Endless respect for Martin Scorsese - I love Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, After Hours, King of Comedy, GoodFellas, and Last Temptation of Christ - but The Departed was just plain muddled and somewhat pointless, not really deserving of inclusion in that list. Doublecrossing, triplecrossing, quadruple-crossing gangsters plus a lot of cellphone silliness, edited like a 2 and a half hour movie trailer with some great actors turning in wildly uneven performances. Jack Nicholson is manic and rambling, completely over the top and not very believable. Matt Damon simply fails at conveying real emotion and Leo DiCaprio is monotonously tortured, Martin Sheen and Vera Farmiga are wooden and lifeless. Surprisingly the best acting is delivered by Alec Baldwin (hysterically funny) and most of all Mark Wahlberg (completely believable as a tough-as-nails state police sergeant). At no point did I see anything which resembled the real operations of organised crime, the police, or even psychiatry - Farmiga's character breaks every rule, constantly - she is described as a 'hot sh*t' psychiatrist, but I would argue about 'hot' being appropriate in this context. The twists, turns, folds, and manipulations of the plot do not reward the attentive viewer, they merely allow Scorsese to move from set-piece to set-piece. The rapid-fire editing condenses the story to only the most significant events, and I think here he has gone too far, as the exhausting pace feels more like an ordeal than a story. The appearance of the rat at the end is like some kind of joke - symbolism so leaden you can't possibly miss it. I didn't even like the soundtrack, especially the inclusion of 'Comfortably Numb', a song from the soundtrack of The Wall (another muddled mess of a film!) which does not describe any character's state of mind. On the positive side, there is some great bravura filmcraft, and it's never really boring, and Wahlberg is just superb. It's still better than most of the genre in the last decade and as usual some fantastic ideas (the cross section of the cellphone secretly texting in Damon's pocket, for instance, was great). My advice would be to watch Internal Affairs if you like this sort of film. I rate it 6 out 10 because it's never mediocre. It just falls very short of a classic.
Reviews
18 Reviews
The Departed
(2006)
Confused and ultimately disappointing - gangsters and cellphones.
19 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Broken Flowers
(2005)
Murray plays aging Don Juan note perfect
28 July 2005
I'm more of fan of Jim Jarmusch than Bill Murray, but I think his performance in Broken Flowers is the highlight of the movie. His ubiquitous deadpan never carried so much weight as in this role as the aging Don Juan character, Don Johnston. A strong rebuff to those that thought Lost in Translation was his one-of-a-kind-role-of-a-lifetime etc. Broken Flowers is a Jim Jarmusch film that belongs with the best of his work (Down By Law, Mystery Train, Dead Man, Ghost Dog) - films that entertain and provoke thought in equal measure, that keep the sense of auteur vision without sacrificing accessibility. I was disappointed by Coffee and Cigarettes, but this film restored my faith in Mr. Jarmusch. It's especially good to see him using a format which retains elements of anthology but stays together as a single story, albeit one which ultimately chooses character study over a perfectly sewn-up plot. Some viewers may be frustrated by the inconclusiveness of the ending. I don't think the film could end any other way and remain true to the character, the tone, or the vision. It's a little downbeat from start to finish, and you either buy it or you don't. I bought it. Jeffrey Wright was very funny and warm, Sharon Stone plays trailer trash perfectly, fine cameos by Jessica Lange (as an 'animal communicator'), Julie Delpy, Chloe Sevigny, and Tilda Swinton (cast against type as a biker chick.) Plus Alexis Dziena as the Lolita to end all Lolitas, whom I would gladly see more of (in a manner of speaking).
The Matrix Reloaded
(2003)
Spectacular; disappointing. Makes a great trailer though!
15 May 2003
Not a stitch on the original! Of course in a sequel they can afford to
focus on action rather than setup, but the Brothers Wachowski
have no excuse for this muddled mess of a plot. The Matrix was a
thought-provoking high concept thriller punctuated by outrageously
cool action sequences; it could produce a deep conversation.
