HALLOWEEN II

Halloween II (1981) dir. Rick Rosenthal
Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasance, Charles Cyphers, Lance Guest

***1/2

“I shot him six times, I shot him in the heart!”

John Carpenter’s “Halloween” is a great film, but rarely is its sequel “Halloween II” ever discussed with any reverence. Perhaps because it’s not directed by Carpenter which may knock it down on the prestige level, or perhaps its lumped in with the half dozen sequels which came after it. But discussing “Halloween” without “Halloween II” is like discussing “The Godfather” without “The Godfather Part II”. “Halloween II” is a superb second half of the story, a natural extension from the first film, adding more chilling horror and revealing more of the story which make both films all the more satisfying.

The night of Oct 31, 1978 isn’t over in Haddenfield. “Halloween II” not only links up with Part I, it overlaps the last five minutes of the film. Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) the quiet teenage babysitter has just fought off the Shatner-masked Michael Myers and we see Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasance) shoot Myers six times only to discover his body has disappeared into the night. While Dr. Loomis and the cops comb the streets of Haddenfield and Laurie is taken to the hospital for treatment, Myer regroups and continues his rampage. Myers is a different killer though, he’s not as random as we thought. When he steals a knife from a neighbour’s kitchen he curiously leaves her alive. His murderings seem motivated and by necessity. A series of discoveries by Loomis will reveal why.

Eventually Myers makes it to the hospital where the terror is ramped up to peaking levels. Rosenthal constructs a masterful sequence of terror in the clausterphobic confines of the hospital. One by one the skeleton crew staff bite the dust in even more gruesome fashion. Myers creatively kills with a syringe, a scalpel, his bare hands, and even a scolding hot water tub. When Myers finds Laurie, it becomes a one on one chase through the hospital with Myers pursuing with a calm but relentless Terminator-like assault. Loomis eventually makes the connection between Laurie and Myers, and arrives at the hospital just in time to save the day,

“Halloween II” feels like a real and necessary sequel because it expands on plot threads from the first film and provides the satisfactory closure missing in the first film. Some may say the randomness of Myers’ killing or the open-ended ending made it scarier. I disagree. Knowing Myers’ motivation and the patient 15-year wait before his premeditative attack is even more chilling than the randomness.

Rosenthal smartly mimics John Carpenter’s style to make his film fit nicely alongside the first. Carpenter wasn’t so far removed from the project either to make it completely Rosenthal’s film. Original creators Carpenter and Debra Hill co-produced and co-wrote the sequel and Carpenter composed the score again. And so, with the same actors, it’s all but Carpenter’s film. In fact, in interviews Carpenter’s said he should have directed the sequel, but his career was blossoming too fast at that point.

Rosenthal is no slouch though. The hospital sequence is as good and scary as anything in the first film and arguably the film reaches even higher levels of dramatic intensity. The creepiest shot in the film is Myers slowly walking down the steps, scalpel in hand, in time with the beat of the music.

The film is book ended with a counterpoint song, “Mister Sandman”, which reinforces the theme of Strode’s living nightmare which will continue to haunt her the rest of her life. And Loomis’s heroism at the end is the correct way to close out his character. Throughout his time in the mental hospital, Myers’ battle was with Loomis – a battle which Loomis lost, and for which he needed redemption. “Halloween II” is as much about Loomis as it is about Strode or Myers. Enjoy.

Buy it here: Halloween II

Read More...

Summary only...

TWIN PEAKS PILOT

Twin Peaks Pilot (1990) dir. David Lynch
Starring: Kyle Maclachlan, Michael Ontkean, Ray Wise, Richard Beymer, Lara Flynn Boyle, Sherilyn Fenn

***1/2

“Diane... another ‘Twin Peaks’ box set arrives in stores. I thought all episodes were available already. Wasn’t the second season just released earlier this year? Oh, I just noticed this Gold Box includes the previously unreleased pilots. I must check it out.“

Ten years before the birth of edgy serialized watercooler television like “the Sopranos” there was “Twin Peaks” - a trailblazing short-lived event TV series from surreal experimentalist David Lynch. Family-friendly network television and David Lynch seemed an unlikely match, but for half a season they were the real ‘must-see TV’. The pilot which aired April 8, 1990, is still one of the finest television moments in my 32 years of boob-tubing.

The series opens with a credit sequence not unlike his 1986 film “Blue Velvet” – serene nature shots of an idyllic northwestern lumber town named “Twin Peaks”. Angelo Badalamenti’s swooning score washing over you like a gentle stream. The opening moments catch Pete Martell (Lynch regular Jack Nance) finding a dead body wrapped in plastic at the side of a river. The girl is revealed to be local beauty queen Laura Palmer. The awkshucks group of inexperienced authorities led by Sheriff Harry S. Truman call in the FBI to help with the investigation. Arriving in town praising the local coffee and cherry pie is the goofy Dale Cooper (Kyle Maclachlan). Goofy as he is, Special Agent Cooper is as thorough as he is peculiar and his attention to detail becomes apparent once he begins the investigation.

The townsfolk are either innocent benevolent naves or scheming and conniving backstabbers. The numerous subplots are as steamy and potboiled as any soap opera. There’s Benjamin Horne (Richard Beymer) the local landowner looking to takeover the local saw mill. There’s Ray Wise and his wife Sarah who are grief-striken beyond belief over Laura’s death. There’s the high school cliques, all of whom are cheating on their girlfriends or boyfriends with someone else in the town. Teasing forensic clues are dropped on us, such as a half a heart necklace, a hidden diary, a video tape of Laura recorded by an unknown lover, a small letter R torn from a newspaper and placed under Laura’s finger nail. Since it’s a pilot not much is resolved except to throw the puzzle pieces on the table for us to piece together over the course of the show.

Lynch is a master of counterpoint and mixing tones. And like “Blue Velvet” he and co-creator Mark Frost move effortlessly between absurd humour to potent melodrama to uncompromising horror. In the pilot humour and horror are mixed in with a traditional procedural set up giving us the evidence, witnesses, and list of suspects. Lynch also shows us how the news of Laura’s death travels through the community. Two scenes stand out –Leland on the phone with his wife when Sheriff Truman gives him the bad news; and Donna Hayward and James Hurley’s fearful glances with each other in class.

The characters make the show a standout. Some are caricatures such as bad-girl-in-a-school-uniform Audrey Horne, some are extreme wackos such as Ed Hurley’s drapes-obsessed wife, but only a few are actually grounded in reality. And in many ways Sheriff Truman is the anchor. His character is our point of view in this world – he remains calm and straight throughout the entire series. Dale Cooper, though an outsider of the town is as idiosyncratic as the log lady.

As the series moves on, weaknesses become evident after the first 7 episodes, which is where the open-ended American television format fails. Lynch is best at creating moments or individual scenes, and so the series amplifies glaringly Lynch’s limitations with closure. The series should have been completed after 6 or 8 episodes, instead its popularity likely delayed the reveal of Laura’s killer till the second season.

No pun intended, the series peaks somewhere in the first few episodes of Season 2. After Laura Palmer’s murderer is discovered, all parties involved including Lynch himself admits the series went downhill and rightfully got cancelled. But within the sloppy second season there are moments of brilliance. And, really, has there ever been a scarier bad guy in television (or even the movies) than “Bob”?

The influence of Lynch and Frost’s skewed world of absurd characters is seen in many of today’s shows such as “Desperate Housewives”, “Weeds”, and “Ugly Betty”. But this is 2007 and it took over 15 years for television to catch up to this giant leap forward. Enjoy.

Buy it here: Twin Peaks - The Definitive Gold Box Edition (The Complete Series)

Read More...

Summary only...

TALK TO ME

Talk to Me (2007) dir. Kasi Lemmons
Starring: Don Cheadle, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Martin Sheen

**

“Talk to Me” intrigued me as worthy viewing based on the ten-year old reputation of “Eve’s Bayou”. A film which I haven’t seen, but will always remember from Roger Ebert’s glowing 1997 review. Unfortunately Lemmon’s latest film about 60’s/70’s controversial African-American DJ Petey Greene is a typical middle of the road biopic, an HBO MOW at best pushed to the theatres based on the star power of Don Cheadle.

Petey Greene (Don Cheadle) was a thug serving time in a Washington D.C. prison when he caught the attention of local radio programming director Dewey Hughes (Chiwetel Ejiofor). Dewey first hears Greene’s profane radio act over the PA system while visiting a friend in prison. Dewey is casually introduced to Greene, who is as loud and obnoxious in person as he is over the air. After Greene gets out, he pursues Dewey to put him on the radio with steadfast determination. Everyone in the station is turned off by the in-your-face persona of Greene, but Dewey sees a connection with the black audience that is lacking with his current programming. Dewey takes a chance and puts him on the air. And the rest is obscure radio history.

Dewey and Greene’s career spans the civil rights period in the late 60’s and early 70’s. But as Greene becomes more popular Dewey’s dreams of success become larger and larger. Dewey becomes Greene’s manager and he moves his act into stand-up, TV talk shows and eventually the peak of entertainment, “The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson”. The success takes a toll on their partnership and they eventually split up, only to reform years later for one last gig.

Essentially the film is about the relationship between two opposite personalities. Greene, the talented showman with an alcohol problem, and Dewey, his conservative manager who harnesses and guides Greene’s talent into areas he was never meant to go. When they make it to “The Tonight Show” Greene’s act has become too diluted he feels like a sell out. At this point in his career Greene realizes there’s more to life than success - ‘keeping it real’ splits the team apart.

Basically I’ve just recycled every celebrity team’s rise and fall formula. Most recently it was “Dreamgirls”, but “Talk to Me” does nothing to alter the formula. We never get the sense of Greene’s talent for talk either. By following the formula the film has to showcase the talent of artist – like the tremendous musical sequences in “Dreamgirls”. Unfortunately Cheadle, though a great actor, doesn’t show us Greene’s true magnetism. Compare this performance to the portrayal of Barry Champlain, the doomed shock jock in Oliver Stone’s “Talk Radio”. Similar subject matter, elevated above formula by Eric Bogosian’s commanding performance. If Bogosian never acted again, he could have been a successful radio DJ. Cheadle never embodies Greene, he just acts like him.

“Talk to Me” is also filled with too many silly and contrived scenes that lesson the power of the story. The usual hard-ass near heart attack role by Martin Sheen as the station manager and Greene’s bombastic bimbo girlfriend make for lame slapstick comedy.

Here’s footage of the real Petey Greene:

Read More...

Summary only...

THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME

The Most Dangerous Game (1932) dir. Irving Pichel, Ernest B. Schoedsack
Starring: Joel McRae, Fay Wray,

***

This largely unheralded film from the early 30’s is essential viewing for cinephiles. “The Most Dangerous” is an adventure film about a man and woman who get shipwrecked on a remote Pacific Island inhabited by a maniacal Russian aristocrat who hunts human victims for sport. A myriad of remakes, copycats and borrowers have reduced the power and suspense of the film, but when put into proper context, it’s still is a highly enjoyable film. And at the very least you can see the seeds of the next film for this filmmaking team – “King Kong”.

Like “King Kong”, director Schoedsack opens his film on a boat, traveling the treacherous Pacific Ocean. A group of game hunters are returning home from a hunting trip, when they are lured off their path to an uncharted island. They hit a reef and sink their boat. The only survivor is Bob Rainsford. Bob is given shelter by Russian emigrant Count Zaroff and his Rasputin-like henchman, Ivan. Zaroff’s false hospitality is peppered with a sinister ulterior motive. Along with Bob are two other guests from another misguided expedition – siblings Eve and Martin Trowbridge (Fay Wray and Robert Armstrong).

When Martin disappears, Bob and Eve learn about Zaroff’s sick hobby – hunting real humans in the wild for sport. Bob and Eve are given weapons and released into the island jungle with a head start before Zaroff and his hunting party tracks them down. But Bob is no ordinary game. He proves a worthy adversary as he creates a series of traps that make Zaroff’s hunt the most dangerous yet. The hunter-vs.-hunter battle ends with a hand to hand fight in his castle before Bob and Eve finally win their freedom.

Before Eve and Bob are released and the adventure begins we are subject to a largely painful set up consisting of the most unsubtle metaphors of Social Darwinism. Before reaching the island Rainford’s proclaims his superiority saying, “This world's divided into two kinds of people: the hunter and the hunted. Luckily I'm the hunter. Nothing can change that.” A tad on the nose. Things get interesting once the scene-chewing Count Zaloff enters the picture. He is a wonderful noble bad-guy with a sense of gamesmanship and honour (imagine Hans Gruber meets Mr. Burns). My favourite moment is the crash dolly down the staircase when he Martin says to Eve “Don't worry. The Count will take care of me.” The camera ends its sweeping move with Zaloff’s line “Indeed I shall.”

Once the adventure begins on the island (approximately the midway point), we get to see Schoedsack’s skills at ‘in-the-wild’ filmmaking. Many of the jungle sets were reused for “King Kong” and the special matting photography gives us an utterly believable lifelike environment. The chase continues for most of the second half and is well executed and edited as an early classic Hollywood action sequence.

Some other interesting significances of the film is the presence of a young David O Selznick as producer, Max Steiner who composes one of his earliest and best music scores (and uncredited as well!). And the film has key significance in David Fincher’s 2007 film, “Zodiac”. “The Most Dangerous Game” figures prominently as a piece of evidence in the case against the famed 70’s serial killer. Watching “Zodiac” having seen “The Most Dangerous Game” actually makes the film more enjoyable.

For good and bad, “The Most Dangerous Game” is a public domain film, which means anyone with access to a professional quality tape anyone can create a DVD and sell the film. It appears Legend Films has done just this. The disc is marketed as the first release of the colourized version, which of course, is blasphemy to cinephiles, but thankfully they also include the original black and white version. Unfortunately both versions are not as crisp as the Criterion version released several years ago and the atrocious DVD menu screen which looks like a video game is an insult to the film. The colourization was supervised by Ray Harryhausen, which doesn’t add enough credibility to make it right. The interviews with Harryhausen and a couple other scholars add a few good insights, but I recommend watching the Peter Jackson documentary on Universal box set of the 1933 “King Kong” film for a better analysis of the film.

But these are all peripheries for film buffs. The film and content prevail as an important benchmark of cinema. Enjoy.

Buy it here: The Most Dangerous Game

Mind the French music accompanying this clip, it’s all I could find:

Read More...

Summary only...

THE COMPANY

The Company (2007) dir. Mikael Salomon
Starring: Chris O’Donnell, Alfred Molina, Michael Keaton, Alessandro Nivolo

****

“The Company” is a 3-part TV mini-series which aired on TNT this summer. It’s a shame it only aired on the lower-tier cable channel and not a prestige-caster like HBO or Showtime, because with some heavy hitters behind the film (Ridley and Tony Scott) we are guaranteed an exciting, suspenseful epic event. Indeed, it’s arguably the definitive film about the CIA – everything “The Good Shepherd” wasn’t.

The film is divided into three clearly-defined chapters spanning 1945 – 1992. Part 1 introduces three key figures – Jack McAuliffe, our hero (Chris O’Donnell), Leo Kritsky (Alessandro Nivolo) and Yevgeny Tsipin (Rory Cochrane). They are all friends and grads from Yale, which, as we know from history books and films was the recruiting ground for the Company (the CIA’s nickname). Jack and Leo get recruited, and Yevgeny moves back to Russia, where he is courted into the KGB. The first mission for Jack is bringing back a Communist defector from East Berlin. Jack is taught the ropes by old school mentor ‘The Sorcerer’ Harvey Torritti (another fine Alfred Molina performance). When the defection is compromised it exposes a mole with the upper ranks of the Company. Throughout the series, this mole will become central in all of Jack’s dealings.

In Part 2, Jack is abroad participating in the foreign affairs missions in Hungary, Guatemala and Cuba and we get to see played out the Hungarian Revolution, and the Bay of Pigs invasion. In Part 3, the mole comes back into the picture when another defector teases Jack with some tempting information. Michael Keaton, who plays director James Angleton, a supremely analytical agent, goes after the mole with needle and thread precision. But when the mole is revealed to be someone close to Jack, hearts and minds come into conflict. The film finishes off with the fall of Communism, when the “great game” as everyone describes it comes to an end. We are also given a revelatory piece of information about a Soviet connection to a near disastrous event in 1987. I’ll let you watch to discover this clever real-life connection.

It must have been fun and frustrating to be a CIA agent - highly intelligent people going head-to-head in a game of global chess. Nothing is ever as it seems, and if the agents get to a piece of information too easily it’s usually dismissed as disinformation. This is the main battle for Jack and Torritti, determined disinformation from real information. It’s a conundrum that can rarely be solved, because facts, evidence and information can so easily be planted and manipulated.

Writer Ken Logan (“Blackhawk Down”) manages to dramatize these complex mind games with clarity. He keeps the characters to a minimum, and so rarely are we confused. He also gives us peaks and valleys in the narrative – which “The Good Shepherd” lacked. Part 2 is essentially an action film with Chris O’Donnell driving tanks in Hungary and firing guns in Cuba. Logan is all business as well, leaving out any and all relationship plotlines. Excised are the requisite scenes of domestic life and internal family conflict. And there’s no miscasting of Angelina Jolie as an innocent housewife either. As mentioned, it’s the “24” model of espionage - A to B to C storytelling with very little fat.

The series is directed by Mikael Salomon – known for his DOP work in the 80’s and 90’s but his superb directorial work on “Band of Brothers”. He manages to get some surprisingly large-scale production value within television’s usual low budget. Having cut his teeth with lower budget action on “Band of Brothers” Salomon provides the same level of tense action here. And in the Bay of Pigs sequences, he actually pulls off a surprising epic landing sequence complete with wide establishing shots of the beaches with planes flying overhead, battleships in the water and hundreds of men on the beach. It was a pleasant surprise to see this escalation in storytelling after the largely low-key whispering of Part 1.

