie. That man is ridiculous looking. I would consistently think I was being ironic at myself. I mean, how can anyone take that guy seriously?! He's got a mustache and really nice blonde hair! He's perfect for this movie... Anyway, Prince of Darkness is just a lot of ideas that Carpenter had and he happened to make them all into a movie. Usually, things like this end up pretty badly. Just a bunch of random bullshit thrown together in a cold, calculating manner with shitty characters and bad special effects. Lucky for me, I like Carpenter's special effects. Some nice 80's practical effects, none of that computer business. Sure, I didn't give a damn about a single character, but it managed to be entertaining. And the premise is interesting enough to keep me interested. Anytime someone throws physics in with words like Anti-God, I'll bogey with them. It's not the best Carpenter movie, it's like a mid-point between his really shitty stuff and his good stuff. And you can see Alice Cooper as a Hobo. Not everything works, but there's so much thrown at you, that you're bound to enjoy some aspect of the movie. If not... maybe you're just not a Carpenter fan (I don't blame you).

AAaaahahaahha!

The Plumber - 1979 - Dir. Weir

2011-06-05T02:50:00.001-07:00

A short TV movie that ended up being a bonus feature on The Cars That Ate Paris, which I enjoyed enough to give this a shot. I think I may have enjoyed The Plumber even more, which makes sense. It's a little tighter. About a woman who is getting used to the life of a homemaker who finds herself "terrorized" by a rather overbearing Plumber. It's a little like the spiritual ancestor of The Cable Guy. Naturally, one of the more entertaining aspects of the movie is the woman struggling to draw the line of what is acceptable behavior from the Plumber, who knowingly takes advantage of her upper-class guilt and pushes the boundaries further and further, behaving increasingly manic. Where he does manage to go is awesome and the transformation of bathroom is easily one of my favorite aspects of the film. Judy Morris is especially great as the protagonist. I definitely felt for her, but at the same time, she wasn't so likable that I was rooting for her throughout. She's one of those characters who you want to see a little terrorized. Part of the fun is not just seeing what the Plumber will do next, but how long she'll manage to keep up her facade of everything being peachy keen. It's a fun movie, a simple story told extremely well with a great balance of comedy and drama.

Caaable Guy- I'm mean- PLUUUUMBER!

The Cars That Ate Paris - 1974 - Dir. Weir

2011-06-04T16:19:00.001-07:00

A movie I rented somewhat randomly, not really having a great idea as to what it was about. Throughout the movie, I kept expecting it to get a little more supernatural but it follows a town and their obsession with automobiles, to the degree that their economy seems based on outsiders getting into car accidents in some way. It's Weir's first feature and definitely feels like it. There's a definite unevenness and a strangeness. This makes it a little disjointed of a film but also quite a bit of fun to watch. It's silly and the ending most certainly hits the spot as a gang of youths terrifies the town and our protagonist gets over his fear of driving. It's got some Western/Mad Max touches that warmed my heart. The film has a series of strong moments and fun/creepy ideas and images that makes up for the weakness of the whole. The opening sequence is a good example of that. I always liked what I was watching, but often struggled to put it all together and make sense of it all. By the end, I don't think I ever successfully did, but I look back on the movie with great fondness and even as I write this, I'm remembering more things I liked about it. So maybe it's satisfying in a long-term sense. And I would certainly go for another viewing. Also Bruce Spense shows up! FUN!

You don't wanna cut this car off! LOLOLOLOLOLULZ!

Waterworld - 1995 - Dir. Reynolds

2011-05-31T03:20:00.002-07:00

Notable flop, Waterworld seemed engrained in my memory as the first movie I remember that was a joke. I'd never seen it, but it's infamy seemed to nag at me all these years and so I took advantage of it's Watch Instant status. Naturally, it's not as bad as it's built up to be. It's actually surprisingly capably done at times considering all the poo-poo that is said about it. The problem is that it's just boring as hell. I don't give a good god-damn about Kevin Costner in this movie. And he doesn't want us to care about him! Most of the other characters exhibit similar levels of apathy. And you know, I didn't care for Dennis Hopper as the villain. And I love a good Dennis Hopper. BUT EVEN HE WAS BORING! I needed him to be a little more evil... a little wackier. He just seemed crabby, disgruntled. In fact, the high point was Kim Coates playing more of a nut than he already does. But the movie just kind of trudges along (or wades...) scene after scene. There's a vague search for land but clearly that's just an excuse for Costner to bond with the kid and Tripplehorn (Both of which are in Big Love!). The bonding is about as generic as you would expect from a movie like this. It has some nice action sequences. I won't lie. And some nice post-apocalyptic sets. I wouldn't go out of my way to say you should see it, but it's a reasonable distraction.