Reloaded is a series of outrageously cool action sequences
hampered by a ridiculous plot worthy of a third-rate manga anime.
All of the principals are there, but one feels it's lights on, no one
home. Zion looks more like an Ibiza nightclub than I had pictured
from it's descriptions in The Matrix. Throwaway characters and
set-ups, and more than a few ridiculous, cringeful scenes. See it
for the special effects rollercoaster ride and try to ignore the idiocy
that gets us from explosion to explosion, and you'll enjoy it. As a
side note, the trailer is probably the best trailer EVER. 5/10
focus on action rather than setup, but the Brothers Wachowski
have no excuse for this muddled mess of a plot. The Matrix was a
thought-provoking high concept thriller punctuated by outrageously
cool action sequences; it could produce a deep conversation.
Reloaded is a series of outrageously cool action sequences
hampered by a ridiculous plot worthy of a third-rate manga anime.
All of the principals are there, but one feels it's lights on, no one
home. Zion looks more like an Ibiza nightclub than I had pictured
from it's descriptions in The Matrix. Throwaway characters and
set-ups, and more than a few ridiculous, cringeful scenes. See it
for the special effects rollercoaster ride and try to ignore the idiocy
that gets us from explosion to explosion, and you'll enjoy it. As a
side note, the trailer is probably the best trailer EVER. 5/10
Bringing Out the Dead
(1999)
Doesn't measure up to the talent behind it
26 October 2000
It's impossible not to draw some comparison to Taxi Driver... same director, same screenwriter, the story of a loner on the edge driving around NYC at night... and it's not a very pretty comparison. The dialogue rolls out a bit like Yakuza, an earlier work by Schrader... it's got flashes of brilliance which are never quite sustained. And whereas Taxi Driver was compelling, with brilliant characterizations, 'Dead' suffers from its inability to make you care about the main character or most of the supporting cast. Having said all that, it's still a Scorsese / Schrader collaboration and thus could hardly be labelled a 'bad' movie. But fans of either or both will probably be disappointed. Getting sick of seeing a suicidal Nicholas Cage too. Yawn.
The Talented Mr. Ripley
(1999)
By the time you read this, I will be dead.
21 August 2000
Sorry for so dramatically getting your attention, but I really feel I need to warn as many people as possible. This film is a shocking, diabolical waste of celluloid. The Stultifying Boring Complicated Bland Over-rated Muddled Contrived Endless Interminable Patronizing Obvious Unrewarding Misguided Insensitive Shallow Dispassionate Untalented Mr. Ripley is as bloated as its original title.
While it could be argued that the twists and turns in the plot keep the viewer guessing, it could also be argued that one has to care about what happens in order to guess. And who could care about this collection of spoiled brats portrayed by spoiled brats, playing out their two-dimensional roles of the idle rich and beautiful in 1950's Italy? The only character who doesn't fit into this mould is the pointless Mr. Ripley himself, unconvincingly phoned in by flavour of the moment Matt Damon. Thoroughly revolting from start to long, overwrought finish. It appears the film-makers did not know how to end this travesty, and therefore filmed 6 different endings, each 10 to 15 minutes long, and ran them one after the other. How anyone could care how this stupidity resolved itself by the last two reels is beyond me.
A telling credit is that the film was 'edited' (did he actually cut anything or just piece together everything Minghella shot?) by Walter Murch. Murch is a genius with sound, and should have played the strengths he showed designing sound for Coppola and Lucas instead of reinventing himself as a mediocre film editor.
I rated this film 2 out of 10... a point each for the performances by Jude Law and Philip Seymour Hoffman, the only cast members who seem to understand that they are portraying human swine. If you like impenetrable, meaningless, unredeemable snoozefests about rich honkies in Italy, but Paul Schrader's "The Comfort of Strangers" didn't quite scratch that itch, you may consider watching it. If you enjoyed Minghella's other rubbish, "The English Patient" and "Truly Madly Deeply", or if you want to gawk at the pretty studs, perhaps you can gleam an inch of enjoyment out of this nonsense.