The film is on DVD, and believe me, it’s a must see. For those of you who really wanted to like “The Good Shepherd” but could only sleep through it’s pedantic pace, the real film about the CIA has finally arrived. Enjoy.

Buy it here: The Company

Read More...

Summary only...

KAW

Kaw (2007) dir. Sheldon Wilson
Starring: Sean Patrick Flannery, Kristin Booth, Stephen McHattie, Rod Taylor

*
Guest Review by Greg Klymkiw

Have you ever seen a motion picture that reminds you of how little you know? Have you ever seen a motion picture that teaches you things you never knew? Have you ever seen a motion picture that makes you glad you never watch television?

“Kaw” is just such a motion picture.

Recently released on DVD, “Kaw” proved to be quite a revelation to this viewer.

First of all, I wondered why I had never heard of it before since I see virtually every genre picture that is released in the movie theatres. How could I have possibly missed a motion picture about a sleepy farming community that is under attack by flocks of crows afflicted with mad-cow disease? This sounds like the sort of picture I live for.

Crows? Afflicted with mad-cow disease? Pecking people to death?

Let me be first in line, please.

Alas, such a motion picture did not open theatrically, and I was forced to experience it for the first time on DVD.

Why, you ask? Well, as it turns out, “Kaw” is not one of your run-of-the-mill straight-to-video feature films. It apparently premiered on the Sci-Fi Channel. As I live in Canada, I do not get the Sci-Fi Channel. Even if Canada did get the Sci-Fi Channel (or if this movie aired on Canada’s own Space or TMN), I still would not have seen it since I have not had cable television since 1983 and have no intention of getting it ever again.

In any event, the first thing I learned is that people still make movies for television.

Isn’t that interesting?

The second thing I learned was that Sean Patrick Flannery who plays the stalwart small-town cop attempting to save his fellow townsfolk from the mad-cow-afflicted crows has made many movies for television. This explains why he was not familiar to me. The same thing happened a few years ago when I was watching the pallid American remake of “The Grudge” and wondered why I could not figure who the mousy, uncharismatic leading lady was. I eventually found out she was the star of the TV show “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” which I had never seen before because I do not watch television and I had managed to successfully repress her appearances in the pathetic theatrical motion pictures she actually was in.

The third thing I learned was that I should be proud of my Canadian nationality since it appears that “Kaw” was made in Canada with many Canadian actors, some Canadian producers and with money from the Canadian government. For some reason I saw an American flag flying in the small town the movie is set in, but that’s okay because I soon realized it was probably some small town in Southern Ontario and that it looked a lot prettier than many small towns in America.

The fourth thing I learned from watching this movie was that Rod Taylor is still alive and he’s a terrific actor who deserves much better than being wasted in thankless roles like this one, a kindly small-town doctor. Taylor, as many of you know, was a big star in the late 50s and early 60s and most notably was the square-jawed leading man in Alfred Hitchcock’s “The Birds”, a film that “Kaw” pathetically attempts to homage.

“Kaw” is not terrible. If you had absolutely nothing to do, you probably would not feel like you wasted 90 minutes. It clips along reasonably, it does feature Rod Taylor (and the eminently watchable character actor Stephen McHattie), it is not without some decent special effects and it is relatively bereft of awful dialogue. This, however, is what makes a movie like this even more depressing. I actually kept wishing it would be awful, so at least it would have been fun. Instead, it was straight-ahead, humourless and maddeningly competent.

This sort of competence does not necessarily make for entertaining movies. I mean, come on, this is about crows with mad-cow disease for God’s sake! Can we lighten up a little folks and have some fun?

Watching this movie kept me thinking about some of the fabulous creature features of the 70s and 80s from people like Corman, Dante and (I kid you not) John Sayles. Movies like “Piranha” and “Alligator” had a delightful trash sensibility and tons of humour mixed with the gore. I even thought about movies like “Frogs” and “Grizzly” which also had pulp sensibilities. I thought about “The Birds” and “Jaws” – both “A” pictures to be sure, but full of virtuosity and humour.

And then I thought about “Kaw” and the humourless competence that rules every frame.

The DVD release of “Kaw” features a variety of extra features, but the best one is an interview with Rod Taylor who is gracious, funny and full of wonderful anecdotes. Alas, he does get to talk about “Kaw” and mentions that he took the role because, unlike Hitchcock’s “The Birds”, the mad peckers had a reason for killing people. My heart sank. He was too gracious to admit he took this piece of garbage for the paycheque and came up with some lame excuse. Rod, darling, one of many things that makes “The Birds” so creepy, so chilling and so scary is that there is NO reason for the birds to kill.

“Kaw” gives us a moronic reason. Some repressed Hutterites with fake beards do not report that their livestock have mad-cow disease and the crows start to feast on the disease-ridden bodies, which, in turn, drive them insane.

Now if you’re going to have a mind-numbingly stupid reason behind the carnage, please have the good taste to make a pulpy, funny, completely whacked movie instead of something that is merely competent.

The fifth and most important thing I learned watching “Kaw” was this – if “Kaw” is the sort of thing made for television on a regular basis, I’m sure glad I don’t have cable.

Buy "Kaw" here:Kaw

Buy "The Birds" Here: The Birds (Collector's Edition)

Read More...

Summary only...

TORONTO AFTER DARK FESTIVAL #3: Wolfhound

Wolfhound (2007) dir. Nikolai Lebedev
Starring: Aleksandr Bukharov, Oksana Akinshina, Aleksandr Domogarov, Igor Petrenko

***1/2

For me, no one does melodrama better than the Russians. Perhaps it’s the sheer size and uncompromising environment that brings out the heart and soul of the people from their art. Though it’s no “War and Peace”, or “Doctor Zhivago” “Wolfhound” – a large scale sword and sorcery fantasy is in the tradition of these “big” stories. Billed as “Russia’s” “Lord of the Rings”, it comes close to being one of the best in the genre of medieval fantasy.

Having just seen and given two stars to Uwe Boll’s take on sword and sorcery – “In the Name of the King” with Jason Statham, “Wolfhound” towers over that film and stomps on it like a blow from a blunt mace to the head. Speaking of blunt maces to the head, the film owes a lot to “Braveheart”. The opening sequence establishes the lead character’s journey, when we see in flashback our hero’s innocent farming parents brutally murdered right in front of the child’s young eyes. Like William Wallace after his new bride is murdered, “Wolfhound” makes it his lifelong mission to avenge their deaths.

When he takes down his first victim in a violent and brutal fight in a castle, he takes with him a female tagalong (a traditional element of the genre) Princess Helen, a Russian Goddess who will soon be crowned Queen of land. Wolfhound and Helen are joined in their quest by a blind wizard and a few other warriors, slaves and scholars. Oh, I forgot Wolfhound’s pet bat as his sidekick – a definite first for the genre. Like R2D2 or Twinkle Bell his bat is his trusted ally and comes to his aide on a number of occasions. It’s corny, but each and every time it put a childlike smile to my face. I won’t go into detail about the quest and the special rock-like key that supposed to open the gates of Callidor (or something like that). There’s also a love story between the scarred warrior Wolfhound and the Princess. Typically her hand is already taken by another prince, but Wolfhound’s sensitive power is able to win her love. It's all food for the sweeping majesty and melodrama of the genre.

“Wolfhound” apparently had the largest post-Soviet budget for a film. And it’s on the screen. The special effects are mostly invisible to the eye. Even though people told me the bat was CGI, I still couldn’t tell. The film also has an aged, 80’s feel to it. Like 80’s classics “The Sword and the Sorcerer” or “Flesh and Blood”. Trust me, “Wolfhound” is not a nostalgia-fest, it’s taken very seriously and there’s ample bucks on screen to make it look believable.

As director, I don’t know who this Nikolai Lebedev guy is, but he’s definitely got some cinematic chutzpah. There’s at least 6 to 8 awesome sequences that get the blood pumping and adrenaline flowing. There’s a great sequence intercutting three transition scenes – the Princess’ coronation, the evil lord’s preparations for battle, and ceremonial goat killing – set to a heart pounding drum score. Lebedez turns what could have been a perfunctory montage scene into fun music video style exercise. There’s great battle between “Wolfhound” and a lifelike white fog that’s one of the more creative action sequences I’ve seen in a while. Wolf’s final battle against the tornado rock creature has certain biblical allegories and Lebedev’s framing of the gothic imagery feels like a Wagner score put to life.

Lebedev is clearly steeped in the cinematic fantasy and action cinema. There’s lot of “Excalibur”, “Braveheart”, “Gladiator”, “Lord of the Rings”, and a subtle dose of “Raiders of the Lost”. Though there’s a lot Spielbergian camera movements, it’s the attitude and joyful cinematic tone of Indiana Jones that really shines through.

My pals whom I saw the film with complained about its corniness. Indeed the love story and Wolfhound’s overly dramatic arc of revenge moves well into melodrama, but it’s a genre film, and though it may not match “Lord of the Rings”, there’s plenty of room at the top to make it worthy companion film. The Russians wear their hearts on their sleeves and considering their history of pain and suffering, and the damned cold weather, they are allowed to rejoice loud and grandiose as they want. I'll always listen. Enjoy.

PS I don't know when this film will get a North American release. If anyone has any info, please send a comment.

Read More...

Summary only...

FIDO

Fido (2007) dir. Andrew Currie
Starring: Dylan Baker, Carrie Ann Moss, Billy Connolly, Henry Czerny, K'Sun Ray

***1/2

Fido is a fabulous new zombie comedy about a tamed zombie who is bought by a humble suburban family to do household chores but ends up developing a brotherly relationship with their young son. Though there will be inevitable comparisons to “Shaun of the Dead”, “Fido” earns its own place in this new sub-sub genre of horror films.

The opening monologue is hilarious. The masculine and guttural voice of a 1950’s radio announcer explains the backstory in the style of a classic newsreel. Instead of a World War, Earth, in this fictional world fought a “zombie war” against a zombie infestation. A company called Zomcon was able to tame the zombies with a collar around their necks. With this device zombies became robotlike servants available to ordinary families to do their daily chores.

One day Helen Robinson (Carrie Ann Moss) surprises her husband, Bill (Dylan Baker) with a new zombie (Billy Connolly) for the home. Their young boy Timmy makes friends with the zombie and names him Fido. Fido performs his tasks well, but Bill is still suspect of his presence. Painful memories of the Zombie War are brought back which causes a disruption in the family. Fido is watched carefully by the neighbourhood skeptic Mr. Theopolis (Tim Blake Nelson) and one of the Zomcom executives (Henry Czerny) for fear that Timmy and Fido’s relationship might result in another potential zombie-outbreak.

“Fido” is foremost a deadpan comedy. Everything in the film, no matter how ridiculous is played straight. Director Currie assembles a perfect ensemble cast to play the roles. Carrie Ann Moss is the perfect homemaker-next-door, Dylan Baker is the classic suburban conservative father, Henry Czerny, as always, play his bad guy role with evil menace, and K'Sun Ray is gawky enough to play the curious Timmy. Henry Czerny, who doesn’t get enough good work as far I’m concerned, is the stand out.

Parodying the dull 1950’s suburban lifestyle is nothing new, but when combined with the absurd revisionist history Currie and co-writer Robert Chomiak create with the zombies, it’s downright hilarious. Even when I wasn’t laughing out loud there was a constant smile on my face. “Fido” could have overstayed its welcome and become a one-joke comedy, but Currie actually creates a warm relationship between Timmy and Fido. Though Billy Connolly doesn’t have any lines, his head tilts express just enough emotion to keep us interested.

The film, shot by DOP Jan Kiesser, looks fantastic as well. The film has a beautiful 2:35:1 widescreen frame, bright saturated colours and great use of the B.C. landscape. Composer Don MacDonald produces a top notch Elmer Bernstein-esque score and complements the heightened recreation of the period perfectly.

“Fido” manages to find surprisingly clever metaphors between zombies and the paranoia of the 1950’s - the fear of losing jobs to mechanical automation, the communist scare, and the need to keep up with the Jones. But the heart of the film is the relationship between boy and zombie. It’s like “Slingblade”, meets “E.T.”, meets “Lassie” meets "Night of the Living Dead". I’m sure that made an awesome pitch. Please check this film out. Enjoy

Buy it here: Fido

Read More...

Summary only...

HOSTEL PART II

Hostel II (2007) Dir. Eli Roth
Starring: Lauren German, Heather Mattarazzo, Bijou Phillips

*
Beware Spoilers Ahead

In my review of “Hostel I” I said I purposely avoided the films of the new ‘torture porn’ genre which has emerged in the past 4 years. I praised the “Hostel I” for its satisfying blend of action, horror, wit and fresh unpredictability. “Hostel” is a completely unnecessary sequel that serves only to start another exploitation franchise which is the reason I avoided the genre in the first place.

Part II continues on directly where Part I left off, following Paxton (Jay Hernandez) home where he miraculously escaped the torture chambers in Part I. Despite this the underground organization “Elite Hunting” continues to exist and thrive. We get to see how the organizers choose their victims and auction them off to the highest bidders across the world. The next victims are Beth (Lauren German), Lorna (Heather Mattarazzo) and Whitney (Bijou Phillips), three female backpackers who unfortunately choose the same nefarious hostel as Paxton. Like the men in the first film, one by one the women are lured into the trap by the advances of the opposite sex. They are tortured to death, except for one of the gals who uses some smarts and a little bit of braun to escape death.

“Hostel II” feels like one of those sequels with lower rent actors and a new director hired to regurgitate the formula. So the fact that Eli Roth is responsible for this hasty sequel astonishes me. Roth uses the same formula as the first film, but a few changes have a drastic effect, turning a clever story about exploitation into just plain old exploitation – and without the wit.

The fundamental change in Part II is that the audience knows the major twist – that the torture chamber is an underground hunting club for rich sickos. The social context of Part I is the irony of the three backpackers being lured into an extreme form of exploitation by their own desires to exploit other women. In Part II, there is no irony, and the fact we know they are being lured makes it a perfunctory exercise with no suspense.

The second major change is that the victims are women. In a sick and twisted way the torture in Part I was actually witty. But when the victims are women it just becomes sick and twisted. That’s where I draw the line.

The third change is a preposterous attempt to humanize the torturers. Roth shows us the journey of two rich friends, Todd and Stuart (Richard Burgi and Roger Bart), from the U.S. to Bratislava as they get ready to take part in the game. We are supposed to ‘identify’ with Stuart who is uncertain and bullied into going through with the deed. Todd is the devil on his shoulder who peer pressures him into torturing and murdering an innocent woman – “Come on, be a man!” he keeps saying. And so, when a cheap excuse for a twist happens at the end it’s completely lost because we don’t care about any of the characters.

I will definitely put a hold on my support of Mr. Roth, who has taken a giant step backward with this film. Apparently his next film is a zombie film based on the Stephen King novel “Cell”. In the meantime, skip this horrible flick.

Read More...

Summary only...

TORONTO AFTER DARK FESTIVAL #2: In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale

In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale (2007) dir. Uwe Boll
Starring: Jason Statham, Ray Liotta, Ron Perlman, John Rhys-Davies, Matthew Lillard, Burt Reynolds

**1/2

It was a fun screening last night with the infamous Uwe “Bloodrayne” Boll present in the audience. “In the Name of the King” is being billed as Uwe Boll’s largest budget to date, conspicuously leaving out the quality of the film. As a piece of adventure fantasy cinema the film is fantastic, but it’s also hampered by easily some of the worst performances this year. With an After Dark Festival audience it was terrific night out, but when it comes to competing with regular weekend box-office audiences that’s a different story.

The crowd was indeed primed to watch a Uwe Boll film. Mr. Boll’s humourous self-effacing introduction gave us permission to laugh at the bad parts and cheer the good parts. The story is typical of the genre. The evil sorcerer Gallian (Ray Liotta) has created an army of Krugs (like LOTR’s Orcs), laid siege to the land and taken over the Kingdom of his uncle King Konreid (Burt Reynolds). Jason Statham plays a humble farmer named Farmer (seriously) turned reluctant hero who summons latent but powerful fighting skills in order to rescue his kidnapped wife.

Farmer is joined by his mentor Norick (Ron Perlman) and his brother-in-law Bastian (Will Sanderson). Along the way Farmer discovers some secrets about his association with King Konreid and must reconcile the needs of the people with his own desire to save his wife. Much sword fighting, horse riding, magic conjuring ensues in this fun “Lord of the Rings” knock off.

The film looks fantastic, and though the fighting is 100% bloodless Boll and martial arts expert Siu-Tung Ching (of the Zhang Zimou films) choreograph some terrific epic action scenes. The film has an aged sepia-toned quality to it –unpolished and raw, like an untimed one-light transfer from the cut negative. Ironically it was refreshing to see a film without the dousing of an over-processed colour palette and digital effects.

Burt Reynolds’ performance was so bad every time he entered a scene he drew fits of laughter from the audience, and even more when Boll cut to the close-ups of his obviously face-lifted face. In fact, Jason Statham deserves an award for keeping a straight face through Reynolds’ bedside death scene, which is drawn out to a magnificent five minutes of agony. As mentioned, with the jazzed After Dark audience the scene drew thunderous applause.

Also turning in over-the-top performances are Ray Liotta at his maniacal best as the evil scorceror, and Matthew Lillard hamming it up as Konreid’s snot-nosed delinquent nephew and heir-to-the-throne. The rest of the cast knows their place in this expensive b-movie realm as well. Leelee Sobieski is comfortable saying the bad dialogue, as is Clare Forlani. Ron Perlman is perfectly cast and is at his grizzly best. Brian J. White also keeps a straight face and turns in a noble performance as the leader of the King’s army. He makes a strong case to be a future action star. But the film is all about Jason Statham’s star persona, and he delivers with great action chutzpah. Every leap, sword swipe, and leg slash is matched with a snarling squinting stare. Few actors today could do this role better than he.