It's WATERWOOOORRRRRRRRRRLLLLLDDDD!!!!

ABC Africa - 2001 - Dir. Kiarostami

2011-05-30T06:48:00.002-07:00

I've only seen one other Kiarostami film previous to this, it was not a doc so they don't exactly compare. It feels a little funny to critique the documentary about children dying of AIDS but I thought this could have been a little better! I guess, really my primary issue is that it looks like Kiarotstami just edited together a mildly organized vacation. The reason it looks that way is because that's what it is (sorta, he went location scouting and ended up just using that footage). This does two things, one bad, one good. On the bad, there's a kind of haphazard feel to many portions of the movie. It just FEELS like something that wasn't intended to be a movie. On the flip side, however, it also seems to convey a kind of atmosphere that perhaps a planned doc might lose. There's a spontaneity about it as if we're wandering side by side with Kiarostami. Even the portion that takes place in complete darkness contributes to this flow. He doesn't interrupt it with voice overs or heavy handedness, letting his footage speak for itself. The film is especially adept at capturing moments when it's at its best. However, I am of two minds because when occasionally it fell into moments of Kiarostami home videos, I felt like it was doing injustice to a topic that deserves far more respect.

Lucky kid... I wish I had a hoop...

A Fish Called Wanda - 1988 - Dir. Crichton

2011-05-30T04:47:00.002-07:00

I knew next to nothing about this movie apart from the fact that it was long overdue that I had seen it and that it had the same cast as Fierce Creatures. I'm a big Python fan so I think I expected the most from Cleese and Palin, but honestly, Kline fucking KILLED IT in this movie. He's so STUPID in this movie. In the best way. I was surprised he won an Oscar for his role but he deserves it. He's so incredibly manic and loud, but it is pulled off so well. I'm still smiling about the way he moves around in this movie. The rest of the cast performs admirably. Curtis playing straight (I suppose that's predictable with her being a lady). Cleese playing a goofy straight. Palin playing a nut whose efforts to kill an old woman makes up the subplot. It's not exactly groundbreaking by any means but is just a really strong comedy with a strong cast and a satisfyingly manic climax. It's just really well put together at times and is just so good at consistently raising the bar of the silliness. I'm sure it has great replay value as well. I can imagine I missed plenty of jokes in the dialogue being that it comes at you pretty quickly. If I had to toss a complaint out there, it can be a little slow and perhaps some of the silliness is dated, but the movie is more than twenty years old at this point and I think it's impressive that this movie aged as well as it has.

John Cleese has a terrible genital disorder.

Exiled - 2006 - Dir. To

2011-05-29T06:39:00.002-07:00

I had a bit of a To exploration phase in college. It wasn't long-lived. I think I went through three or so before losing interest. His movies were the epitome of confusion for me. I rarely could follow what was going on. I could rarely keep track of the action. There were a lot of spinning and smoke and crap flying everywhere. It certainly seemed nicely directed, but the movies felt like 90's action movies that were a chore to follow. Naturally, I popped this on my queue because of it's western like description and deciding to give the man a chance after so many years. Exiled still has the 90's action movie feel but seems to be a lot more simply told than To's other films. I could follow what was going on in the movie. One of the reasons for that is probably because it's not hard to guess what WILL happen in this movie. Everyone does the thing they should. Unless it was an action sequence in which case it was all spins. He seems to get close to a ballet type choreography but I feel like most of the time, it's just spinning. They're visually nice, but I have absolutely no kind of emotional reaction to those sequences. I just wait until they are over to have figured out what has gone on. So it felt like a pretty good movie to get someone started on To. It's fun, charming at times, has an equal share of good and confusingly directed action sequences, and it's easier to follow than his others despite some goofy plot divergences. Probably if you can't stomach that or don't want to, I imagine you should stop right here.