Otherwise, heed my warning: Life is too precious, brief, and fleeting to squander 133 minutes of it on The Talented Mr. Ripley.
While it could be argued that the twists and turns in the plot keep the viewer guessing, it could also be argued that one has to care about what happens in order to guess. And who could care about this collection of spoiled brats portrayed by spoiled brats, playing out their two-dimensional roles of the idle rich and beautiful in 1950's Italy? The only character who doesn't fit into this mould is the pointless Mr. Ripley himself, unconvincingly phoned in by flavour of the moment Matt Damon. Thoroughly revolting from start to long, overwrought finish. It appears the film-makers did not know how to end this travesty, and therefore filmed 6 different endings, each 10 to 15 minutes long, and ran them one after the other. How anyone could care how this stupidity resolved itself by the last two reels is beyond me.
A telling credit is that the film was 'edited' (did he actually cut anything or just piece together everything Minghella shot?) by Walter Murch. Murch is a genius with sound, and should have played the strengths he showed designing sound for Coppola and Lucas instead of reinventing himself as a mediocre film editor.
I rated this film 2 out of 10... a point each for the performances by Jude Law and Philip Seymour Hoffman, the only cast members who seem to understand that they are portraying human swine. If you like impenetrable, meaningless, unredeemable snoozefests about rich honkies in Italy, but Paul Schrader's "The Comfort of Strangers" didn't quite scratch that itch, you may consider watching it. If you enjoyed Minghella's other rubbish, "The English Patient" and "Truly Madly Deeply", or if you want to gawk at the pretty studs, perhaps you can gleam an inch of enjoyment out of this nonsense.
Otherwise, heed my warning: Life is too precious, brief, and fleeting to squander 133 minutes of it on The Talented Mr. Ripley.
Triumphant as a film, if not an 'objective' documentary
16 July 2000
Errol Morris has certainly 'injected' (pardon my contextural
pun) a bit of energy into the documentary form, even if the
films he makes lie somewhere outside its confines. Mr Death,
with its characteristic visual flourishes and tangents, is no
exception to this, though it does contain excerpts of a 'true'
documentary of Leuchter pilfering 'evidence' from Auschwitz.
Morris' film refutes Leuchter's findings to the point that the
only viewer who would give tham any credence would have to be as
biased as Ernst Zündel, the revisionist publisher whom
Leuchter's testimony defended. One detail of the film sticks out
in my mind... the home movies of young Leuchter accompanying his
father to work at the local prison, where he pals around with
the convicts, and explains how he learned at this tender age to
pick locks, pockets and safes... and with audible smugness
relates that these skills have actually aided him later in life.
The image of this boy nebbish, undoubtedly an outcast and loner
at school and socially, gaining acceptance amongst the convicts
helps to explain why such an intelligent and resourceful person
could be duped by the likes of the pinheaded, hateful Neo-Nazi
Revisionists. Here's a group of 'bad guys' accepting, applauding, listening and agreeing to Leuchter. Of course this
is because his undeniably faulted research supports their own
misguided conclusions. But it mirrors his experiences as a boy
among the convicts and provides a strong psychological
foundation for Leuchter's downfall into his delusional world. I'd recommend this film to anyone who enjoys thought-provoking
cinema, realizing that they are sadly in a minority amongst
filmgoers.
pun) a bit of energy into the documentary form, even if the
films he makes lie somewhere outside its confines. Mr Death,
with its characteristic visual flourishes and tangents, is no
exception to this, though it does contain excerpts of a 'true'
documentary of Leuchter pilfering 'evidence' from Auschwitz.
Morris' film refutes Leuchter's findings to the point that the
only viewer who would give tham any credence would have to be as
biased as Ernst Zündel, the revisionist publisher whom
Leuchter's testimony defended. One detail of the film sticks out
in my mind... the home movies of young Leuchter accompanying his
father to work at the local prison, where he pals around with
the convicts, and explains how he learned at this tender age to
pick locks, pockets and safes... and with audible smugness
relates that these skills have actually aided him later in life.