The film has the honour of being part Canadian and being filmed in the glorious Rocky Mountains of B.C. (eat your heart out New Zealand). While it’s certainly no “Lord of the Rings” Boll has turned in a decent part-action film, part unintentional comedy, which deserves to be in the “so bad it’s good” column. Enjoy.

P.S. The film will be released in U.S. and Canada in Jan 2008.

Here’s a cool trailer to keep you going till then:

Read More...

Summary only...

TORONTO AFTER DARK FESTIVAL #1: Mulberry Street

Mulberry Street (2007) dir. Jim Mickle
Starring: Nick Damici, Antone Pagan, Sarah Dickinson

***

Opening the ‘Toronto After Dark Film Festival’ last night was the acclaimed New York City zombie film “Mulberry Street”. When an infestation of half-rat half-man zombies take over Manhattan, a group of lowly apartment building tenants including a former boxer, a drag queen and a war veteran form an unlikely bond to fight off the predators. It’s a humorous logline, but the film is a seriously intense urban action zombie film in the tradition of “28 Days Later”.
The opening establishes a group of well-meaning New York City working class residents of a condemned apartment building slated for demolition. Before that happens, some of the feral rats also inhabiting the building start exhibiting more than the usual belligerent behaviour. When a rat takes a chunk out of the arm of one of the residents, he becomes infected with a new virus that will soon turn him into a rat zombie. Of course, where’s there’s one rat zombie there 10 more. And so it doesn’t take long for Manhattan to turn into a rat-zombie war zone.

In the building the fight is led by former boxer Clutch (Nick Damici) who is joined by Drag Queen Coco (Ron Brice) and a group of unlikely working class heroes. Clutch’s paternal instincts kick in and he becomes the Romero-like hero of the building. Meanwhile, in another part of the city Clutch’s daughter Casey (Kim Blair) has returned home from a tour in Iraq to be with her Father. She is forced to fight her way into the city to be reunited with her long lost father. The reunion is bittersweet as more death and bloodshed soon follow.

The film is played completely straight with little overt humour, though I giggled at some of the creative beatings from Clutch and his comrades-in-arms. There are no guns in the film; instead fists are the weapons of choice. Rat-zombies are punched to a pulp and thrown around like rag dolls. The hook of the film seems to be the introduction of the New York City rat into the zombie world. It sounds great on paper, but apart from catching a glimpse of a few prosthetic noses in some of the shots, the enemies are just flesh-eating zombies – plain and simple.

Jim Mickle keeps his camera moving and cutting at a frantic pace. His staccato shutter effect mimics the visual techniques in “28 Days Later”. In fact, the tone of Danny Boyle’s film is all over this film. Mickle uses an ambient feedback music score that Boyle used to punctuate his emotion beats in “28 Days Later”. Mickles overuses this technique and through repetitiveness, unfortunately it loses its impact. There’s about 6 or 7 action sequences with muted location sound and amplified ambient feedback. Mickle seems infatuated with it.

I’m being a little tough on the film, because considering the zero-budget the filmmakers had to work with, it’s a remarkable tough, gritty and intense film. When the characters finally get together at the end there’s a brief moment of calm when Clutch and Casey realize they’re a family together under the most extreme of circumstances. Mickle knows his film is about his characters, not the effects, or the action or the bloodletting.

One major distraction I had with the screening was the yucky full frame letterboxed digital projection. The colours were muted and dull and the grainy dark images which dominated the entire film only made more obvious the film’s no-budget. It’s a shame because under proper projection conditions – ie. maybe a print transfer, or a ‘Christie’ digital machine the film could have looked much better. Instead we were watching a giant television screen.

This is just part one of a few more After Dark Reviews of some of the best under-the-radar horror and fantasy films coming to your local theatre, underground video store, or Bit Torrent queue list. Enjoy.

Read More...

Summary only...

HOSTEL: DIRECTOR'S CUT

Hostel: Director’s Cut (2006) dir. Eli Roth
Starring: Jay Hernandez, Derek Richardson, Eythor Gudjonsson

***1/2

NOTE: This is a review of the “Hostel: Directors Cut”, but since I haven’t seen the theatrical cut so I can’t compare the two.

Over the past few years I purposely stayed away from the hyped ‘torture porn’ genre of horror films. Eli Roth, from his public persona, struck me as someone whose films I did not want to see. But having just seen “Hostel” (as well his Grindhouse trailer, “Thanksgiving”) I can now say, I’m an Eli Roth fan. “Hostel”, which tells the story of a group of Americans who get seduced, kidnapped and tortured by some particularly gruesome Eurotrashers, throws enough twists and turns at us that the film becomes more than just your ordinary horror film, but something completely entertaining and satisfying beyond the genre expectations.

Americans Paxton (Jay Hernandez) and Josh (Derek Richardson) and the Icelandic Oli (Eythor Gudjonsson) are your typical backpackers traveling through Europe looking to get laid and get stoned. They’re in Amsterdam making the most of the town. Paxton is the adventurous one, Josh is the shy one, and Oli, is your typical wild Icelander (you’d know if you met one). In search of even greater action, the boys take the advice a creepy Russian, who tells them to go a hostel in Bratislava where the girls go mad for Americans. Hook, line and sinker.

The boys travel by train to Bratislava and rent a room at the hostel where they are greeted by a pair of half undressed Eastern European beauties. They boys party with and eventual bed the young ladies. But one night when Josh gets separated, he passes out and wakes up in a torture chamber where his living nightmare begins. I’ll end the synopsis here, because the less you know the better. And beware spoilers are ahead.

The story unfolds very carefully. Roth doesn’t rush the gore, which is the reason why most people will be seeing the film. In fact, there’s only a 20 mins sequence in the middle of the film when the disgusting stuff actually happens. Much of it is implied. Roth plays by the rules and doesn’t give us too much too early. The film is cleverly structured to maximize the dramatic impact of its reveals. The opening act contains no horror, only laying a foundation of suspense. The portrayal of the Americans’ behaviour and the European attitude to them is very real. Much of the fear comes from this post 9/11 worldwide backlash against America. Because of recent Bushian politics, many Americans feel threatened in different parts of the world. All of the scenes and events in the first act (ie. Josh’s fight in the bar) amplify this fear. As well, what seems like exploitation and gratuitous amounts of sex and nudity with the prostitutes in the film is also laying thematic groundwork for payoff later in the film.

There’s several key moments and story beats in the film that kept me on the edge of my seat. The first key switch is when Roth cuts away from Josh in the torture chamber to Paxton who has been left alone at the disco club in the morning. By cutting back to Paxton, we are left hanging as what happened to Josh, and he delays the big reveal as to what the torture chamber actually is. NOTE: I applauded the recent TIFF film, “The Passage” for a similar narrative shift, not knowing Roth did it first. The second key reveal is when Paxton discovers he’s been set up by his new girlfriends. And the third moment occurs when he meets a fellow American in the torture room. It’s a very clever twist that I didn’t seen coming. Instead of being another slice of torture-porn exploitation, it makes an intelligent statement about exploitation.

Roth is very smart about how he shows his gore. It’s incredibly violent but also with a touch of humour – the eyeball scene is my favourite. And just when the film is about to get predictable, there’s the third act, which is a revenge action film. Roth breaks a horror film rule by having the victim actually fight back and succeed. I can’t recall a horror film where the hero is able to find such satisfying and sustained revenge against all his enemies.

That’s the key word in this review – satisfaction – the ending of the film in the washroom is such a great moment of cinematic revenge I was fist-pumping the screen. Eli Roth, you’ve sold me. I loved your “Thanksgiving” trailer on Grindhouse, I loved “Hostel”, and I look forward to “Hostel II” and looking back at “Cabin Fever”. Enjoy.

Buy it here: Hostel (Director's Cut)

Read More...

Summary only...

SAM KATZMAN #1 - Creature With the Atom Brain

Creature With the Atom Brain (1955) dir. Edward L. Cahn
Starring: Richard Denning, Angela Stevens, Michael Granger, S. John Launer, Gregory Gay

***1/2

Sam Katzman is one of cinema’s great schlockmeisters – a Roger Corman-like producer of 1950’s B-Horror films. According to the IMDB he has 250 various producer credits to his name. My first entry into the cinema of Sam Katzman is “Creature With the Atom Brain” a classic piece of disposable celluloid of the atomic era.

The film jumps right into the story with not an ounce of backstory explanation. A zombie-like man with a scar across his brain follows another man to his office late at night. The zombie moves to the windows and rips open the covering steel bars with hulk-like ease. The zombie then approaches the man and strangles him to death. Somewhere else in the world, a maniacal gangster and his German scientist partner, Dr. Wilhelm Steigg, (Gregory Gay) watch the action from the point of view of the zombie. They are able to control his movements remotely with simple instructions read into a microphone.

The gangster is the diabolical Frank Buchanan, who has returned from exile in Europe to exact revenge on his enemies. One by one his former colleagues and lawmen that did him wrong die at the hands of his army of remote-controlled humans. There’s a fantastical scientific explanation of how they can control their brains, but essentially they are zombies before there was such a term. The army is called in to help and the authorities led by mild-mannered scientist, Dr. Chet Walker, hunt down Buchanan and Steigg.

I doubt Sam Katzman ever thought this film would last beyond its life in the theatre. In fact, he’d probably be shocked someone like me would be discussing his film has such length 50 years later.

But a film like this changes over time. What was probably a very scary movie for teenagers in its day is now a time capsule comedy – a hilarious slice of the times. Modern films about the fifties frequently make fun of the blindfolded view of the world cinema showed its audiences (ie. “Far From Heaven”, or the recent horror-comedy “Fido”). Domestic suburban life was a blissful fairytale world and politics and war was noble, heroic and fun. And so, the naiveté of films like these provide us with unintentional absurdist humour.

Remarkably, as a piece of disposable low budget cinema, it actually survives as a polished piece of entertainment. With the help of a fantastic DVD transfer, the black and white image is as crisp and clear as it was in 1955 (probably better actually). In fact, the sharpness of the image rivals any black and white film made today - try doing a comparative analysis of Clooney’s “Good Night and Good Luck” and this film. It’s surprisingly difficult to find the technical differences.

The film plays to the lowest common denominator of intellect. The actors are there to tell the audience, on the nose, what is going on – and set up the fun action horror sequences. Some of the acting is horrendous, but excusing this in the context of times is necessary to enjoy the film. Though it’s not particularly scary, once the film gets moving at it’s brisk pace I got caught up in the melodrama.

The finale will provide some laughs as the zombie-warriors engage in a huge hand-to-hand battle with the police on the lawn of a suburban home. Director Edward L. Cahn frequently uses a point-of-view shot to show the zombies strangle their victims. It’s overused, but I can imagine it causing a fright to 50’s teenagers.

There are three more films in the new Sam Katzman DVD box set that I’ll be reviewing leading up to Halloween. I was surprised how enjoyable these films can be. For a guilty pleasure, and at least to expand your film history experience, take a look at “Creature With the Atom Brain”. Enjoy.

Icons of Horror Collection - Sam Katzman (The Giant Claw / Creature with the Atom Brain / Zombies of Mora Tau / The Werewolf)

Read More...

Summary only...

THE HOAX

The Hoax (2007) dir. Lasse Hallstrom
Starring: Richard Gere, Alfred Molina, Marcia Gay Harden, Hope Davis, Stanley Tucci

***1/2

Nazi Propagandist Josef Goebbels once said the bigger the lie the more people will believe it. This was how Clifford Irving managed to pull the wool over the eyes of the editors, executives and lawyers of McGraw-Hill, one of the world’s largest publishers, and command an advance of $1,000,000 to write a fake autobiography of Howard Hughes. “The Hoax” which recounts the amazing details of Irving’s forgery is a terrific new film just released on DVD.

Richard Gere, sporting a funny 1970’s tightly curled hairdo, plays real life author Clifford Irving. In the opening, Irving is on top of the world when his publisher McGraw-Hill agrees to publish his latest fiction novel. It isn’t more than a weekend that goes by before Irving has bought a new car, refurnished his house and spent all his money that he discovers the editors are reneging on their verbal deal. Irving is sent into a tail spin, and the only wait to salvage a failed career is to manufacture his own destiny. In a fit of anger he proclaims to his editor Andrea Tate (Hope Davis) that his next idea will be the most important novel of the 20th Century. This statement is enough to get another meeting from Tate, where Irving comes up with a false story that Howard Hughes, the billionaire, has chosen Irving to write his autobiography.

Of course Tate is suspect, since Hughes is one of the most reclusive people in the world. But Irving uses this reclusiveness to his advantage and manufactures fake handwritten memos as evidence. Handwriting experts valid Irving’s claims and so Irving is off and running with his forgery. His wife Edith (Marcia Gay Harden) and his research colleague Dick Suskind (Alfred Molina) are roped into the adventure and together through a series of elaborate scams actually finish the novel and steal $1,000,000 from the publishing company. When the news of the book breaks, suddenly the real life Howard Hughes becomes involved (or does he?). Suddenly, without knowing it Irving becomes the puppet for Hughes’ devious bidding. The story unfolds with wit and intrigue. Of course the film wouldn’t work for a second if it weren’t all true. It’s hard to believe, but the story is backed up by none other than Mike Wallace in a retrospective “60 Minutes” featurette on the DVD special features.

“The Hoax” is a pleasant discovery – the once shelved Miramax film was released in April of this year, two years after it was made, to decent reviews but little box office or fanfare. I must blame the marketing department that built its campaign around the minor comedic elements of the film. Watch the trailer below which makes the film out as a happy-go-lucky farcical satire.

The intricate and detail-heavy plotting were the most intriguing aspects of the film. Imagine a really good episode of one of that great detective shows “McMillan and Wife”, or “Columbo” where we get to see the crime performed and dissected down to the minutest detail. It’s hard to believe how easily respectable and experienced executives could hand over such large sums of money based on a forged handwritten memo on lined yellow paper. But that was the power of Howard Hughes back then. His influence in transportation and politics allowed Irving to move these hypothetical weights around to get what he wanted.

Much of the deception is due to the personality of Irving himself, whom Mike Wallace describes as an ok novelist, but a better actor. He’s one of the great conmen of our age. Gere gives a solid performance of this complex guy. He’s a devoted husband with a philandering past, who frequently asks his pal Dick to stop him from the temptation of other women. Irving knows his failures, and so in way we sympathize with him. He’s addicted to lying.

The humorous elements probably come from Lasse Hallstrom, who has made a career from throwing pixy dust onto emotional subjects (“What Eating Gilbert Grape”, “Cider House Rules”). He uses some overused AM radio songs as the soundtrack for the film – CCR, Rolling Stones, Richie Havens, etc. These are great songs, but gave off a confusing tone for the film.

“The Hoax” compares favourably to “Shattered Glass” – Billy Ray’s equally terrific film about a magazine journalist who wrote fake articles for the ‘New Republic’. The subject matter in both is something we are instinctively drawn to, the con, the robbery, the magic act of deception. I know every time I watch a heist film I always want them to get away with the money. I’ll let you watch the film to know how it turns. Enjoy.

Read More...

Summary only...

THE TRIALS OF DARRYL HUNT

The Trials of Darryl Hunt (2007) dir. Ricki Stern, Anne Sundberg
Documentary

***1/2

I had the pleasure of watching “The Trials Darryl Hunt” a new documentary from ThinkFilm. The small New York/Toronto-based distributor has placed themselves in the forefront of this new era of theatrical documentaries (“Spellbound”, “Murderball”, “Born Into Brothels”). And indeed, “The Trials of Darryl Hunt” hits the mark of these other films. It tells the unbelievable story of Darryl Hunt’s 20-year fight to free himself from wrongful imprisonment of a crime he didn’t commit. It’s a compelling story of injustice, racism and the dedication of his friends and colleagues to set him free.

In Winston-Salem N.C. in 1984 newspaper editor Deborah Sykes, suffered the most heinous crime. On her way to work, just ten minutes from her office, she was brutally raped, sodomized and murdered. Her body was discovered at 2:00 in the afternoon that day. Darryl Hunt, a young black male, was fingered as the murderer. A sloppy trial based on a circumstantial evidence and an “eye witness” testimony from a Ku Klux Klan member convicted Hunt on first degree murder, which meant life in prison (that’s ‘real’ life, not the Canadian 25-year version).

Hunt’s cries of innocence do not go unnoticed by the outraged members of the black community – specifically Larry Little, a local city official and friend of Darryl’s who starts a fund to see his case reopened and appealed. Little and his organization of black citizens indeed get the case reopened in 1989, but this is only the beginning of the Odyssey. As the title suggests, Hunt endures trial after trial for 20 years before real justice is served.

Directors Ricki Stern and Anne Sundberg use 10 years of their own lives to document the complete journey with a remarkable amount of TV news reports, data, court documents etc. It’s told completely straight with little stylish embellishments. Of course, the high bar for a film like this is Errol Morris’ “The Thin Blue Line”, which used creative cinematic techniques and bold dramatic music to accompany his investigation. At first, I couldn’t help comparing the two, and thinking, “the music is kinda dull and the visuals are adequate at best,” but as the film moved along and gathered momentum these concerns disappeared. The drama is inherent to the details of the story. Dramatic music and stylish visuals were not necessary.

Some of the egregious police and legal oversights were shocking to hear. Other then the Ku Klux Klan eye witness, racism doesn’t seem to be an overt factor in the story. But it is. No one cared about Darryl Hunt. No one cared about the shoddy evidence which miraculously stuck to the case. Even when DNA testing proved Hunt did not rape Mrs. Sykes, he still could not get another trial. Perhaps the carelessness of the police investigation could have happened to anybody. But did they really care about another black man put in prison, wrongfully or not? No.