You guys wanna have a shoot out or something?

Tears of the Black Tiger - 2000 - Dir. Sasanatieng

2011-05-28T07:21:00.002-07:00

Recommended to me by a friend who knew I liked strange westerns, this certainly fits into that category. Campy and melodramatic, it follows the love of a notorious henchman and a governor's daughter. As expected, their love causes conflict in their respective circles. Bloodshed and tears ensue. I found out afterward that I was watching Miramax's heavily edited version (apparently they kinda gave the movie the shaft). Apart from a rather sudden ending, I didn't clue in on it but I think like... twenty minutes or so were cut out (I saw a 90 min release where the running time is listed at 110). It's a fun, playful movie, dipping now and then into some classy melodrama. It moves along swiftly enough, although the flashbacks feel a little tedious now and then. The action is certainly well done, exciting or silly enough in the beginning, then pleasantly violent at the end. Visually, it's very strong. The real gem in the film is the acting. Everyone treads the line between camp and silliness, never crossing over too far in either direction. My particular favorite is Mahasuan, who has an overly masculine voice and the SILLIEST fucking mustache. Silly moustaches aside, the movie generally shows a bit of restraint. Now and then it explodes (see below) but it always good enough to reign itself back in and be a real film. It's not exactly mind-blowing or spectacular, but just a very satisfying and visually appealing entry in the world of Camp.

Sunsets are FUCKED UP in Thailand.

Kairo - 2001 - Dir. Kurosawa

2011-05-27T07:41:00.002-07:00

Kiyoshi Kurosawa is one of my favorite directors, but Kairo/Circuit/Pulse always tripped me up a little. It was one of his more talked about films, kind of making a cult splash over on this shore resulting in what was probably a shitty remake. I've seen it once before and was bored. It didn't seem nearly as interesting as his other movies. I had always kind of assumed I missed something or that I was a little distracted during my viewing (which I was). So I gave it another shot, years later... this time around, my opinion is about the same. The initial premise of the Spirtual World leaking into our own through electronics as well as the theme of disconnection in our MODERN WORLD are interesting but they don't really seem to manifest in an interesting way. I'm willing to admit that many of my favorite Kurosawa films share similiar problems with Pulse. For example, the plot develops strangely, often making it difficult to keep up and causing some pacing issues. He often blends genres but it doesn't seem to work out this time around. He hops back and forth between horror and drama without really giving either the attention they might deserve, resulting in sudden horror sequences (that to be honest, didn't really get me all that much) and pretty on-the-nose dialogue as characters consider their mortality. I think to some degree it feels too much like a straight J-Horror movie. There's no real playfulness about it. Not that I require playfulness, but it helps and always felt like something he did very well when handling tough or intellectual subjects. It's clearly a Kiyoshi Kurosawa movie and in that, it's probably more interesting than your usual J-Horror fare, but I feel like it's a poor example of what he can do

AAAUUGGHH!!! C'mon man, clean up after yourself!

Bright Star - 2009 - Dir. Campion

2011-05-25T18:30:00.002-07:00

I don't know Fuck all about Keats! Or them POEMS they keep talking about. I ended up seeing this primarily because I'd seen Campion's Passionless Moments in school and it had always really stuck with me. I'd figured it was time to see her larger body of work was like. I think what appealed to me about her short film was what I liked most in Bright Star. Just short, quiet moments. Beautifully shot. And there is plenty of time allotted for those moments. Especially when they are first falling in love, which threw me for a loop. The parts I liked most were the Romantic parts. When Keats begins to die, I got pretty bored. Maybe because it becomes so clear that he will die so early on, so... I dunno... I wanted him to get on with it. Oh! But I did get a kick out of Paul Schneider as Browning. Schneider just pops up all over the place and he always does a fantastic job! Abbie Cornish does a good job of being somewhat unlikable at first and then seemingly growing on us. Ben Whishaw seems to have a somewhat easier job of being the tortured artist heartthrob. I'm not sure I really emotionally connected with the film. I would often find myself a little confused and distracted by the actions of the characters, but I was so out-of-place in this world that I think I struggled to keep up. Nonetheless, I enjoyed most of the film. It's just very visually satisfying and I feel like the plot is subdued enough to let our eyes just hang out and enjoy.