The image of this boy nebbish, undoubtedly an outcast and loner
at school and socially, gaining acceptance amongst the convicts
helps to explain why such an intelligent and resourceful person
could be duped by the likes of the pinheaded, hateful Neo-Nazi
Revisionists. Here's a group of 'bad guys' accepting, applauding, listening and agreeing to Leuchter. Of course this
is because his undeniably faulted research supports their own
misguided conclusions. But it mirrors his experiences as a boy
among the convicts and provides a strong psychological
foundation for Leuchter's downfall into his delusional world. I'd recommend this film to anyone who enjoys thought-provoking
cinema, realizing that they are sadly in a minority amongst
filmgoers.
Fat City
(1972)
Overlooked and forgotten, still packs quite a punch
6 February 2000
American audiences don't generally go in for realistic stories of human despair and suffering that offer very little in the way of hope or relief. This may explain why John Huston's Fat City has been condemned to obscurity, a real shame considering what a great flick it is. It's the sort of movie you see and remember but can't quite pick it out of a line-up... a shuffling, mumbling story of down-and-out pugs in an off-the-map burgh. You're taunted with the possibilities of the story picking up to... well if not epic at least noteworthy proportions... but, all of the characters' minor victories are mitigated by their simultaneous defeats. Keach's Tully is the main thrust of the story, though it tends to veer off on the occasional tangent. A has-been who possibly never really was, crushed by the departure of his wife and overwhelmed by the constant little defeats in his life. Huston really drives this point home, that all of these little defeats add up. Without giving too much away, suffice to say Fat City is a film where mood overshadows plot. The mood is indelibly rendered by Conrad Hall's dark, dirty images, which nearly swallow the characters in the depth of their shadows. Watching it back to back with fellow pugilist opus Raging Bull (1980), it's easy to see that Huston was a keen observer of human behaviour, while Scorsese was a keen observer of Hollywood films of the thirties. And don't even talk about Rocky. I would compare it favourably with Barbet Schroeder's Barfly (1987), another film about fringe life in California, and even Vincent Gallo's excellent Buffalo '66 (1998), though of the three it is the bleakest and the least accessible.
Third Best of the Four?
5 December 1999
Clive Barker's 'Hellraiser' and 'Hellraiser II' are fantastic
slices of gory comic-book horror, whose power lies in the
convincing mythology they create and the menace of the box and
the cenobites. The third outing, subtitled 'Hell on Earth' lacks
a lot of the mood which made the first two installments so
effective, and instead goes for a more commercial route
resembling Craven's "Nightmare on Elm Street" series. Uneven and
sometimes plodding in its pacing and structure, III nonetheless
delivers its share of shocks and gross-outs, and sticks close
enough to the storyline of the original to make it a worthwhile
sequel. The new cenobites are a bit dumb, yes. And the church
scene was absolutely unnecessary, and ruins one of the most
original aspects of the first two. That being how they don't
rely on established religious symbolism for their depiction of
evil, and therefore sidestep comparisons to "The Exorcist" et
al. But dime-store theology and characters without common sense
aside, Hellraiser III still exceeds your usual horror movie Part
III and even your usual horror movie for that matter with it's
inventive and unflinching depictions of the avenging angel,
Pinhead, extracting his pleasure from the pain, fear, and
suffering of the innocent. Just beware Part IV, 'Bloodline'. The
law of diminishing returns finally hits.
slices of gory comic-book horror, whose power lies in the
convincing mythology they create and the menace of the box and
the cenobites. The third outing, subtitled 'Hell on Earth' lacks
a lot of the mood which made the first two installments so
effective, and instead goes for a more commercial route
resembling Craven's "Nightmare on Elm Street" series. Uneven and
sometimes plodding in its pacing and structure, III nonetheless
delivers its share of shocks and gross-outs, and sticks close
enough to the storyline of the original to make it a worthwhile
sequel. The new cenobites are a bit dumb, yes. And the church
scene was absolutely unnecessary, and ruins one of the most
original aspects of the first two. That being how they don't
rely on established religious symbolism for their depiction of
evil, and therefore sidestep comparisons to "The Exorcist" et
al. But dime-store theology and characters without common sense
aside, Hellraiser III still exceeds your usual horror movie Part
III and even your usual horror movie for that matter with it's
inventive and unflinching depictions of the avenging angel,
Pinhead, extracting his pleasure from the pain, fear, and
suffering of the innocent. Just beware Part IV, 'Bloodline'. The
law of diminishing returns finally hits.