In a month when most distributors are releasing their horror films to video stores, ThinkFilm seems to be telling us to watch this movie as a horror film. And indeed there’s as much horror in this film as any of the “Saw” films. Enjoy.

PS. The film won the Documentary Audience Award at the 2006 Sundance Film Festival.

Buy it here: The Trials of Darryl Hunt

Read More...

Summary only...

THE DARJEELING LIMITED

The Darjeeling Limited (2007) dir. Wes Anderson
Starring: Owen Wilson, Jason Schwartzman, Adrian Brody

***

Warning: Spoilers contained here:

After going big with “The Life Aquatic” Wes Anderson has wisely scaled back his latest production to tell an intimate story of three brothers struggling to get through the baggage of their past and rekindle their friendship while on a spiritual journey through India. The stunning visuals make up for a story that starts off well but loses momentum in the second half.

The opening scene is a fun action sequence. The camera is following Anderson’s favourite actor Bill Murray through the streets of an unnamed Indian city. He’s racing to catch the “Darjeeling Limited” train. He’s running down the platform but not fast enough to make the jump on the last car. Just as he gives up, a more fleet of foot Adrian Brody emerges beside him and successfully makes the jump. Murray is left off the train, and off the film. It’s a neat piece of misdirection from Anderson.

We then follow Brody, playing Peter Whitman, who joins up with his two brothers, Jack (Jason Schwartzman) and Francis (Owen Wilson) who are on the same train taking the same journey. The ride is organized with obsessive detail by Francis and his assistant Brendan as a way of reconnecting after the death of their father one year before.

It’s clear there’s much baggage between the three and so Jack and Peter are suspect of Francis’ motives. His intent is meaningful but immediately Francis’ commanding presence over the two starts to annoy each other. One of Francis’ many petty annoyances is his habit of ordering food for his brothers at restaurants. There are a couple of wonderful scenes that showcase this with great comic timing of the actors.

Brody, Wilson and Schartzman are a great trio. As brothers they are completely different in appearance (a 5-6 inch difference between Brody and Schwartzman), but they have a report and a common manner of speaking that is realistic for brothers. And while the dialogue zings like a Hawks film, there are moments of silent glances that say more about brotherly relationship than any line of dialogue.

The characters are typically Andersonian – privileged men who act like children stunted from absentee parenting. The backstory of their younger lives are not fully fleshed out, but with a Wes Anderson film they don’t need to be. Anyone familiar with his films knows his characters’ frailties. And in “Darjeeling” they are much the same. At the midway point in the film, Francis’ plan is halted and the trio are forced to deal with their problems ad hoc without the security of the train and Francis’ itinerary.

Thematically, getting off the train is a great metaphor for the next step in the mending of the lives, but cinematically the film suffers and loses direction. When they eventually meet up with their mother (Angelica Huston), these scenes fail to pay off the set up in the previous two acts. The film then slowly loses steam and deflates without a whimper. At this point only the beautiful imagery and music were keeping my attention.

Like all his films Wes Anderson and his DOP Robert Yeoman shoot the film with wide angle anamorphic lenses. There’s something to look at in every part of the shot. When the camera is framed for its close-ups the actor’s faces jump out of the screen giving each character a larger than life persona. As customary Anderson’s camera movements are kept to parallel and perpendicular patterns. With the wide angle lens the movements are exaggerated and so the camera becomes a character in the film - the wonderful opening scene as prime example.

Since this is Anderson’s fifth film, I was somewhat disappointed he couldn’t expand his storytelling skills and give us something we hadn’t seen or heard before – the quirky compositions, deadpan humour, intellectual dialogue, super slo-mo set pieces, mod music etc. While I do appreciate a director who can create a consistency in style across his or her body of work, as mentioned, the similarities go beyond the style and into story, character, theme and tone.

Years from now when we look back on Anderson’s films, we may be calling him a genius, but I doubt we’ll be able to remember the difference between Owen Wilson’s four main characters: Dignan (Bottle Rocket), Eli (Royal Tenenbaums), Ned (Life Aquatic) or Francis (The Darjeeling Limited). I’ll let him off the hook now, but next time…

Enjoy.

P.S. Wes Anderson advises you to watch his short film prologue “Hotel Chevalier” starring Natalie Portman and Jason Schwartzman before viewing the film. I've seen it. It's really boring and pretentious. Visit http://www.hotelchevalier.com/.

Read More...

Summary only...

PLANET TERROR

Planet Terror (2007) dir. Robert Rodriguez
Starring: Freddy Rodriguez, Rose McGowan, Marley Shelton, Josh Brolin, Michael Biehn, Jeff Fahey, Bruce Willis

****

After a second viewing “Planet Terror” on DVD and alone, without “Death Proof”, it’s clearly one of my favourite films of the year. It’s a remarkably enjoyable film that succeeds on all levels – action, character, comedy, and genre. Every scene is infused cinematic wit and energy and from beginning still had me grinning from ear to ear.

The film opens with a wicked-awesome go-go dance routine from Rose “Cherry Darling” McGowan over the opening credits. Then the film establishes the creation of Rodriguez’s zombies with a ridiculously over-the-top action sequence on a military base in Texas. His blood squibs are extra juicy, like exploding water balloons of blood. Then Rodriguez establishes one-by-one the dozen or so characters in the town that will soon become victims or heroes in the 105min circus of carnage to follow. Each character is given a clear – albeit melodramatic – subplot which is followed through to the end, no matter what happens. Some are sincere and romantic, others are absurdist. There’s Cherry Darling’s list of “useless talents” that help her get out of a number of life-threatening situations, J.T.’s search for the missing ingredient to make his prize-winning BBQ sauce, Dakota Black’s relationship her father, El Wray’s attachment to his leather jacket as well as his attempts to win back his Cherry, his long lost love.

Rodriguez clearly loves his characters and the actors who play them, and so we love them too. My favourites are Marley Shelton, playing a gorgeous blonde doctor, Dr. Dakota Black, who performs all her action scenes in high heels and sexy smeared eye liner, Rodriguez’s own nieces playing a pair of ‘Crazy Babysitter Twins’ who are billed as such in credits, Michael Biehn and Jeff Fahey, two classic 80’s/90’s b-list action actors who seem practically separated from birth. Nicky Katt, Stacy Ferguson, Naveen Andrews – too many to name really – all add to the fun.

John Carpenter’s influence is all over the film. Freddy Rodriguez, who plays the soft spoken nave turned ass-kicking hero, channels the best Carpenter hero roles – Snake Pliskin, Jack Burton, and Roddy Piper from “They Live”. Rodriguez’s score has the same particular synthesized rumblings of a Carpenter score as well, not to mention his recurring theme of the townsfolk forced to defend together against a siege on the town (which originally is a Romero and Hawks creation). “Planet Terror” moves away from the Carpenter formula with its own brand of Grindhouse wit. In addition to many more subplots, Rodriguez manages to set up and execute more successful comic gags than all of his other films combined.

Rodriguez makes the film his own with his trademark hyperkinetic editing and shooting style he perfected with the Mariachi trilogy and particularly “From Dusk Till Dawn”. Rodriguez’s DVD special features are always top notch and his usual 10 Minute Film School Featurette shows how he and his special effects team used a variety of high tech and low tech methods of fooling us.

The digital scratches and imperfections hold well on DVD. When it was first rumoured that the Grindhouse filmmakers would purposely scratch the film to make it look old, I admit I cried foul. But seeing it on both big and small screens, the two films benefit greatly and add to the fun.

“Planet Terror” stands well on its own. The clever and busy narrative could have been overshadowed by the pyrotechnics but amazingly his motley group of Grindhouse characters are the most interesting and lovable from any of his films. I’ve seen lots of great and serious films this year, but “Planet Terror” will definitely find a place in my ten best. Enjoy.

Read More...

Summary only...

A MIGHTY HEART

A Mighty Heart (2007) dir. Michael Winterbottom
Starring: Angelina Jolie, Dan Futterman, Will Patten, Archie Panjabi

***1/2

With “The Kingdom” out in theatres, Peter Berg’s immature take on Americans/Islamic relations, it’s the absolute best time to release on DVD “A Mighty Heart” – a more accurate and ultimately compelling version of essentially the same issues and themes. “A Mighty Heart”, which tells the story of the investigation into the kidnapping of American journalist Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, is a powerfully realistic film about the resolve and determination of Pearl’s wife Mariane to find her husband amid the powerful force of global politics.

In 2001, Wall Street journalist Daniel Pearl was kidnapped by Muslim extremists in Pakistan. The film is told from the point of view of Mariane (Angelina Jolie) who patiently manages to navigate through the false rumours, politicking, and worldwide press fervour surrounding the case and focuses on finding Daniel. Dan Futterman is well cast as Daniel whom we get to know in the first act of the film and periodically in flashbacks throughout. Prior to his capture, he is a soft-spoken dedicated journalist and husband. The Pearls travel to Pakistan the day after Sept 11 to report on the activities of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. When Daniel gets a chance to interview Sheikh Gilani, a notorious terrorist, he knows he’s entering dangerous territory. Everyone Pearl talks to warms him but Pearl is ambitious and puts the story ahead of his safety. The night Pearl is to meet Galani, he disappears, never to return home.

When the Pakistani police become involved a complex web of terrorist connections slowly unravels. Like “All the President’s Men” one suspect leads to another, which leads to another etc etc. The names are so hard to keep track of Mariane and her friend Asra (Archie Panjabi) have to use a whiteboard to keep track of everything. We aren’t meant to follow or understand the trail, only to know that Pearl’s kidnapping was not random but a targeted and premeditated act of terrorism.

The film is directed by the multitalented Michael Winterbottom, a British filmmaker, who can work in any genre, but who recently has developed a naturalistic style of on-the-fly street filmmaking. Winterbottom and cinematographer Marcel Zyskind shoot the film with local non-actors, in authentic locations with documentary-like believability. Watch, “24 Hour Party People”, “In this World”, and “Road to Guantanamo” to see the evolution of this style. The result is a film with 100% authenticity.

The film is edited with great pace. The lead-up up Pearl’s kidnapping is told with a fractured non-linear montage technique. Winterbottom enters conversations already in progress and exits before they are finished. At times this can be frustrating, especially when a new character is introduced but whom we don’t get to know until many scenes later. For example when we first see Will Patton, who plays an American authority, we only get a few lines out of him before Winterbottom cuts away. It’s a shame because Patton is such a good actor and I wanted to hear what he had to say. So this style can be obtrusive to the story, but since this is Mariane’s point of view I guess the motivation was to mimic the chaos of the event.

Unlike, Peter Berg, who turned his story into kill-at-all-costs action film, Winterbottom avoids all possible Hollywood traps. It would have been easy to inject internal conflict into the film by portraying the Pakistani police as backwards and unaccommodating to the Americans, instead the captain of the Pakistani counterterrorism unit who leads the investigation is as smart, dedicated and unwavering in his search as any of the Americans. Winterbottom is also able to create tension and suspense without resorting to guns, overt violence or action scenes. There’s a couple of moments of gunfire, but it’s not embellished.

Much of the credit of the film should go to producer Brad Pitt, who had the courage to put the film into Winterbottom’s hands as opposed to someone like Peter Berg’s. As a result “A Mighty Heart” may be a less accessible film, but it’s been told the best way possible, by preserving the integrity of Daniel and Mariane Pearl and all those involved in bringing the terrorists to justice. I hope the academy doesn't forget about this film come Oscar time. Enjoy.

Buy it here: A Mighty Heart

Read More...

Summary only...

THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)
dir. Andrew Dominik
Starring: Brad Pitt, Casey Affleck, Sam Rockwell, Sam Shepard, Mary Louise Parker, Paul Schneider

***

The most pretentious title of the year could have been the most pretentious film of the year – it aspires to be “Days of Heaven”, but it also has the potential to be “Heaven’s Gate”. It lies somewhere in between. The often told story of Jesse James and his storied death at the hands of his friend Robert Ford is told with a quiet intensity that elevates the story into the ultra strata of American myth.

The James in this film is an enigmatic bi-polar hero. He can be a decent, peaceful and loving father to his wife and kids one minute and a sadistic maniac willing to beat a child down repeatedly with his fists the next. Robert Ford is a celebrity-wannabe of the 19th century. He has worshiped Jesse since his youth and makes a concerted effort to befriend him and become part of his gang. He’s eventually brought in to help with their bad deeds, but right at a time when there’s much internal conspiracies against Jesse. With the authorities hot on his trail eventually Ford gets bribed into killing the man he once idolized.

For most of the film, the machinations of the plot seem perfunctory to the denouement or ‘fourth act’. After James is killed the story finally gets interesting when we see the country’s reaction to the death of their storied anti-hero. Robert Ford becomes famous for killing James and exploits it as any reality or 15-min-fame celebrity would today. He becomes overexposed and all hopes of achieving greatness in his life from his actions are lost. I’m hesitant to be specific about how this finale plays out, but it absolutely makes the film.

The film is told with a documentary-like omniscient narrator – very similar to the narration in “Little Children”. It’s not a Midwest or Southern voice, it’s out of place, perhaps someone from the 'civilized' north recounting the story. We all know the story of the James gang from the countless Hollywood films, and it’s actually refreshing to see the film made not like the current trend of ‘gritty’ reality films but like a fairytale bedtime story.

So the film becomes about the myth of Jesse James – not the man. In fact, I’d argue James as a supporting character to the lead – Robert Ford played by Casey Affleck. Affleck is well cast. He’s been playing the affable meek runt his entire career, and finally he gets to take this character to another level.

Director Andrew “Chopper” Dominik and producer/star Brad Pitt have their sights set on texture and mood, and, going by the credits, they clearly screened the works of David Gordon Green, Terrence Malick, and the Coen Bros before crewing up. So I doubt it’s a coincidence Paul Schneider, Roger Deakins, and Sam Shepard show up on the call sheet – not to mention the architect of perhaps its closest cousin – “The Proposition” – Nick Cave, who provides the melancholy soundtrack.

Roger Deakins seems to be shooting every prestige film in Hollywood these days – this season alone he’s shot “Jesse James”, “In the Valley of Elah” and “No Country for Old Men”. Deakins, the Coen’s frequent DOP, shoots the outdoors so well. Each frame is rich with the texture of a tattered old photograph. I’m sure he’ll be Oscar-nominated for at least one, if not all three of these films. I’d love to see that happen.

“The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford” is no “Days of Heaven”. It hits the myth, but misses the poetry. And thank god for the final 20mins, without which it could, sadly, have been “Heaven’s Gate”. Stick through the two hours before the finale, it will be worth the $11.95. Enjoy.

Read More...

Summary only...

MICHAEL CLAYTON

Michael Clayton (2007) dir. Tony Gilroy
Starring: George Clooney, Tom Wilkinson, Tilda Swinton, Sydney Pollack

**1/2

Buyer beware. Michael Clayton may not be what you expect. It certainly wasn’t what I expected. And that doesn’t necessarily make it better. “Michael Clayton” is not a corporate thriller, but a character film, about a ‘fixer’ for a corrupt law firm that is forced to reexamine his life when he discovers his firm is complicit in a class action law suit of corporate malfeasance.

In the first few moments we are parachuted into a series of scenes that do not make any sense – Michael Clayton (Clooney) a disheveled looking lawyer appearing to play his last penny on a hand of poker; Clayton seeing a client late in the evening and acting aloof – Clayton seeing his car get blown up. There’s an apathy to him, which we will come to learn about as the film then flashes back to 4 days before.

We then get the full backstory of Clayton’s failed life. Clayton has sunk his savings into a restaurant business which was financed with some shady money. The restaurant has gone under and now Clayton is scrambling to pay back his lenders. Meanwhile, Clayton’s boss and mentor Arthur Edens (Tom Wilkinson) has gone mad and stripped down in the middle of a deposition. This has angered and alarmed his clients U-North – a giant conglomerate who is in the middle of a large class action law suit. Clayton is sent in by his unscrupulous partner Marty Bach (Sydney Pollack) to “fix” the situation. Amid a severe depression Clayton is forced to reconcile his debt, his job and his family life, all of which are threatened by the corporate henchmen watching over his shoulder.

Tony Gilroy is the writer behind the Bourne films. While those films are direct and to the point, “Michael Clayton” takes some time before it makes it point. In fact, it isn’t until the last scene of the film, where I finally realized what it is. It looks and sounds like a political thriller – replete with middle aged men and women wearing cool suits and talking on their cell phones a lot, there’s the quiet but percussion heavy James Newton Howard soundtrack and the poster tagline “truth can be adjusted”. Unfortunately the film isn’t about truth, or lack thereof, nor the mystery surrounding the nefarious actions of an unethical corporation. It’s about Michael Clayton and all the pressures that surround him – including his failed restaurant business, his job, his alcoholic brother and his neglected son. The elements of the corporate story which the film is marketed as are laid out in a 5min conversation with Tom Wilkinson’s character when we first meet him. Other than that there is very little revealed in that subplot story.

I must admit I was waiting for the intrigue to start, but it never does. The film is about Clayton. As mentioned he is a broken man, disillusioned with the state of his job. He once had aspirations to be a lawyer with ethics and pride, but as his boss Marty Bach says, he found his niche – to be a fixer. This brings me to another problem I had with the film. We never get to see how good Clayton is at being a fixer. We never get the establishing scene where he “cleans” up the mess. I imagine this could mean planting evidence, bribing people, maybe even threatening or killing people. We are told of Clayton’s talents, but we never get to see it.

The arc of his character is well thought out and executed. There’s a moment late in the film where Clayton’s holding a paper in his hand while talking to Bach. What he does or doesn’t do with this piece of paper is a turning point in the film, the significance of which is only referenced casually at the end. The movie then builds to a wonderful climax that lingers with you after the film. In fact, the final shot will likely keep you in your seats.