The Agony of being a Poet...

Mon Oncle - 1958 - Dir. Tati

2011-05-24T16:14:00.003-07:00

I have mixed feeling about Tati. I've only seen Playtime previous to this, but I feel like I have a general idea as to how he functions. First of all, he's a genius. Second of all, he's really hard to watch. Both Playtime and Mon Oncle have been some of the hardest comedies to watch. They are just so slow... and not particularly funny. But they are just SO FUCKING CHARMING. They just ooze charm. It looks SO GOOD too, which is important due to the lack of dialogue... and the dialogue that is there, it's not really important. It's just there is support the action, like the score would. The humor is pretty old-fashioned, Hulot is of relation to the Chaplin/Keaton characters, but he seems to lack the drive and the manic-ness of them. I think that ends up being a bit of a double-edged sword. The lack of goal and drive for our protagonist is probably the leading reason why the film drags as much as it does. I do love the general premise of that type of character being thrown into a manic, technology driven world. So I dunno, I feel like if you are in the mood to be charmed, looking for a very simple humor and feeling particularly patient: This movie will hit the spot. Visually incredible too. I especially like the shots of Hulot's building.

Always turn your fish on for important guests!

Amarcord - 1973 - Dir. Fellini

2011-05-22T16:15:00.002-07:00

Of all the "Great Masters of Film," I think I struggle with Fellini the most. I dunno. His films are very watchable and obviously they deserve some level of respect... I suppose I just don't really care all that much to see them. I'll sit and watch 'em! No problem with doing such an act, but I don't know... I just don't seek them out and aren't very emotionally involved with them. He can be a blast visually. And he makes a fine joke. And I'm pervy enough to get down with his... inclinations. I suppose, Amarcord seems to be the most charming of his films that I've seen. Anyway, it's a fun movie! It's mostly a series of light-hearted sequences with goofy townspeople. We somewhat follow a young fellow who happens to be coming of age and his various pseudo-sexual romps (The Tobacconist sequence probably being the most memorable). The movie is paced very nicely considering it's meandering nature. I feel like films like this can often too strained. There are obviously some more serious bits but they are underscored or result in humor by the end. There's also an insane hooker in it! The wikipedia entry makes me feel like there's way more to the movie than I give it credit for, which I'm sure is reasonable but wikipedia entries will do that, won't it?

Sigh... Italian People...

Severance - 2006 - Dir. Smith

2011-05-20T19:29:00.005-07:00

Severance doesn't really bite as hard as it should, or make us laugh as much as it probably should either. It's probably unfair to compare it to Shaun of the Dead so I won't do that. But apparently a lot of people do so, I guess it was at a time where British people couldn't make a violent comedy without the comparison on this side of the pond (still the case, maybe?). The movie simply doesn't do enough to break out of the horror genre, so we're left with a horror movie with an unusual amount of jokes in it. There are an appropriate amount of cringe-worthy moments and moments of tension (the bear trap stands out as a high point in that regard). It sort of falls apart by the third act but I feel like that is a pretty common problem. The movie fails to really bring anything to the table with the whole weapons manufacturing idea. It's simply a function of the story, there's a few throwaway lines here and there that might suggest that we'll go deeper but we don't. And it seems to be implied that the villains were murderous brutes anyway so... I dunno. The movie is just very ordinary. One can watch it with a minimum of effort. The story-telling is goofy, jumping from different character perspectives (we see a dream sequence of one, hallucinations of others [both to stir up interest more than anything else]). Dialogue is clever enough on the upside, I certainly wish more horror writers had Moran's ability with dialogue. It would make the genre more bearable. If anything, the acting is the only thing that stands out as a clear positive. Everyone sells their somewhat stereotyped characters well (they are pretty straight-forward horror tropes, I have no problem with this though). Particular favorite is Tim McInnery, who I just enjoyed seeing a little older after so much Black Adder.

Women who are upset in Pits.

Stephen Tobolowsky's Birthday Party - 2005 - Dir. Brinkmann

2011-05-01T09:48:00.002-07:00

I'm the kind of sucker who would watch a movie just to see what Stephen Tobolowsky is doing in it. Granted, he's probably not doing anything terribly interesting but I'm always checking in to make sure. I think Birthday Party ended up being what I expected it to be. Entertaining, sometimes a little disappointing, and probably a little more sentimental than I might have liked. Well, maybe the sentimentality isn't the problem. In fact, it should be expected that when a movie is a bout an actor telling stories on his birthday, that there is going to be sentimentality involved. I suppose maybe at times it seems a little forced or a little on the nose. Tobolosky is often calling for toasts to various people and things. And there's something that just feels a little too set-up about Stephen standing in front of a room telling lengthy stories. Cameo appearance by Anna Farris seems very bizarre since she hardly is featured but is one of the few who speaks directly to the camera in private. Sort of like showing off that Anna Farris is around. But they are entertaining stories for the most part. Maybe not as profound as he might make them seem, being that we're separated by the screen, simple story telling can often lose it's power. The tone of the movie is at it's best when Stephen is more relaxed, cooking sausages rather than when he's clowning about in front of a crowd. A nice way to kill some time and certainly needed if you like watching Tobolowsky.

Genius.

Born on the Fourth Of July - 1989 - Dir. Stone

2011-04-30T09:48:00.001-07:00

Having somewhat given up on really getting into Stone movies, I had pretty low expectations. I would say this movie met them with flying colors. I saw it primarily because it was being taken off of Watch Instantly and Tom Cruise shouting in a wheel chair had been ingrained in my memory at a young age and I was never able to shake it, so was kind of naturally interested in the movie. And yeah, Tom Cruise does an awful lot of shouting. It's pretty good shouting, I guess. No, you know what, it's great Tom Cruise shouting. Some of his best. The movie focuses Kovic's experience in Vietnam and mostly on his return home and readjustment. It's a tumultuous one to say the least. The entire Brooklyn hospital sequence is probably the most striking and memorable part of the movie. It feels like we spend as much time in the Hospital as in Vietnam and Stone seemed to make a point of making it even more horrific. Generally speaking, I felt like Stone's broad strokes effected me the way they usually did and turned me off quite a bit. I always feel yanked out of the story and any kind of emotion that I might have had. More than twenty years later, the movie has become a blue print for the returning vet movie. So I guess, it feels a little aged, the events just feel familiar. It's just become a very Hollywood Blockbuster tale at this point.

Bleeeeeuuuughhhhh...

How Much Wood Could a Woodchuck Chuck - 1976 - Dir. Herzog

2011-04-29T09:49:00.001-07:00

Sort of a mini-documentary. Or just a normal documentary, I guess. "It's forty minutes long" is what I'm saying here! Herzog is capturing the World Livestock Auctioneer Championship. There are a handful of interviews in the beginning, some shots of Pennsylvania, but I would say the majority of the film is watching auctioneers strut their stuff. So the length is really appropriate length for the film. Any longer and I might have started to pull my hair out. That isn't to say that the subject matter isn't interesting. It's fun to see how all of the auctioneers do what they do. And rather hypnotizing. The scope of the film is a little limited. Apart from the opening when the auctioneers talk about their "craft." There isn't much to the movie apart from the actual auctioneering. I would have gotten a kick out of speaking with a few more people. There's something kind of funny when people are filmed talking about a subject about which they certainly don't seem to have a lot to say. Even the auctioneers don't have much to say repeating the mantra "Practice makes perfect" and go through how they began to practice. The movie is nice in depicting the atmosphere of the Championship. There seems to be something inherently engrossing about the film to someone like me who is very distant from that world, and also somewhat amusing.

Cattle! You are all just Cattle! It makes me sick!