The most frustrating aspect is the fact that Gilroy tries too hard not be direct. He plays the pronoun game in virtually every conversation - referring to “this” or “that” without establishing what “that” is. In hindsight, the title gives away the film, so I really shouldn’t be surprised that it wasn’t a thriller but a character film. But when I saw the final credits and saw that Sydney Pollack, George Clooney, Steven Soderbergh and Anthony Minghella were Executive Producers, I said, “ahhh, that explains it”. There’s some major award-winning talent here that probably wanted to win some more awards. Enjoy.

P.S. I seem to be in the minority compared to the current critical opinion. Please let me hear your thoughts.

Read More...

Summary only...

ELECTION

Election (2006) dir. Johnnie To
Starring: Simon Yam, Tony Leung Ka Fei

**

Johnnie To’s “Election” was an official selection at Cannes in 2005 and was at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2006 (along with it’s sequel “Election 2”). It also won some major hardware at the Hong Kong film Awards. Some major accomplishments for a very average Hong Kong gangster film. I'll probably take some heat for this, but nothing elevates the film beyond the plethora of Hong Kong triad films that get over-praised year after year.

It’s part of Triad tradition to elect the new Chairman of a gang every two years. This year’s campaigning is particularly aggressive between the two frontrunners Lok (Simon Yam) and Big D (Tony Leung Ka Fei). When Lok is elected Big D doesn’t take it graciously and proceeds to kidnap two of the elder voters to get them to change their decision. When the coveted Baton which symbolizes the leadership of the Chairman disappears in the melee the henchman of both Lok and Big D chase it down leaving nothing standing in their way.

Amid the violent confrontations, much political maneuvering takes place in a local jail house where both Lok, Big D and many of the voters have been locked up. After some unlikely alliances a winner emerges at the expense of much brutal bloodshed.

One of my key DFD contributors has often said that critics are too kind and easy on Asian films. Did “The Host” really deserve a 92% rating on Rotten Tomatoes? It's good, but not that good. Therefore I’m not going to go easy on this one. Like many Hong Kong action films I’ve seen, the acting is bi-polar. Characters are pushed to the extreme all believability is completely thrown out the window. Lok is a soft-spoken gangster who rarely utters a word or expresses an emotion. Nothing phases him and he always seems in control. Of course, as the screenwriting rule says, the antagonist is the anti-thesis of the hero (assuming that’s Lok, who actually won the election). Johnnie To makes him out to be a screaming, raging maniac – like a Ritalin child who’s just had his candy taken away. Both characters have only one note to play each – quiet or loud.

If the characters are not there, then perhaps I could have relied on some kick ass action (as in a Tsui Hark film), but there’s none. In fact, I don’t think there’s a single gunshot in the entire film. The baddies chose to dispose of their enemies by lengthy and brutal beat downs with clubs, garbage cans and good old fashioned kicks and punches. Ok, without the action, maybe I could have been compensated with a tight suspenseful plot (as in “Infernal Affairs”). Again, there no scenes that stand out or even have me wonder ‘what’s going to happen next.’

So what do we have? A typical derivative Triad film with bad acting, no interesting characters, no action, and no suspense. The film even has a bland colourless look to it. I even tried to watch Johnny To’s “Exiled” but couldn’t make it through 30 mins before being bored again with drama worthy of an exploitation video game. "Election" has an 84% positive rating on the IMDB and apparent Quentin Tarantino called it the “best film of the year”. Am I alone on this one? Did I miss something?

Buy it here: Election 'Hak Se Wui' (Special Collector's Edition) 2 DVD Set

Read More...

Summary only...

AFI RELOADED: THE FANBOY 100 - #1-50

After a summer of compiling over 500 entries, I’m pleased to announce the FANBOY 100.

Earlier this year the American Film Institute re-voted their top 100 American movies of all time. The first list, compiled in 1998 sparked a great discussion, several TV specials and got people talking about some old classics they hadn’t seen in a while. This year that list was updated to see how the films of the last 10 years would be ranked and to see how our tastes in culture had changed. Please see my posting dissecting some of the differences and similarities of both lists – HERE.

There was much discussion from bloggers and fanboys out there – some more passionate and angered than others. Therefore Daily Film Dose spearheaded another vote, using the same guidelines and same short list of films used by the AFI. The result is what I’ve called the “FANBOY 100”. We can now put rest speculations of how the fans may have voted for their favourite films, in comparison to the AFI’s. The major difference of this list is that the Fanboys were allowed the choice of moving off the 400-film short list for as many selections as possible. The AFI allowed only five, which, in my opinion, cuts down the votes significantly. Funny enough, even with the allowance of as many free selections, all of the films below were on the 400 short list.

The survey is still not 100% scientifically accurate. The mere fact that there’s a shortlist influences voters to a large degree. Enjoy and discuss.

1. The Godfather (1972) dir. Francis Ford Coppola

Francis Coppola’s masterpiece still reigns supreme as filmed-entertainment of the highest order. Michael Corleone’s character arc from naïve and innocent war-hero to corrupted sadistic maniac is the highest bar for writing and acting. Coppola made the story into a film about family, so it’s fitting, amid all the gangster politics, the first two films boiled down to a story of two brothers and the fateful decision made by Michael which dooms them both forever. Placement on the AFI List: #2

2 Psycho (1960) dir. Alfred Hitchcock

“Psycho” reached only number 14 on the AFI list, but the fans think it’s number 2. Generally considered the first modern horror film, Alfred Hitchcock’s masterpiece is a manipulative piece of cinema, and Hitchcock at his most devious. He sets up a road chase film like his previous “North by Northwest” but instead pulls the rug from under us by killing off his heroine midway through the film. We, as the audience, have no idea what to expect next. “Psycho” is often imitated, never duplicated. Placement on the AFI List: #14

3. Pulp Fiction (1994) dir. Quentin Tarantino

The major line-jumping of “Pulp Fiction” is likely due to the voting demographic – which is much younger, pop-culture savvy and modern. “Pulp Fiction” is the definitive film of our current generation. Thirteen years later, its influence is still being felt today. “Pulp Fiction” not only won the Palme D’Or, it cracked the $100million domestic box office barrier (unheard of for an indie film back then) and was nominated for all the major Oscars – and taking one home for writing. What makes “Pulp Fiction” so unique and so influential? It was the heart and soul of Tarantino put onto film – a film junkie who devoured the medium. He was able to make a film on his own terms, his way, with relatively complete freedom. Special films like this should be celebrated as often as possible. The fans have spoken. Placement on the AFI List: #94.

4. Casablanca (1942) dir. Michael Curtiz

“Casablanca” ranked #3 on the AFI, and here it comes in at #4. Therefore it’s safe to say fans and critics/historians alike are in agreement, “Casablanca” is a great film for everybody. In fact, it’s hard to find someone who doesn’t like the film. What is the attraction to “Casablanca”? It was a cookie-cutter studio film that rose to the top as the best and greatest example of the entertaining value of the Hollywood formula – a tight script which practically invented the screenwriting template, dynamic and attractive stars (Bogart and Bergman), and top notch supporting players (Sidney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, Claude Rains). Placement on the AFI List: #3

5. Citizen Kane (1941) dir. Orson Welles

Believe it or not, I received a lot of hate mail about this film. For the many of you who revere the film, there’s a whole lot of ‘anti-Kaners’ out there, but not enough to excise it from the top 5. Kane is still influential, though not untouchable. AFI picked it twice in a row as the top film. Technically the film is brilliant and innovative. Everyone should watch the special features and listen to Roger Ebert’s commentary on the DVD. The film is a magic show. Welles, in his youth, was a magician, and his sleight of hand in evident all over the film. No matter how many times you see it, “Citizen Kane” can always be re-discovered. Placement on the AFI List #1.

6. Schindler's List (1993) dir. Steven Spielberg

“Schindler’s List” is also consistently a favourite among critics and fans. Upon its release Spielberg was praised for maturing as a director and telling an adult story, an important story, without his traditional artifices. Indeed, the palpable realism is powerful, but Spielberg’s eye is always present. Watch for some of his signature movements and compositions hidden in the handheld ‘verite’-style camerawork. Placement on the AFI List: #8.

7. Goodfellas (1990) dir. Martin Scorsese

Scorsese was very popular with the fans. The AFI voters had “Raging Bull” as his masterpiece, but the fans obviously love the Liotta, De Niro, Pesci and Sorvino gangsters better. And I agree. While “Raging Bull” rages with anger and fury, “Goodfellas” is more fun, energetic and audience-pleasing. Who can forget the awesome moment when Henry Hill, who has been narrating the film in voiceover, suddenly turns to camera in his trial, breaks the fourth wall and talks to camera? It’s a risky device, but it’s so natural for Scorsese and only elevates the film to awesome brilliance. Congrats Marty. Placement on the AFI list #92!

8. Apocalypse Now (1979) dir. Francis Ford Coppola

Coppola is the man. Two films in the top ten, and one more standing by at #11. The legend and awe of “Apocalypse Now” grows and grows. It’s the epitome of the pure sacrifice filmmakers give to their films. Coppola took years off his life making it, and though it garnered a Palme D’Or and some Oscar nods, it was the fanboys who helped put the film on its high pedestal. You should all be given credit, and a pat on the back. Placement on the AFI list #30.

9. Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) dir. Stanley Kubrick

To Kubrick fans, it will come as no surprise that this film tops his other films, including “2001” and “A Clockwork Orange”. It’s the benchmark for black comedies – The "Citizen Kane” of black comedies. Virtually untouchable, razor-sharp and flawless. Placement on the AFI List # 39.

10. Star Wars (1977) dir. George Lucas

“Star Wars’” influence speaks for itself. I need not say anymore. Placement on the AFI List #13.

11. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) dir. Steven Spielberg

I thought “Raiders” might top “Schindler’s” in the fan voting, but I was wrong. If people thought “Star Wars” was fun, exuberant adventure cinema, Spielberg and Lucas miraculously topped it with “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” Like Tarantino’s “Pulp Fiction”, it’s a film made by a couple of filmmakers who devoured a different type of cinema in their youth – the B-movie adventure serial. Lucas and Spielberg mashed up “Tarzan”, “Buck Rodgers”, “Flash Gordon” and more to create the iconic franchise. Placement on the AFI List #65.

12. The Godfather Part II (1974) dir. Francis Ford Coppola

The second “Godfather” film is the high bar for film sequels. In Part II the film turns even darker than the somber ending of the first film. Michael Corleone has morphed into a sadistic killer and an unemotional robot. There is very little semblance of the same character we were introduced to in the first film. Perhaps the most remarkable scene in the film is the second to last scene, when Coppola flashes back to the dinner table scene where we see Connie meet Carlo. Not only do we get to see Sonny again, but we get to see Michael before he was corrupted and tempted by the dark side. And we’re also reminded of one of the biggest ‘what ifs’ in cinema history. What if Brando reprised the role as Vito Corleone for that scene? We can only dream. Placement on the AFI List #32

13. Taxi Driver (1976) dir. Martin Scorsese

“Taxi Driver” was Scorsese’s major breakthrough film. Though “Mean Streets” and “Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore” brought him critical attention, Scorsese became a household name with “Taxi Driver”. The film works because of the trifecta of talent – Scorsese, Robert De Niro and Paul Schrader. It’s the definitive film for cinematic loners. Placement on the AFI List #52

14. Jaws (1975) dir. Steven Spielberg

“Jaws” was a sensation in 1975. Not only was it then the most successful film of all time, it gave birth to the summer blockbuster tent pole films that now finance practically everything in mainstream Hollywood. Under immense pressure and stress of a skyrocketing budget, schedule delays, a mechanical shark that didn’t work and a doubting studio, Spielberg, like Coppola in “Apocalypse Now” put his creativity to the test and came out a winner. Placement on the AFI List #56.

15. The Shawshank Redemption (1994) dir. Frank Darabont

There’s a reason “Shawshank” is tied for the top-rated film on the IMDB, just about everybody loves the film. Darabont’s interpretation of Stephen King’s short story is part prison film, part Capra fantasy. Morgan Freeman’s earnest voiceover sets the tone early, but it’s the surprising second act turn that elevates the film to greatness. Though it was nominated for seven Oscars, the film wasn’t really discovered by the public until its video release. Word of mouth quickly turned this film into a classic.

16. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) dir. Milos Forman

Like “Shawshank”, just about everybody loves “Cuckoo’s Nest.” It’s a simple story so thoroughly entertaining and satisfying with solid star-making performances, dramatic plot twists and an ample dose of the 50's/60’s rebellious attitude. Aside from the anchor elements of Ken Kesey’s novel, Jack Nicholson and Louise Fletcher, for me, the heart of the film is ‘Chief’ the gentle giant mute who ends the film with possibly the most tearjerking yet uplifting endings of all time. It brings chills to my skin each and every time I watch it. Placement on the AFI List #33.

17. Silence of the Lambs (1991) dir. Jonathan Demme

A slew of serial killer films have been released since “Silence of the Lambs” – including three Lector sequels/prequels. Aside from David Fincher’s equally impressive “Se7en” “Silence of the Lambs” still rocks its competition. The film is only one of three films to win all four major Oscar categories – Actor, Actress, Picture, Director, Screenplay. But the fact it performed so well as a genre film at awards season is incredible. Placement on the AFI List #74.

18. A Clockwork Orange (1971) dir. Stanley Kubrick

"Clockwork" is the second favourite Kubrick film for the fans. The success of this film is staggering as well. Despite the family-unfriendly subject matter, and having a protagonist who rapes and murders people and gets away with it, the film was Warner Bros’ highest-grossing film of that year. Is that a testament to the times or the power of the film? A bit of both I suspect. Few films and filmmakers since have been able to make such subject matter a commercial success. Placement on the AFI List #70.

19. Rear Window (1954) dir. Alfred Hitchcock

This comes as no surprise to me that “Rear Window” is the second favourite Hitchcock film for the fans. “Vertigo” is revered by the international critics, but “Rear Window” trumps “Vertigo” as popular cinema. The concept is so simple and effective – a wheelchair bound emasculated man has only a window through which to view and interact with society. We all can relate to Jimmy Stewart in the film because there’s a voyeur in all of us. Placement on the AFI List #48.

20. The Wizard of Oz (1939) dir. Victor Fleming

The name “The Wizard of Oz” has so much cache it was an almost automatic inclusion on the list. It is a wonderful film, and the top musical on the list. But it’s not the musical numbers that make the film great – it’s the fantastical new world Dorothy enters, perfectly represented by the famous door opening transition from black & white to colour. Placement on the AFI List #10.

21. Empire Strikes Back (1980) dir. Irvin Kirschner

This is the most telling entry. In the AFI List “Star Wars” placed #13 – “Empire Strike Back” was non-existent. Clearly the voters (critics, historians etc) lumped all the “Star Wars” into one and named the first film as the best. Now “Empire” gets to be represented as a separate and distinct ‘great’ film unto its own. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

22. E.T. The Extra Terrestrial (1982) dir. Steven Spielberg

After so many years “E.T.” still captures the fans' hearts as a story about a friendship between a boy and Reeces Pieces-loving alien. Placement on the AFI List #25

23. Chinatown (1974) dir. Roman Polanski

“Chinatown” established its own subgenre of noir films. “L.A. Confidential” is the only worthy rival to “Chinatown’s” crown as the noir-king. An interesting double bill would be David Lynch’s subversive “Mulholland Drive”. Placement on the AFI List #19

24. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) dir. Stanley Kurbrick

Stanley’s Kubrick’s existential sci-fi still divides some people, but at #24, it’s still a popular and powerful film and a benchmark for the genre. Placement on the AFI List #15

25. Raging Bull (1980) dir. Martin Scorsese

“Raging Bull” made a major jump into the AFI top 5, but according to the fans, it’s not his most popular film. It’s as much a violent and disturbing film about domestic abuse as it is about boxing. It’s a tough film to watch, and clearly not as fun or audience-friendly as “Goodfellas”. Placement on the AFI List #4

26. To Kill a Mockingbird (1960) dir. Robert Mulligan

The honourable presence of Gregory Peck anchors this important film about civil rights in the segregated U.S. South. It made many top 5 lists, especially among women. Placement on the AFI List #25.

27. The Graduate (1967) dir. Mike Nichols

Even though we are long gone from the 60’s for the young Fanboy voters, “The Graduate” is still relevant as a statement of the transition period from youth to adulthood. Nichols’ direction is as fresh and fun as it was 40 years ago. Placement on the AFI List #17.

28. It's a Wonderful Life (1946) dir. Frank Capra

Frank Capra’s quintessential Christmas film is seen by new audiences every year. As soon as the film ceases to be relevant to our lives broadcasters won’t play it on television every year. And there’s no indication that that will happen any time soon. Placement on the AFI List #20.

29. Fight Club (1999) dir. David Fincher

This is the second most notable entry – David Fincher’s neo-cult classic “Fight Club”. Most critics and audiences dismissed the film as nihilistic excess when the film was originally released. But for film junkies under 20, it’s grown in stature to be the “Taxi Driver” of their generation. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

30. Vertigo (1958) dir. Alfred Hitchcock

“Vertigo” in critics’ circles in generally considered Hitchcock’s masterpiece. In the recent AFI list it jumped to #9 and placed #2 in the last ‘Sight and Sound’ poll. Clearly fans aren’t as enamored with the film as critics. Placement on the AFI List #9

31. Fargo (1996) dir. Joel Coen

There were many cries afoul when “Fargo” got knocked off the new AFI list. The fans have spoken again and the Coens are represented with a respectable #30. Placement on the AFI List – nil

32. Gone With the Wind (1939) dir. Victor Fleming

Again, some respect for what still is the inflation-adjusted box office champion of all time. Placement on the AFI List #6

33. North by Northwest (1959) dir. Alfred Hitchcock

This is not one of my favourite Hitchcock films, but hey, it’s not my list. Hitchcock’s espionage romp across the USA has some particularly wonderful suspense sequences, specifically the famous and fabulous crop duster scene. Placement on the AFI List #55.

34. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) dir. Peter Jackson

I thought the recency effect of the huge popular franchise might dominate and propel the Rings films higher than this. But #33 is a respectable number for a new entry into cine-history. Placement on the AFI List #50.

35. Lawrence of Arabia (1962) dir. David Lean

A critical fave of the AFI voters, David Lean’s epic just doesn’t seem to have the likeability with the fans. With reduced attention spans, perhaps it’s the 227 mins running time. Placement on the AFI List #7.

36. The Shining (1980) dir. Stanley Kubrick

Kubrick’s horror masterpiece didn’t even crack the AFI Top 100. But since fans are not genre phobic, and “The Shining” is generally considered one of the greatest horror films of all time, it’s not surprising it’s up to #36. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

37. Annie Hall (1977) dir. Woody Allen

This is the only Woody Allen to make either list His other great films – “Crime and Misdemeanors” and “Manhattan” received some good quality vote counts, but just couldn’t crack the 100. Placement on the AFI List – #35

38. Back to the Future (1985) dir. Robert Zemeckis

One of the great fan films of all time gets some much needed respect. Thanks voters for counting this 80’s classic. Placement on the AFI List – nil

39. Singin' In the Rain (1952) dir. Gene Kelly, Stanley Donen

This film is routinely considered the greatest musical of all time. The male-centric youth who dominated the voter demographic has something to do with the difference in placements with the AFI list. Placement on the AFI List #5.

40. Sunset Blvd. (1951) dir. Billy Wilder

Fans and critics both love this film. It’s quality noir about the dark side of Hollywood and celebrityism. Placement on the AFI List #16.

41. 12 Angry Men (1957) dir. Sidney Lumet

Sidney Lumet’s chamber-drama is a classic film – essentially an investigative crime film told entirely within a jury room. It’s a brilliant concept executed perfectly thanks to a great team of actors led by the soft-spoken Henry Fonda. Placement on the AFI List #87.

42. The Matrix (1999) dir. Andy and Larry Wachowski

If the sequels had been more successful “The Matrix” would have scored higher. Up until “Reloaded” and “Revolutions” came out the first “Matrix” was the “Star Wars” of the computer/internet generation. Even with the extreme negative reaction to the other two the first film has survived as an influential film. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

43. Saving Private Ryan (1998) dir. Steven Spielberg

Steven Spielberg’s powerful film re-invented the modern war film and established the new cinematic language of war. Every battle scene from here on in will be compared to the first 25 mins of “Saving Private Ryan”. Placement on the AFI List #71.

44. Blade Runner (1982) dir. Ridley Scott

“Blade Runner” has grown into one of the all-time great sci-fi films, standing side-by-side with “Star Wars” and “2001: A Space Odyssey”. Ridley Scott combines stunning visual effects with an existential story about the nature of humanity. Placement on the AFI List #97.

45. The Lord of The Rings: The Return Of The King (2003) dir. Peter Jackson

Jackson’s achievement in making each LOTR chapter bigger and better is a triumph. His use of CGI, trick photography, costume design and all other forms of in-camera special effects to achieve his vision is astonishing. And to think he made them all at the same time. It's mind-boggling. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

46. Alien (1979) dir. Ridley Scott

Ridley Scott’s “Blade Runner” and “Alien” is one of the great career one-two punches in cinema. Two sci-fi films, completely different in style – one, a monster film masquerading as sci-fi and the other a film noir masquerading as sci-fi. Genius. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

47. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2003) dir. Michel Gondry

Like “Shawshank Redemption” this Gondry/Kaufman concoction, in a very short time, has become many people’s favourite film. It’s a great film, but the immense popularity of this little gem definitely took me by surprise. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

48. Some Like It Hot (1959) dir. Billy Wilder

Men in drag is classic go-to humour. Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis did it better than anybody. But it’s Marilyn Monroe who’s magnetic and impossible to take your eyes off. Placement on the AFI List #22

49. American Beauty (1999) dir. Sam Mendes

"American Beauty” didn’t make the AFI List despite being a generational-defining film for many people. Perhaps it’s Mendes’ arguably declining work since this debut film. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

50. Forrest Gump (1994) dir. Robert Zemeckis

“Forrest Gump” is finally bested by “Pulp Fiction”. But the earnest audience-pleaser actually ranked higher in the Fanboy list than either AFI List. Placement on the AFI List #76.

Click HERE to continue for films 51-100.

Read More...

Summary only...

AFI RELOADED: THE FANBOY 100 - #51-100

Click HERE to view #1-50
Continuing on...

51. On The Waterfront (1954) dir. Elia Kazan

So far the 40’s and 50’s studio classics are getting shunned for more recent and director-driven films. This Brando-method classic still is the defining film for actors. “I coulda had class…” After a higher #8 and then a #19 placement on the AFI Lists, the fans seem to disagree. Placement on the AFI List #19.

52. L.A. Confidential (1997) dir. Curtis Hanson

Few thought anyone could come close to meeting “Chinatown’s” standard for period noir films. But Curtis Hanson’s film indeed meets the mark. This is clearly a special film that will stand the test of time. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

53. Memento (2001) dir. Christopher Nolan

Another AFI no-show turns out to be one of the favourite films of the fans. This backwards brain-twister received many popular top5 votes. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

54. The Exorcist (1973) dir. William Friedkin

This film was a phenomenon in its day. It seems a little dated now, but the fans have obviously given the film respect for its cultural impact. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

55. Die Hard (1988) dir. John McTiernan

There was little chance this film would ever make the AFI list, but it comes as no surprise that it makes the Fanboy’s list. Perhaps the greatest pure action film of all time. Placement on the AFI List – nil

56. Unforgiven (1992) dir. Clint Eastwood

Though Clint had been making films since 1971, it took almost 20 years for him to deliver his first masterpiece, and he’s delivered 2 or 3 more since then. A remarkable late bloomer. Placement on the AFI List #68.

57. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969) dir. George Roy Hill

Apart from the extended Burt Bacharach sequence “Butch Cassidy” is invisible to its age. The dialogue, look, and action all seem as modern as it did almost 30 years ago. Placement on the AFI List #73.

58. Rocky (1976) dir. John G. Alvidson

Ok, so what if “Rocky” beat out “Taxi Driver” for the major awards of 1976. The film is still so much fun to watch and as culturally significant as “Taxi Driver.” Another very close call between AFI and the fans. Placement on the AFI List #57.

59. The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) dir. David Lean

Alec Guinness is fantastic in this film – David Lean’s first on location epic. It’s a grand spectacle, if a bit soft on the war realism. It’s a great character film too. Placement on the AFI List #36.

60. King Kong (1933) dir. Merian C. Cooper, Ernest B. Schoedsack

Two remakes still don’t compare to the power of the original film. How these two independent filmmakers managed to create life out of a 12-inch-tall clay figurine is still a miracle. Placement on the AFI List #41.

61. The Usual Suspects (1995) dir. Bryan Singer

I can still remember the theatre-audience's reaction to the famous cut-to-black at the end of “The Usual Suspects”. There was a collective gasp, and then spontaneous applause. It’s no surprise the love fans still show for this gem of a film. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

62. The Maltese Falcon (1941) dir. John Huston

The title alone can cut glass. The film, too, is a sharp, mean and tough gumshoe noir, with some of the all-time best Hollywood baddies all after the big maguffin – the Maltese Falcon. Placement on the AFI List # 31.

63. Double Indemnity (1944) dir. Billy Wilder

Perhaps the greatest of all of the black and white noir films. It’s a steaming plot twister that established many of the rules of the noir genre. Placement on the AFI List #29.

64. Groundhog Day (1993) dir. Harold Ramis

An ingenious concept executed to comic perfection, and one of the best star vehicle comedies for Bill Murray. If this film wasn’t on the AFI 400 shortlist, it may not have made this list. Cudos to them. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

65. Jurassic Park (1993) dir. Steven Spielberg

"Jurassic Park” doesn’t have the wonderful actors or characters “Jaws” had, and so the film cannot even be compared to that film. But the milestone in CG effects and the tremendous action sequences seems to have warranted inclusion. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

66. Bonnie and Clyde (1967) dir. Arthur Penn

Another milestone film for depiction of violence on screen. The violence shocks us because the film is, for the most part, a happy-go-lucky bank-robbing romp across the United States. Dunaway and Beatty are having so much fun during the film, we can hardly believe our eyes when they are eventually cut down with such violent force. Placement on the AFI List #42.

67. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) dir. Frank Capra

This film is such a classic – and a film with so much optimism that it could only have been made in the United States and by one man, Frank Capra. All his films are a treat to watch and to rediscover. - Placement on the AFI List #26.

68. Amadeus (1984) dir. Milos Forman

This is the second film on the list for Milos Forman. It’s one of the most unique portraits of an artist. F. Murray Abraham won a richly-deserved Best Actor Oscar. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

69. Toy Story (1995) dir. John Lasseter

"Toy Story” set the benchmark for all other CG animated films – the animation bristles with kinetic life, but the character and comic situations jump out of the screen as much as the scenery. Placement on the AFI List #99.

70. A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) dir. Elia Kazan

This is my favourite Brando role. It was certainly his breakout performance. It revolutionized acting – it’s one of the top 10 film performances of all time. Placement on the AFI List #47.

71. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) dir. James Cameron

A surprise entry, and a hell of a lot of fun to revisit. Back in the day, I can still remember the gigantic hype surrounding the film. It didn’t disappoint. In hindsight, was it better than the first film? Placement on the AFI List – nil.

72. Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) dir. John Huston

“Sierre Madre” is a morality tale about greed and another early classic from the multi-talented John Huston whose career spanned five decades. Placement on the AFI List #38.

73. The Third Man (1949) dir. Carol Reed

The exclusion of this film from the AFI list is a shock to me. But the fans have brought it back to the list where it belongs. Though the Fanboy list leans more toward recent films, the inclusion of this timeless classic Euro-noir speaks volumes. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

74. Rebel Without A Cause (1955) dir. Nicholas Ray

Another old classic left out by AFI and rescued by the fans. James Dean pours his heart out on the screen in this melodramatic classic. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

75. Stand By Me (1988) dir. Rob Reiner

This is another fan favourite that stands the test of time. It’s a rare mature film that appeals to young boys and girls and adults and for the same reasons. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

76. Touch of Evil (1957) dir. Orson Welles

Often referred to as the last of the studio noir films, “Touch of Evil” was considered Welles’ comeback film. In fact, his Brando-esque weight gain was just one of the shocking elements of the film. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

77. Dog Day Afternoon (1975) dir. Sidney Lumet

"Dog Day Afternoon” is one of a string of classic performances from Al Pacino. It’s a remarkable film about a gay man who robs a bank in order to pay for his lover’s sex change operation. Believe it or not, despite the risqué logline, the film is played straight as an arrow and was a critical and commercial success. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

78. Ben-Hur (1959) dir. William Wyler

I’m pretty sure “Ben Hur” gets the vote based mainly on one key scene in the film – the monumental chariot race scene. It’s arguably the greatest action scene ever filmed. By the way, the chariot scene in the original 1925 silent version is just as impressive. Check it out as well. Placement on the AFI List #100.

79. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) dir. Peter Jackson

So that makes all three LOTR films in the top 100. I can’t disagree that all three are powerful films in their own right. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

80. The Deer Hunter (1978) dir. Michael Cimino

“The Deer Hunter”, other than being very long, is still a powerful film. It’s not just about war, it’s about community, friendship and loyalty. And the Russian roulette scenes are still some of the most intense moments ever put to film. Placement on the AFI List #53.

81. Do the Right Thing (1989) dir. Spike Lee

Spike Lee’s brilliantly constructed and stylized masterpiece is the defining film about racism in urban America. It’s a simmering pot of a rage that boils over in a brilliant third act. It’s one of the great American auteur films of all time. Placement on the AFI List #96.

82. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) dir. Steven Spielberg

Steven Spielberg’s skills are best showcased in this film. It’s a film about adults made with childlike innocence. It bristles with lively pace and has that heavenly awe-inspiring quality that only Spielberg can create. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

83. This Is Spinal Tap (1984) dir. Rob Reiner

A landmark film that continues to influence film and television today. The fans clearly know how important and brilliantly funny this film is. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

84. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)

It’s remarkable to think this film was made in 1937 – before colour film was even widely established. The hand-drawn cell animation has that “Disney” quality that can never be recreated. Other than in short films, it’s an art form that’s sadly losing life fast. Placement on the AFI List #34.

85. Platoon (1986) dir. Oliver Stone

Oliver Stone has as many haters as fans. I’m surprised to see “Platoon” as his only entry on this list., because most Stone fans would say it’s not his best film, but it’s certainly his most important and most significant. Placement on the AFI List #86.

86. Braveheart (1995) dir. Mel Gibson

Before 1995, who would ever have thought Mel Gibson could have directed such a passionate and exhilarating epic film such as this. For me the battle scenes are still the best of its kind and have yet to be topped. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

87. Network (1976) dir. Sidney Lumet

“Network” is a fabulous film, written by one of the great writers for film, TV or theatre –Paddy Chayefsky. A terrific cast round out this American classic. Placement on the AFI List #64.

88. Duck Soup (1933) dir. Leo McCarey

The dialogue in this film zings. The pace and rhythm are fast and furious, punchlines are flung at us a mile minute. The comedy is situational, absurd, and slapstick piled on top of each other. Watch for similarities with the Zucker Bros best work 50 years later. Placement on the AFI List #60.

89. The Sixth Sense (1999) dir. M. Night Shyamalan

Though I didn’t see the twist coming, I personally didn’t think much of it, and so I was very surprised when the film’s popularity built up to astronomical proportions. But I’m obviously in the minority. Placement on the AFI List #89.

90. The Sound Of Music (1965) dir. Robert Wise

This film is a guilty pleasure for many fans. From 1965 to 1970 it was the highest grossing film of all time – and when adjusted for inflation it currently sits at #3. Placement on the AFI List #40.

91. Blazing Saddles (1974) dir. Mel Brooks

Fans chose Brooks’ western-comedy over “The Producers” and “Young Frankenstein”. Please go and check out all three of these great films. Placement on the AFI List #40 – nil.

92. Requiem for a Dream (2000) dir. Darren Aronofsky

Like “Fight Club” “Requiem” has grown to become a major influence on young people and young filmmakers. “Requiem” is tough, brutal and emotionally exhausting, but a piece of cinematic art. Placement on the AFI List - nil.

93. Ghostbusters (1984) dir. Ivan Reitman

“Ghostbusters” is such a fun and satisfying film on all levels of entertainment. It’s hard to believe “Ghostbusters” and “Citizen Kane” are on the same list. Wait to go fans! Placement on the AFI List – nil.

94. The Manchurian Candidate (1962) dir. John Frankenheimer

The original political paranoia film. Frankenheimer was one of the best and most innovative American directors of the 60’s and “The Manchurian Candidate” was his best. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

95. All About Eve (1950) dir. Joseph L. Mankiewicz

“All About Eve” was nominated for all the majors Oscars in 1951. It won 6 including Best Picture. And remember Bette Davis’ memorable line, “Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night". Placement on the AFI List #28.

96. Being John Malkovich (1999) dir. Spike Jonze

It looks like 1999 is one of the most popular years for film fans. Already “Fight Club”, “The Matrix, “The Sixth Sense” and “American Beauty” make the list. That’s 2 more than the storied year of 1939. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

97. Titanic (1997) dir. James Cameron

Though it’s still monumentally ‘uncool’ to like this film, it still gets some closeted love from the fans. Fanboys definitely aren’t cynical. Placement on the AFI List – #83.

98. West Side Story (1960) dir. Robert Wise

I personally prefer this film to “The Sound of Music”, but I’m not complaining. “West Side Story” has so many wonderful and energetic cinematic moments. My personal favourite is the underground dance sequence. Placement on the AFI List – #51

99. Airplane (1980) dir. Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker

No surprise the fans love “Airplane”. It’s no doubt one of the funniest films of all time. AFI voters didn’t have the courage to vote for this one. Watch for it's similiaries to the Marx Bros films. Placement on the AFI List – nil.

100. It Happened One Night (1934) dir. Frank Capra

And last but not least, Frank Capra's third film on this list - a classic romantic comedy infamous in it's day for Clark Gable taking off his shirt. Placement on the AFI List #46.

Click HERE to go back to #1-50

Read More...

Summary only...

ANNE OF THE THOUSAND DAYS

Anne of the Thousand Days (1969) dir. Charles Jarrot
Starring: Genevieve Bujold, Richard Burton, Anthony Quayle, John Colicos

****

“We used the incest excuse last time. We can't make a habit of it.”

Queen Elizabeth is in vogue again. “The Tudors” is the buzz mini-series on television and Shekar Kapur and Cate Blanchett are about to release a sequel to “Elizabeth” called “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”. I’d like to make a case for Charles Jarrott and Hal B. Wallis’ “Anne of the Thousand Days” as the best of all these films. The time period is filled with many intriguing soap opera-style political stories – there’s Elizabeth, Mary Queen of Scotts, the many wives of Henry VIII, Sir Thomas More, Sir Francis Drake and more. “Anne of the Thousand Days” concentrates on Henry VIII’s empire-dividing lustful pursuit of Anne Boleyn. It’s a tremendously interesting epic film about this very important and complex time period.

Henry VIII is played with gusto by Richard Burton. The reigning monarch of England has led the nation through a relatively peaceful period. His ego is as big as his power and despite being married his eyes are constantly wandering. In the opening scene horndog Henry locks eyes on the young and beautiful figure of Anne Boleyn (Genevieve Bujold). Even though he’s been in bed with her sister, Mary she quickly discards her and pursues with all energy the more beautiful Anne. His courtship is aggressive, but Anne is strong and stands up to Henry VIII’s continual demands. She doesn’t want to be another mistress of the King, instead she will only give her love in exchange for the title of Queen.