Robocop - 1987 - Dir. Verhoeven

2011-04-18T02:54:00.001-07:00

I love this movie. I've seen it a small handful of times, but I enjoy myself during every viewing. It's a ton of fun to watch. You can chuckle at it without being dismissive of it and losing interest because of the silliness. It's just silly enough. It has a really nice balance of action and sci-fi elements (neither overwhelms the other). There are a ton of my beloved 80's Practical Effects (is that what they're called?). Easily the most memorable of which would be what happens to Emile after his run in with the Toxic Waste, which is also probably one of my favorite sequences in the film. A host of great/campy actors. Miguel Ferrer and Kurtwood Smith are just a portion of the ridiculous cast of villains but to me they stand out as THE TOPS! Both of which are so slimy and over-the-top. I also get a kick out of Ray Wise's bug-eye and forehead. It's one of those nice movies where everyone seems to be on the same page which helps it maintain the satirical, goofy tone. Peter Weller does a great job being a Robotic Cop. Naturally, something like that could look pretty silly but the thought never even crosses my mind. The script doesn't exactly pull any surprises as far as story telling in concerned but it's just a good example of a well-crafted sci-fi blockbuster. It's very indicative of the time.

Peter Weller. Actor.

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus - 2009 - Dir. Gilliam

2011-04-16T08:47:00.001-07:00

MAN! Gilliam is nuts. I believe I've said before that I'm a huge fan of his. I was actually kind of nervous to watch this one so I passed up the chance to see it in theaters. It looked a little bit like Brothers Grimm Redux, yeah, I'm still reeling from that one, I guess. It's not Brothers Grimm Redux though... It seems to to leap into the area pretty frequently, but never gets too out of control. To some degree, I find it really refreshing to watch a movie that doesn't really bother with typical storytelling. It's more like a fairy tale. A very scatterbrained fairy tale (I get the impression that some things were edited for time making it more scatterbrained). At the same time, it also illustrates why certain storytelling elements have become so frequently replicated. Gilliam, however, seems more interested in visuals and images. And the movie is chock full of them. Parnassus' stage is friggin' incredible. I was very hesitant with the CGI, Gilliam always seems to work much better with practical effects, but in the end, I think it worked in the context of the film. I was really impressed with the acting in the film. Andrew Garfield especially, after seeing him in Social Network, doing a completely different kind of role. Ledger's performance is a reminder as to how damned good he could be. The Depp/Law/Farrell stand-ins are a little surreal (even in the context of the movie, but they also just look a little creepy) but they work. The movie can be a struggle to keep up with at times but it's a really satisfying modern fairy tale and a breath of fresh air these days. It's not perfect, but it's fun enough to warrant repeat viewings.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh AHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!

Tron (again!) - 1982 - Dir. Lisberger

2011-04-08T03:15:00.004-07:00

It was sort of an accidental re-viewing of Tron. I would certainly say I didn't seek it out or really consider watching it again. Not that I'm trying to trash Tron exactly, I guess, I just didn't feel very enthusiastic about watching it a second time, so recently especially. It's still pretty fun and goofy and obviously created quite a world. I still feel like the entire concept ends up being a little wasted in the film and is treated more like an AWESOME premise rather than a movie with a full world behind it. I realize I must sound spoiler because Tron: Legacy does that and I still wasn't happy. I think I was a bit more aware of how thoroughly silly the movie could be. Corny sci-fi one liners were way more prominent this time around. Although, it's still a very imaginative movie and understand that the nostalgia factor plays in a great deal to many people's feelings to it. The movie is incredibly dated. It could have played on MST3K in a heartbeat. I guess the movie works best as a snap shot of American Sci-Fi movies. I feel like there is a lot of forgiveness involved and constantly framing it in the period it came from when watching this movie nowadays, unless you can see yourself as a pre-teen having your mind blown at the theater, in which case, I'm sure it's a blast.

I really don't want to make an Ultimate Frisbee joke... :(

The Jerk - 1979 - Dir. Reiner

2011-04-05T03:09:00.003-07:00

Haven't seen this movie since my high school days and to be honest couldn't remember much about it until someone quoted it and the memories came flooding in. I was a huge fan when I first saw this! And I still am! Steve Martin's first starring role as a supremely naive man raised by a poor black family who goes out into the world when he realizes that he's not their blood child. That and he discovers the pleasures of white people music. It's a fun movie. My especially favorite part would be the gas station section of the film, which is kind of a shame because it's so early on in the film. The movie never gets AS funny as that section. It certainly has its laughs throughout. It's not as seriously plotted as many comedies, he becomes rich, then loses it. Generally, not due to any actual action he takes. But that's about as far as we go. So it's like a series of goofy scenes dragging a story along behind it. Certainly we're never really asked to take the plot seriously or do we ever worry that things won't work out for him in the end. I suppose that feels like a weakness sometimes, but the movie is just too silly for serious story-telling, so it feels right that it treats the story as it does. It's a great early Steve Martin role especially to see him in his prime doing something other than the sarcastic prick roles that he seemed to be typecast in frequently afterward.

That's what I wear when I go to the bathroom!

Black Dynamite - 2009 - Dir. Sanders

2011-04-04T02:45:00.001-07:00

This film was repeatedly recommended to me by a friend. It seemed like a good idea but I just repeatedly put it off. MAN! I can't tell you how surprised I was by this flick. It reinvigorated my faith in the Parody genre. After years and years of duds, this is one that actually got me laughing out loud. In fact, I could say I laughed more at this than I have at anything in a long while. The tone and attitude of the film is perhaps what helps it the most. Rather than getting overly silly, it sticks to it's Badass image. It saves all of the over-the-top wackiness until the very end, successfully topping itself. It felt like it was dragging a little at first, because it very distinctly shifts gears around the third act. So perhaps it's not the smoothest transition to the wackiness that it could be. But to be honest the third act works so well that the transition to it is a minor complaint. Naturally, it has all the classic Blaxploitation stereotypes of boom mikes in frame and shitty acting but the movie also maintains the style of a classic Blaxploitation. It's just a parody that really knows it subject and knows how to pace a story. Michael Jai White plays a terrifically badass protagonist, all the while being able to make sure there's a vein of inept acting running throughout. Excellent choice if you're in a goofy mood!

Yeah!

Capitalism: A Love Story - 2009 - Dir. Moore

2011-04-03T17:36:00.002-07:00

I haven't seen a Michael Moore movie since Bowling for Columbine came out. I just find him awfully smug... or I dunno. I generally don't disagree with him. But often times, I'd rather just read an article. I don't need his jokey bits and "clever" illustration (we know he's not getting into the wall street offices, he knows he's not getting in, no one would expect that he be let in, so why bother?!). I gave in to this one because I do love a good anti-capitalism rant. Probably my previous experience with these kinds of movies, made this a bit less impact-full. Maybe I'm just too cynical but generally my reaction kept being "Yeah, and?" It's a little like The Corporation-lite, with schmaltzy tragedy thrown in. I dunno, there were so many sad crying people in this movie. I felt like I wanted more facts, more dates, more damning evidence. Of course, all this awful shit will make families upset, seeing it just makes me feel like Moore is trying to pull at my heart-strings rather than actually try and speak to me intellectually. I mean, it's Moore so I guess this IS more for mainstream consumption. For people who'd rather watch a movie than read. On a lesser note, Michael Moore looks like an exhausted old woman in this movie. It looked like any minute he was going to melt into the ground. I was always unhappy when he was onscreen... which was a lot.

That's guy's hand is HUGE! :o

Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take One - 1968 - Dir. Greaves

2011-04-03T17:33:00.002-07:00

What I think is especially neat about this movie is that as you watch it, it does seem to be shaped as the movie goes on. Rather then there being a strong premise and we follow closely to that, there does seem to be an organic nature to the way the movie proceeds. Naturally, Greaves had an idea as to what he wanted to happen and seemed to plan ahead of time to a degree. And editing in the end shapes the story more than anything else. But the movie does kind of have an organic narrative that develops within this very free-form and experimental doc. It's also a pretty humorous movie. Greaves is entertaining to watch direct while trying to answer questions about what all these people are really doing in the film. While the crew ponder the meaning of the film, often times the pretentious language and high-handed explanations that occur are pretty amusing on their own. It's also just interesting to watch because of the way everyone is reacting as they are filmed. Greaves talks about how the Uncertainty Principle inspired the film and it is pretty clear. People's behavior DO change obviously when they are filmed, reality TV has long been proof of that, but it's neat to this late sixties take on it. The movie can be a little slow, even though it's under ninety minutes. But I feel like there's enough going on that I would definitely rewatch.