One major problem stands in the way of bliss for Henry – he’s married to the niece of the King of Spain. The politics of annulment are complicated even more by the political ramifications of making an every of Spain. But Henry is determined. With the aide of his advisors Thomas Cromwell (John Colicos) and Cardinal Wolsley (Anthony Quayle) Henry makes famously splits ties with the Vatican creating the Church of England all so he can wed Boleyn. Henry gets what he wants, but when Boleyn is unable to produce a son for Henry the honeymoon is over and Boleyn becomes an enemy of the state. We know from history the fate of Boleyn, and revenge will be Anne’s in death with her daughter Elizabeth I waiting in the wings for her time claim the throne.

“Anne of the Thousand Days” at two and a half hours is indeed an epic film. But there’s no better producer than Hal B. Wallis to make it all work. Just go to IMDB and you’ll see his resume, which is longer than the phone book and includes a number of classics including “Casablanca”, “Beckett” and a dozen Elvis films. The politics of the Court can be complicated but the writing team of John Hale, Bridget Boland and Richard Sokolove who adapt Maxwell Anderson’s play keep it simple. The film is character-driven. Burton is incredible as Henry VIII. He is bull-headed ego-mad chauvinist, but Burton makes him lovable and vulnerable. The speech he makes to Anne which convinces her to marry him is a wonderful turnaround of character.

Genevieve Bujold, a great Canadian actress, is an equal match for Burton. If not one of the best-ever performances by I’ve seen by an actress, it’s certainly the most underrated. Bujold was nominated for an Oscar, but lost to Maggie Smith for “The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie”. Watch the subtle character changes over the course of the film. The film is essentially a power struggle between man and woman, each with their own agenda. Anne starts out on the defensive and idealistic. She is offended that the King could break up her engagement to Lord Percy and simply ‘take’ her because he is King. Though the King is known for his merciless persecution of dissidents, she stands up to him knowing that his carnal lust weakens him. Eventually she falls in love with the wealth and power that comes with her title. And when she can’t give birth to a son, she becomes a broken woman, who loses the strength to fend off the increasingly psychotic behaviour of Henry.

Charles Jarrott at the time was a veteran of British television, but this is definitely not “Masterpiece Theatre”. He shoots the film with on location realism. The confines of the court are never clausterphobic or cold, his shooting style is vibrant with movement, colour and a magnificent anamorphic wide screen frame. With little big cinema experience he indeed manages to create a great epic film.

The new DVD of the film is actually two films in one – before “Elizabeth: the Golden Age” Jarrott and Wallis were the first pair to create a period sequel of the Tutors. The second disc accompaniment is “Mary Queen of Scots” – a sequel of sorts made three years later with different actors but with the same tone and style as the first film. After watching “Anne of the Thousands” I was so interested seeing this second part of the story. Unfortunately despite some good performances “Mary Queen of Scots” fails to rise to greatness of “Anne”. The time and place is even more complicated than the court of Henry VIII –and so the film gets bogged down by double-crosses and triple-crosses.

But certainly check out “Anne of the Thousand Days”, it’s a classic epic featuring two great performances from Genevieve Bujold and Richard Burton. Enjoy.

Buy it here: Anne of the Thousand Days / Mary, Queen of Scots

Read More...

Summary only...

FUNNY FACE

Funny Face (1957) dir. Stanley Donen
Starring: Audrey Hepburn, Fred Astaire, Kay Thompson

**1/2

It’s the 50th Anniversary of “Funny Face”- the Hepburn/Astaire musical classic about a bookish young girl’s entry into the world of high fashion. Having not seen it before I was looking to seeing it because of director Stanley Donen, who made three of the all time classic musicals “On the Town”, “Singing in the Rain” and “Seven Brides for Seven Brothers”. Unfortunately, despite some wonderful direction, the musical sequences are a bore compared these other classics. And the age difference between Astaire and Hepburn distracted me from accepting it as a love story.

The film opens with very creative credit sequence by Richard Avedon, which brings us into the office of the high style fashion magazine ‘Quality’. The editor-in-chief is a pre-Anna Wintour bull of a woman named Maggie Prescott (Kay Thompson). She loudly expresses her discontent with the current issue of the magazine and proclaims to her army of assistants that pink shall be the new colour of the season. The man to visualize this new look for the magazine is photographer Dick Avery (Fred Astaire). Avery would like to the look to represent not only the bright and cheerfully nature of the colour but also give it an intellectual side. Their first photo shoot is in a bookstore where they discover the woman who’s the ideal new face Prescott and Avery have been looking for – the awkward and studious Jo Stockton (Audrey Hepburn).

Avery, using his skills at photography (and dance) to shows Jo how she can be beautiful and intelligent in front of the camera. Jo accepts his coaxing and agrees to be his model. The film then moves to Paris where she becomes a genuine fashion model and falls in love with Avery. But the intellectualism of Paris also grabs her heart, which threatens the new campaign for the magazine. With the power of song and dance love wins out.

As mentioned, Stanley Donen provides us with modern and stylish opening – not just the credit sequence but the establishment of the fashion office, the design of which can be seen all over “Ugly Betty” and “The Devil Wears Prada”. And before Meryl Streep or Vanessa Williams there was Maggie Prescott who establishes the tough as nails fashion editor.

Surprisingly the major disappointment of the film is the song and dance. The “Pink” number is well shot but the music feels 20 years dated and not reflecting the modern look. The first Astaire number which has him developing the famous photo which would grace the cover of the magazine (and become the famous poster for the film) is flat. Astaire’s sings his dialogue and tries his best to express his joy in song, but there’s nothing catchy or fun about the song. The “Bonjour Paris” scene, a neat recreation of Donen’s “New York New York” sequence from “On the Town”, is a wonderful to look at for it’s on-location sequences, but again, the song is bland. The highlight is Astaire’s extended “Let’s Kiss and Make Up”. It’s a classic Astaire sequence which has him using his cane and jacket to mimic a bullfight.

But despite his talents in this scene Astaire is miscast. He was 57 when he made the film, Hepburn was 26. Of course, that’s never stopped Hollywood creating love out of extreme age differences but 31 years is a stretch, plus Astaire actually looks older than 57. He could practically engulf the waify Hepburn in the wrinkles of his forehead.

For a musical to work, and stand the test of time, the sequences have to take the audience out of the film and bring them into another world – a stylistic expression of the emotions of the characters. Unfortunately Donen has made the real world more stylish and interesting than the expressionistic world.

Therefore having made “Singing in the Rain” and “Seven Brides for Seven Brothers” and featuring Gershwin music, I expected a similar extravaganza of music and dance. So I was disappointed and recommend this film for Astaire and Hepburn fanatics only.

Buy it here: Funny Face (50th Anniversary Edition)

Read More...

Summary only...

THE INTRUDER & EAT MY DUST

The Intruder (1962) dir. Roger Corman
Starring: William Shatner

****






Eat My Dust (1975) dir. Charles B. Griffith
Starring: Ron Howard

***

Guest review by Greg Klymkiw

Two titles released by Buena Vista from the Roger Corman canon in recent weeks, “The Intruder” and “Eat My Dust”, couldn’t be more different from each other. They do, however, share several key ingredients – extremely low budgets, some first-rate writing, pure filmmaking ingenuity, break-neck pace and supreme entertainment value. I can’t imagine there’s anyone who cares about movies that doesn’t know who Roger Corman is – he’s one of the true originals of American cinema; an icon, a maverick, a God. No, let me re-phrase that. Roger Corman is not “a” God - he is God. As a director, producer and distributor, Corman was notoriously thrifty, endowed with impeccable taste in both trash and art, blessed with a nose for talent and, as the title of his autobiography proclaimed, he made well over one hundred films and “never lost a dime”.

“The Intruder”, directed and produced by Corman and first released in 1961, was perhaps – until very recently – the exception to the rule. It was the one film that for years dogged and haunted Corman as his one and only money-loser – a film he pretty much self-financed by taking a second mortgage out on his home.

Based on the Charles Beaumont novel, with a screenplay by the original author, “The Intruder” is about a racist outside agitator who, on the eve of racial integration in the schools, comes to a quiet small-town in the deep South to pit the white (and white-trash) ruling class against their African American neighbours. Using real locations and mixing real people from those actual locations as actors in supporting roles (as well as shooting on the site of recent and actual civil unrest) Corman’s film is powerful and incendiary. It might even be the best motion picture ever made that deals specifically with the civil rights movement in the United States.

Charles Beaumont’s screenplay is full of texture and nuance, but that should come as no surprise since he was one of the great screenwriters of this period, delivering numerous classic teleplays for Rod Serling’s “Twilight Zone” TV series in addition to the numerous Poe adaptations that Corman later produced and/or directed. He also acts in the picture as the town’s liberal newspaper editor who clashes with the racist agitator.

In the title role, Corman cast a very young and utterly brilliant William Shatner who both charms and creeps us out as the picture progresses. In one of the picture’s more memorable sequences, Shatner delivers a speech of utter hatred to a group of rednecks (played by the real thing). Shatner’s performance here is still one of the most frightening things ever committed to celluloid, but is made even more extraordinary by the way in which Corman shoots the sequence – eerily recalling Leni Riefenstahl’s coverage of Hitler’s speechifying in “Triumph of the Will”.

Of the fifty or so pictures Corman actually directed, this was probably the only obvious non-genre picture. It was certainly a critical success and an award winner on the film festival circuits, but its failure at the box office put a definite stop to Corman’s aspiration to make similar pictures and the rest of his career was devoted to horror pictures, motorcycle epics and even head-trip psychedelia. Not that this was a bad thing, mind you, because his genre pictures were almost always brilliantly made and offered entertainment value of the highest order to millions upon millions of moviegoers the world over.

“Eat My Dust” from 1976 is a perfect example of one of those entertaining genre pieces. Corman produced this slam-bang car chase picture which holds the (for some, dubious) distinction of launching the eventual directorial career of Ron Howard. Fresh from a long TV career as an actor on both “The Andy Griffith Show” and the intolerable “Happy Days”, Howard agreed to act in this picture in exchange for an eventual shot at directing his first feature the following year for Corman.

The writer and director of “Eat My Dust” was the late Charles B. Griffith - a legend within the Corman stable who sadly passed away a week ago. He wrote numerous screenplays including the legendary and original “Little Shop of Horrors”, “Bucket of Blood”, “The Wild Angels” and the classic Paul Bartel car chase satire, “Death Race 2000” (in which Griffith also directed most of the jaw-dropping 2nd unit action scenes). And he sure didn’t drop the ball with “Eat My Dust” – a kick-ass drive-inn car chase picture with outlandish chases and stunts blended with plenty of opportunities for hot babes, hot cars and snappy, wacky, delightfully cheesy dialogue. Ron Howard plays the All-American stock car driver who, to impress hot bottle blonde Christopher Norris (yup, she’s a babe, in spite of her first name), steals a super hot-rod and wreaks considerable havoc on the backroads of small town America. The picture almost never lets up and is, essentially, one big extended chase scene. It has everything going for it that Howard’s subsequent directorial debut (also a car chase picture – the forgettable “Grand Theft Auto”) did not have – great dialogue and first-rate, stylish direction.

The good news about both of these recent DVD releases is that they’re both available and both are reasonably priced. The bad news is that they’re pretty woeful releases as far as DVD packages go. “Eat My Dust” is, by default, the better deal because the print source seems to be decent and the extras - the original trailer and a short “making of” segment - while hardly overwhelming, are kind of fun – especially the latter which features brilliant editor Tina Hirsch, the cinematographer and leading babe Christopher Norris (long-in-tooth now, but still perky). Sadly, “Eat My Dust” is presented full frame, though I don’t think it’s been panned and scanned which, oddly enough, is too bad because the open matte just doesn’t seem to do the visuals justice.

The Buena Vista DVD release of “The Intruder” is a sad story. Not only is it from poor print elements, it is presented in a full screen open matte format. The only extra is a very short featurette with Corman and Shatner interviewed separately. Compared with the earlier New Concorde DVD release of this film, the 40th anniversary edition that came out in 2001, this new “special edition” from Buena Vista is not so special. While the New Concorde version came from the same flawed originals, it was at least in anamorphically enhanced widescreen rather than full frame. The New Concorde extras were simple, but solid. The featurette on the earlier DVD release included 30 minutes of Shatner and Corman in conversation with each other, a fun selection of other Corman trailers, a few well-written biographies and an excellent timeline of the entire civil rights movement. Buena Vista’s release is well priced and if you have not seen “The Intruder”, you could do worse than buy or rent it, but frankly, you’re probably better off trying to find the 2001 New Concorde 40th anniversary DVD release.

Ultimately, if these two DVD releases are indicative of the treatment Corman’s work is getting on the Buena Vista label, I’d have to proclaim that Mr. Corman deserves something better. Sure, they’re all drive-inn and grindhouse fare, but they’re entertainment of the highest order.

Buy them here:

The Intruder (Special Edition)

Eat My Dust (Supercharged Edition)

Read More...

Summary only...

CUJO

Cujo (1983) dir. Lewis Teague
Starring: Dee Wallace, Danny Pintauro, Daniel Hugh-Kelly

**1/2

"Cujo's" reputation is preceded by it's pop culture significance as a synonym for a terryfing rabid mangler dog. Though I had never seen the film till now, I did hear that it was a let down from that hype. So my expectations were low. The story itself is terrific, a classic Stephen King concept that reuses themes and situations from his other stories – “The Shining”, “Misery”, “Gerald’s Game”. In short, it’s potentially a great film, unfortunately hampered by an extremely uninteresting set up.

The Trenton family Vic (Daniel Hugh-Kelly) and Donna (Dee Wallace) are the typical married couple with a myriad of domestic troubles. Vic, an ad exec, is about to lose his biggest account, Donna is a bored homemaker who has recently taken up an affair with a local furniture maker. And their sole child Tad (“Who’s the Boss’” Danny Pintauro) is socially stunted and has sought companionship with a local rapid dog. That rapid dog is a lovable Saint Bernard named Cujo, owned by the local car mechanic.

When Vic takes an emergency trip to salvage his fleeing advertising clients, he leaves Donna to take care for their faulty Ford Pinto. When the car put-puts up to the mechanic’s isolated ranch, they discover the mechanic has been mauled to death by Cujo. The dog, still looking for blood, attacks Donna and Tad forcing them to seek refuge in their car. The second half of the film is a cleverly staged three hander siege on the car (if you count Cujo as a character). Every attempt of Donna to leave the car to find help is met by the awesome rabid power of the 200lb mangler. It’s a battle of attrition and wits between animal and man.

Lewis Teague, a not untalented director of action television, stages the first half of the film like a TV movie. The film is chiefly a domestic drama between Vic and Donna as we get to know the foibles of their declining relationship. The characters are well cast. Dee Wallace is the star based on her recent fame from “E.T.” and she is surprisingly good as an ordinary mom who feels guilty for cheating on her husband. Daniel Hugh-Kelly is a good ol’ 80’s hunk – with the Hasselhoff locks and manly chest rug. And of course, he has a cool red convertible car – that’s a given. Danny Pintauro is cute and lovable and adequate as the token child in distress with a convenient asthma affliction.

Many horror films work best in the set up stages but can’t pay off the goods (ie. “Bug”), but Teague actually screws up the set up and nails the pay off. There’s absolutely no tension before the 45min mark. He tries to tease us with longing closeups of Cujo’s eyes – but the dog is just too lovable to be scary at that point. The secondary characters, the mechanic and his wife, are time fillers, and their plot lines are quickly discarded once the dog starts killing people.

When Cujo finally gets violent, that’s when things get good. The lengthy stand off sequence between Donna, Tad and Cujo is Stephen King at his best. Like “Misery” or “The Shining” – it’s a close-quarters battle with nowhere to flee. Thematically the fight is a test for redemption for Donna’s infidelities against Tad and Vic. She eventually turns into a warrior willing to sacrifice herself for her son.

Warning: SPOILERS ahead...The climax moment in the kitchen after Donna and Tad escape Cujo’s attack is well dramatized. Donna’s trying to save her son who’s gasping for air from an asthma attack of some sort. At this point the film had me in its artificial grip of reality. So when Cujo makes another attack jumping through the window, I gripped the seat with surprise. I can’t discount this visceral cinematic moment.

The film was shot expertly by the master Dutch lensman, Jan De Bont. His mobile camera is very fluid and natural. I didn’t so much like the brown tint to the film, but Teague’s editing (he was a former editor too) of the dog attacks are well cut together and successfully put you into the melee.

“Cujo” is not the horror film you think it is, or even remember from a nostalgia point of view. You may be disappointed, and it certainly isn’t as scary as the book, but there’s a terrific second half waiting, if you can get past the MOW at the beginning. Enjoy.

P.S. The film ends with one of the all time worst freeze frames. You have to check it out.

Read More...

Summary only...

PARAMOUNT'S "GAME NIGHT COLLECTION"

Fear Strikes Out (1957) dir. Robert Mulligan
Major League (1989) dir. David S. Ward
Hardball (2001) dir. Brian Robbins
Bang the Drum Slowly (1973) dir. John D. Hancock
Bad News Bears (1976) dir. Michael Ritchie
Bad News Bears (2005) dir. Richard Linklater
Bad News Bears in Breaking Training (1977) dir. Michael Pressman
Bad News Bears Go to Japan (1978) dir. John Berry

Guest review by Greg Klymkiw

With baseball playoffs just begun it seems appropriate that Paramount Home Video should have released this nine-movie box set entitled the “Game Night Collection” as a bit of cinematic foreplay to the main event (as it were). As someone who has virtually no interest in sports I still find myself a sucker for great sports pictures since the addition of story, character, mise en scene and on occasion, pure big-screen hokum become a perfect substitute for watching the thing itself. In a sense, these pictures often delve into that one area of sports some actually find fascinating - the world of sports – that is, everything about and around the sport rather than the sport itself.