The Joys of Film making!

F for Fake - 1974 - Dir. Welles

2011-04-02T17:37:00.002-07:00

I had no concept about what this movie was going to be like before watching it. So I was pretty surprised to say the least, especially coming from Orson Welles. It seems like Kane overshadows this later work, which I suppose makes sense, especially since Kane is way more accessible. It's Welles' examination of authenticity or FAKERY and naturally, he goes about it in a bit of a sneaky way. The movie is incredibly playful which also makes it unlike a normal documentary. Ostensibly, it is about Elmyr de Hory, a professional art forger, and his biographer Clifford Irving, who has been declared a hoax after writing a fake biography about the last days of Howard Hughes. There are a few deviations from this basic premise and it's a little tough to follow at first, Welles drops a lot of information on us at once. And he also has some pretty intense editing to begin with, which is probably my favorite part. It's like a precursor to the wild editing we're so used to seeing these days, but all seventies. It's pretty neat to see that Welles had a hand in it back in the day. As if his name wasn't already big enough! I have to say that I struggled to keep up with some chunks of the movie. Especially when it involved Hughes and Irving's relationship. I'm not well versed in what went on there, Welles mostly catches us up but he takes his time doing so, making some of the movie a bit of a struggle. Welles is charming enough to keep us going though, unless you happen to think of him as an unwatchable, pretentious douche later on in life... in which case, this movie might be a bit of struggle. He is ALL OVER THIS MOVIE. Like a plate of french fries. I don't hold that opinion, so I say: A great doc!

Orson is freaking ooouuuutttt!

Breathless - 1960 - Dir. Godard

2011-04-02T17:36:00.001-07:00

I saw this back in my college days with Shoot the Piano Player and I got down with STPP way more. I saw this as not nearly as much fun as his other work and actually pretty dull most of the time. I understand it's place in cinema history and I think it fully deserves it's place. But I'd rather watch Weekend. That's just the kind of fella I am. But you know, I get it. It's his first movie, he's not gonna take the kind of risks he would later on, but I feel like without his visual flair and his editing lessened (comparatively), we're left with a story about a jerk who acts like a film-noir jerk and isn't able to convince a woman he loves her. I just don't really get into Michel. Godard doesn't normally have all that sympathetic characters by any means... or really strong characters at all, but usually there's so much other ridiculousness going on that I don't really care or notice. In Breathless, we're stuck with this schmuck, we get some nice jump cuts but that doesn't make up for it! I still think that the end sequence is bitchin' though. It stuck out most of all in my memory from my first viewing. So I'm done badmouthing this landmark type movie. Probably if I had to recommend any starter Godard, this would be the one... Although I suppose that would be kind of deceptive wouldn't it...

Seven!

Late Spring - 1949 - Dir. Ozu

2011-04-02T10:11:00.002-07:00

It's a pretty run of the mill Ozu film. Like with many of his other films, I always get the impression that I've seen it before. They're always very satisfying to watch, calming almost, so I don't think I really mind familiar feelings. I guess, it's tricky because the topics of his films often overlap. Late Spring is about a daughter who is perfectly happy caring for her widowed father and planning on becoming an Old Maid in a sense. Her Father, wants her to get hitched, even though it'll leave him on his own. It features my two favorite Ozu actors, Setsuko Hara and Chishu Ryu. It felt like it leaned more towards the serious spectrum of his films. That's not to say he goes around making comedies or anything but they can be light-hearted sometimes. This one, not so much. Anyway, I'm always impressed as to how he can make the simplest stories so watchable... and enjoyable. I rarely find myself impatiently looking at the running time. I feel like he set his pace very clearly, very deliberately. So there's little confusion as to the speed in which the movie will go. It's a good film. Solid Ozu. There's certainly better ones out there but if you have a thirst for Ozu, this will certainly quench it... that or Gatorade (The joke is that Gatorade will make you feel like you just watched mid-twentieth century Japanese cinema).

Setsuko Hara friggin LOVES making that expression.