American cinema is, of course, overflowing with sporting activities as a backdrop, but it is probably safe to say that it is baseball and football that are – by far – the most popular. In the movies, if football is analogous to war as it so often is (think Oliver Stone’s “Any Given Sunday” as a recent example), baseball occupies a somewhat loftier, though gentler metaphorical position than football – that of Life itself. Winning is nice, but how you play the game is just as, if not more important.

When this box set presented itself to me, I was actually pretty excited since I had seen many of these films when I was a child and had some really fond memories of them. I was also looking forward to catching up with a few of the newer titles I had heretofore missed and to take a new look at a couple of the more recent offerings. Upon actually finishing the whole box, my initial hopes weren’t necessarily dashed, but the collection turned out to be a pretty mixed bag.

Happily, in all such sets, there’s usually at least one Crown Jewel in the mix and this box is no exception. While I’ve always had fond memories of “Fear Strikes Out” this most recent viewing yielded one of those rare experiences where the benefits of age (mine and the film’s) allowed for a whole new appreciation of this minor masterpiece of the 1950s. The inspiring true story of Jimmy Piersall a star hitter, shortstop and outfielder for the Boston Red Sox who fought his way to the top with the help of his insanely demanding and driven father only to suffer a highly public nervous breakdown is the stuff movies are made of. And this picture delivers big-time.

The relationship between father and son often provides highly-charged drama, but as portrayed in this extraordinary movie, it chills to the bone with its portrait of a father pushing his son out of both love and selfishness to dizzying heights of fame on the surface, while deep-down, shoving his son into a deep, dark closet mired in fear and intimidation. Karl Malden as Dad and Anthony Perkins as Jimmy electrify the screen with their searing, staggering performances. As horrendous as Dad is, Malden still infuses the character with a warmth and humanity that makes the character all the more tragic. Perkins, in a role pre-dating his turn as the nut-job in Hitchcock’s Psycho is equally extraordinary – careening wildly from the shy romantic young man with a dream to the psychologically battered and drained vegetable in a straight-jacket.

“Fear Strikes Out” is also noteworthy as one of seven terrific pictures from one of the great producer-director relationships in American cinema. As a team, Producer Alan J. Pakula and director Robert Mulligan always delivered the goods – daring to take us on journeys few mainstream pictures were willing to take in the late 1950s to early 1960s. They tackled a wide variety of important social issues with taste, intelligence and most, importantly, a fabulous sense of showmanship. The pictures they made together were as supremely entertaining as they were thought-provoking. If they had only made “Fear Strikes Out” and their timeless adaptation of Harper Lee’s “To Kill A Mockingbird”, that would surely have been enough to secure them a place in motion picture history, but they kept on delivering.

It’s also interesting to mention how this creative relationship really points to the importance of producers with vision. Once this team split up, Mulligan kept directing pictures, but they were all a pale imitation of the collaborations with Pakula. Pakula, on the other hand began directing his own pictures during Mulligan’s decline. Pakula kept delivering and continued the legacy of creating masterworks (“Klute”, “The Parallax View” and “All The President’s Men” to name a few) while Mulligan barfed up such celluloid chunks as “Summer of ‘42”, “The Other” and “Same Time Next Year” (and sadly, those pieces of crap were his “watchable” pictures – try sitting through “The Nickel Ride” sometime).

Sadly, “Fear Strikes Out” has absolutely no extra features, but it’s a solid transfer of a gorgeous-looking black and white picture and happily enhanced anamorphically.

“Fear Strikes Out” is a terrific movie to own. Within the context of this box set, it shares (thankfully on a separate disc) a slim-line case with “Bang the Drum Slowly”. Directed by the painfully bland John Hancock, this TV-movie-style (visually) and annoyingly muted drama pretty much makes mincemeat out of Mark Harris’s lovely novel and screenplay. A young Robert DeNiro as a doomed simpleton ball player works hard to charm and touch us while Michael Moriarty as the pal who takes pity on him is equally moving. Alas, the picture plods along like molasses, looks downright ugly, has little feel for capturing the simple joy of the ball fields, dugouts and dressing rooms and is saddled with an especially grating musical score. There are no extras with “Bang the Drum Slowly”, but none are really required.

The other piece of bad news in this box set is a double-trouble double-header. Two separate discs sharing another slim line case are a pair of what might be the worst baseball pictures ever made: “Hardball”, a bile-inducing story of loser Keanu Reeves finding himself while coaching a ragtag group of inner-city kids to little league victory and “Talent For The Game”, a dull-as-dishwater picture directed by the no-talent hack Robert M. Young (‘nuff said) and starring Edward James Olmos (‘nuff said) as a baseball scout who turns a small town simpleton into a major leaguer. Lorraine Bracco is in it too. Christ, she has an annoying voice. Watching her in this picture, I’m absolutely stumped how Scorsese made her beyond-palatable in “Goodfellas”. “Talent For The Game” has no extra features, but “Hardball” is inexplicably jam-packed with extra features including a pretty useless commentary track with the supposed writer and director and a mess of promo junk.

Getting its own slimline case, the single disc of writer-director David S. Ward’s “Major League”, dubbed the “Wild Thing Edition”, is loaded with a variety of extra features including an okay commentary with Ward. If you liked George Roy Hill’s “Slap Shot” (and I most certainly do), you’ll probably enjoy this raucous version of that hockey classic set against the backdrop of baseball but without Hill’s panache and Nancy Dowd’s brilliant dialogue. That said, “Major League” made me laugh quite a bit when I first saw it and coming back to it was like putting on a comfy old pair of slippers – it still managed to deliver the well-worn goods.

Rounding out the set are four different titles with the “Bad News Bears”. Sharing one slim-line case are two separate discs of the original Michael Ritchie comedy classic and the recent Richard Linklater remake. Ritchie’s picture from Bill Lancaster’s terrific script holds up so marvelously that one wonders why the remake was necessary – especially since it really doesn’t try to move into new territory like some good remakes actually can (I always like to cite the first three versions of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” as an example of how this can work beautifully.). Ritchie’s original stars, the inimitable hang-dog schlub Walter Matthau as the drunken foul-mouthed lout who manages to coach an equally foul-mouthed group of kids to ball-diamond glory with the help of the foul mouthed tweener pitcher Tatum O’Neal. It’s a great picture – both funny and moving. Linklater’s remake, as mentioned is absolutely unnecessary, but thanks to Lancaster’s script (which remains largely intact) and Billy Bob Thornton who is surprisingly good in Matthau’s role, it’s kind of watchable. Sadly, Ritchie’s film has zero extras and Linklater’s ho-hum remake is jam-packed with extras.

Uh, Earth to Paramount Home Video . . . rectify this, please.

The final offerings in this box are the original sequels to Ritchie’s original. On two separate discs in the same slim-line plastic case you will first find “Bad News Bears in Breaking Training”, a horrendously unfunny sequel with none of the original cast and an utterly unappetizing William Devane making a poor replacement for Matthau. The other sequel, “Bad News Bears Go To Japan”, is not without laughs as the misfits find themselves in the land of the rising sun. Paramount wisely secured Bill Lancaster to write the script and they cast a very entertaining Tony Curtis in the coach role. Is it good? Not exactly, but it’s a decent-enough time-waster.

If you don’t own “Fear Strikes Out”, “Major League” and the original “Bad News Bears” and want to own all three of them, then it’s probably your best bet economically to pick up the box set. At the end of the day, it’s probably best to rent all three and hold out to buy “Fear Strikes Out” and Ritchie’s “Bad News Bears” when Paramount Home Video gets its act together and issues proper special editions of them.

Read More...

Summary only...

BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA

Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) dir. Francis Ford Coppola
Starring: Gary Oldman, Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Anthony Hopkins

***1/2

I love “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”. It’s a gothic near-masterpiece, which goes back to Bram Stoker’s original material and builds the film back up directly from his novel. It’s therefore a non-vampire vampire film – a fresh start, unencumbered with genre expectations. Coppola has made the film into a Wagner-esque operatic epic love story spanning continents and centuries.

The opening, wonderfully grand, sets the tone for the film – Polish composer Wojciech Kilar’s dark and brooding chords punctuate an intense pre-credit sequence. Coppola establishes the tragic death of Dracula’s wife, Elizabeta, his renunciation of God and his rebirth as the undead vampyre avenger. We then see the familiar story in turn-of-the-century London as Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves) receives his assignment to travel to Transylvania to visit the enigmatic Dracula (Gary Oldman) and close a deal on a series of land purchases in London. When Dracula notices that Harker’s fiancé Mina (Winona Ryder) looks exactly like his long lost wife, he decides to travel to London to find Mina. Harker, imprisoned in Dracula’s castle, is then put through a series of menacing ordeals, in hopes of breaking his mind like his former liaison –Renfield (Tom Waits).

After the lengthy journey Dracula does meet with Mina. The second act becomes a passionate courtship between the two. Mina feels the powerful attraction of the vampire blood-lust and so is drawn to Dracula. Harker does escape from Dracula’s castle and manages to travel back to London. With the help of Professor Abraham Van Helsing (Anthony Hopkins) and his team of vampire fighters Harker faces off against Dracula one last time to save Mina from becoming one of the undead.

“Bram Stoker’s Dracula” has a rare cinematic exuberance which can easily be mistaken as overdramatic or unrealistic. Coppola has purposefully created a ‘stagy’ feel to his interpretation. Unlike Werner Herzog’s Dracula (“Nosferatu”) which was more ‘on location’, Coppola’s world is manufactured and heightened in all meanings of the word. The acting is big, the music is big, the sets and costumes are big. This tone has much in common with John Boorman’s “Excalibur”, another film, which has been ridiculed for its over-dramatics. Watch these two films back-to-back and you’ll find many similarities.

Gary Oldman is fantastic as “Dracula”. Coppola gives him two distinctive looks – his older “Transylvanian” look and his suave modern Londoner look. He woos Mina with his charming modern attire, but I prefer the angry and vengeful Dracula. There’s no black cape, or widow’s peak. Dracula famous outfits were created by Japanese designer Eiko Ishioka and gives us a Kibuke version of Dracula. It works because the audience is immediately taken outside all other versions of the story including both German “Nosferatu” versions.

The special effects are perhaps the most talked about aspects of the film. Coppola, with his son Roman and effects legend Michael Lantieri, uses classical film techniques to create the unique effects – optical matting, reverse shooting, lighting transitions. But everything looks fantastic and completely modern. I only wish more filmmakers would go old-school and give us a break from CGI (note: Darren Aronofsky also created all his effects optically and organically for “The Fountain”). One of Coppola’s trademarks is his wonderful dissolves and transitions. Harker’s first traveling sequence is the first of many complex transition sequences that breath life into tired old establishing, time-condensing montages.

Despite the praise, the film is not quite a masterpiece. The second act – the love story with Mina and Dracula – starts to lag at the midway point, but thanks to Anthony Hopkins the picture is saved. Hopkins delivers a wonderful scene-chewing performance as Van Helsing. The appearance of he and his vampire posse injects fresh new life into the second act.

This non-musical opera-version of Dracula is a classic. In fact, over the next few years he’ll return to this style of gothic reinvention by remaking “Frankenstein” with Kenneth Branagh and “Sleepy Hollow” with Tim Burton. But his “Dracula” remains the best of the bunch, and clearly his best film of the 1990’s. Enjoy.

Here’s an old trailer from 1992:

Read More...

Summary only...

1408

1408 (2007) dir. Mikael Håfström
Starring: John Cusack, Samuel L. Jackson

**

“1408” was a decent box office success and I received a few good recommendations about it. But I have to say I was sorely disappointed. It’s a classic Stephen King story – a writer haunted by spirits of his past – directed by a young and talented Swedish director, Mikael “Evil” Håfström. Unfortunately the film is a sub-par ghost film heavy on pyrotechnics but short on psychological scares.

John Cusack plays Mike Enslin, a hack writer who pens real ghost story travelogues (like ‘Haunted Houses of New England’). Mike dreams of writing respectable fiction, but when his young daughter died tragically four years ago, both his career and his marriage fell apart. While on a book publicity tour he receives an anonymous postcard telling him NOT to visit room 1408 at the Dolphin Hotel in New York City. Mike, of course, takes the bait and travels to New York to stay in the room and document his findings for a future book. The hotel manager Gerald Olin (Samuel L. Jackson) gives Mike the backstory on the room, which includes numerous deaths and disfigurements over the 75 year history of the hotel. But despite Mike’s experience in investigating paranormal activity he’s actually a skeptic and, so, doesn’t believe a word of Olin’s stories.

With all warnings ignored Mike takes the room for the night. Predictably, freaky things start happening in the room – the radio turns on by itself, windows close by themselves. The paranormal events escalate and become grander and grander. Mike starts seeing the ghosts of previous suicidal residents, then his ‘hallucinations’ turn into large scale upheavals of the room. At one point the room becomes engulfed in water and Mike appears to drown in the room. The real fear for Mike comes when his young daughter appears before him. Up until the very end we’re not sure what exactly is going on, whether ghosts of the past plague his brain, or if indeed it’s all just a dream.

The film begins well, and teases us with a classic build-up sequence. Samuel Jackson has a great role as the harbinger of the room’s evil. Remember the sequence in “The Shining” when the manager interviews Jack and describes the morbid details of the Overlook Hotel. “1408” is definitely NOT “The Shining” but the scene serves the same purpose. The paranormal events have a randomness that reduces the mystery and suspense. The freaky stuff gets so outlandish so fast that all creepiness in the film is lost. Large scale action prevails over what should be a psychological mind-bender. There’s a couple of twists that just jerk us around but they don’t add anything to the mystery or secrets of the room. Håfström throws in everything but the kitchen sink to keep our interest but to no avail.

The subplot with Mike’s estranged wife and deceased child feels perfunctory, like a last straw attempt to scare us when nothing else in the film was working. Granted, there is a moment near the end when Mike is embracing the ghost of his daughter, which is a terrific moment of acting for Cusack, but unfortunately it’s a lost moment in the excessive waterfalls, fires and other pyrotechnics that bloat another failed Stephen King story. A couple weeks ago Cusack was quoted as saying he thought, over the course of his career, he’d only made 10 good films. I doubt “1408” makes his list.

Buy it here: 1408 (Two-Disc Collector's Edition)

Read More...

Summary only...

IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH

In the Valley of Elah (2007) dir. Paul Haggis
Starring: Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron, Susan Sarandon

***1/2

Paul Haggis tackles the popular and topical subject of the Iraq War. “In the Valley of Elah” focuses on the psychological effect of the War on the returning soldiers. It’s an important film, and Haggis chooses to tell the story through the device of an investigative drama. Imagine “A Few Good Men” with a message. Haggis proves again he has top notch skills with familiar stories and relays his message with maximum emotional impact.

The film opens with Hank Deerfield (Tommy Lee Jones) on the phone with the military base his son Mike has returned to after a tour in Iraq. But after one day, Mike has gone AWOL. Hank immediately leaves his wife (Susan Sarandon) at home and travels two days by car to the Tennessee town to find his son. Neither the military police nor the civilian police are doing enough to find his son, so, Hank, a former military man himself, conducts his own personal investigation.

Without spoiling the details (and believe me the less you know the better), I can say the film moves along like a traditional investigative story. Jones quickly reverts to his military habits, and is single-minded and relentless in his search. His actions perturb both the military police and the city police. But he does manage to wrangle the help of a new police detective Emily Sanders (Charlize Theron). Even Emily is skeptical about Hank’s involvement, but she quickly learns his determination is matched by his acuteness and attention to detail. Hank makes a series of discoveries which break the case and help solve the mystery. But the mystery is just the start of the journey for Hank, as he discovers faults in himself which has contributed to the heartbreaking events.

The strength of the film is Haggis’ characters. Tommy Lee Jones is terrific as Hank. Rarely does Hank waver from his poker-faced exterior demeanor, but with just a glance from his weathered face Jones manages to express a range of emotions from rage to sadness to fear. Haggis isn’t always subtle with the message he wants to tell us, but in this film he tells us the message through Hank’s actions as opposed to dialogue. Hank loves the military and places all his faith in its organization, camaraderie and discipline. As such he conducts his investigation as he did back when he was an officer. But by the end watch how Jones’ has been changed by the events in the film. Haggis hits the nail bluntly on our heads with the final scene, but watch the effect on Jones’ character for the subtle changes. His performance is Oscar-worthy.

Charlize Theron is also very good – if miscast slightly. She is a terrific actress, and she appropriately dresses down for her role as a female cop who faces the daily sexism of small town redneck America with confidence, but it’s still hard to get passed her stunning beauty.

Since the film is a procedural investigative film the beats of the story are very predictable. Towards the end of the second act I was waiting for that unintentional discovery of information that sends the story in another direction. Indeed my instincts were right and we did get that moment, but Haggis smartly keeps the tone consistent and doesn’t over-dramatize the turn. The reveals moves the story along but they don’t overpower the characters. Haggis always knows the film is about Hank Deerfield – not the investigation.

Haggis also is spot on with the setting and environment. In the small town in Tennessee where the city is dominated by U.S. flags on lawns, there’s a blanket of somberness despite the community pride. The city feels like an abandoned desolate ghost town – like a failed American dream. There’s another story to be told about the economic effect of globalism on the town and the selling of Bush’s war to these desperate communities. Haggis says nothing explicit about this to us, but it’s there simmering underneath the film. In fact, my wife and I were in Buffalo, NY this weekend, and in certain parts of that city we felt much the same feeling. Haggis gets it right.

“In the Valley of Elah” is a serious and somber film about American military in the Middle East. The film looks even better film when placed beside Peter Berg’s irresponsible action/political film, “The Kingdom”, which feels more like a propaganda video than a realistic film. “Elah” is a film the American military definitely doesn’t want you to see. Please go and see it. Enjoy.

Read More...

Summary only...