The Night of the Iguana
(1964)
Pretty good, if a bit melodramatic
5 December 1999
Huston's 1964 "Night of the Iguana" stars classic ham sandwich Richard Burton as (in a great stretch for him) a drunken, defrocked priest. Burton is at his most over-the-top, even eclipsing his over-emoted later roles in "Equus" and "Bluebeard".
I admittedly have not seen every film Burton appeared in, but only his show-stopping performance as Father Lamont in "Exorcist II: The Heretic", where his overacting literally takes the rest of the movie hostage, comes anywhere near his Rev. T. Lawrence Shannon in 'Iguana'. But Huston was never a director who let his pictures be hijacked by anything, and we are treated to numerous scenes of the rest of the cast, particularly Gardner, Kerr, and Ward, deriding Burton's indulgent self-flailing. Too many outstanding performances for a Burton film, and the ham himself is left to wander around in a daze throughout most of the scenes, as he is assaulted from all sides. Lyon is renegade here from Lolita, playing essentially the same character... any more of her and the picture would resemble Lolita 2: Lolita does Mexico. But Kerr is marvellous, Gardner feisty, and character actress Grayson Hall is perfection as the uptight, bullish vocal teacher. The 'fight scene' with Ward being mercillously and acrobatically pummelled by the twin maracas-wielding rent boys is a hoot and a holler. Overall, Huston manages to make the whole thing work in the stifling heat of a Mexican summer, with Maxine and Hannah helping Shannon fight for his soul and sanity while Charlotte and Ms Fellowes drag him into "Hell and damnation..." It's a good companion to the later and superior Mike Nichols film "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" when fellow ham hall-of-famer and two-time spouse Liz Taylor has her turn at battering the infinitely batterable Burton. 'Iguana' is rewarding, funny, and dramatic, and its excesses do little to detract from the overall saga of temptation, loss, and redemption.
I admittedly have not seen every film Burton appeared in, but only his show-stopping performance as Father Lamont in "Exorcist II: The Heretic", where his overacting literally takes the rest of the movie hostage, comes anywhere near his Rev. T. Lawrence Shannon in 'Iguana'. But Huston was never a director who let his pictures be hijacked by anything, and we are treated to numerous scenes of the rest of the cast, particularly Gardner, Kerr, and Ward, deriding Burton's indulgent self-flailing. Too many outstanding performances for a Burton film, and the ham himself is left to wander around in a daze throughout most of the scenes, as he is assaulted from all sides. Lyon is renegade here from Lolita, playing essentially the same character... any more of her and the picture would resemble Lolita 2: Lolita does Mexico. But Kerr is marvellous, Gardner feisty, and character actress Grayson Hall is perfection as the uptight, bullish vocal teacher. The 'fight scene' with Ward being mercillously and acrobatically pummelled by the twin maracas-wielding rent boys is a hoot and a holler. Overall, Huston manages to make the whole thing work in the stifling heat of a Mexican summer, with Maxine and Hannah helping Shannon fight for his soul and sanity while Charlotte and Ms Fellowes drag him into "Hell and damnation..." It's a good companion to the later and superior Mike Nichols film "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" when fellow ham hall-of-famer and two-time spouse Liz Taylor has her turn at battering the infinitely batterable Burton. 'Iguana' is rewarding, funny, and dramatic, and its excesses do little to detract from the overall saga of temptation, loss, and redemption.
Hellraiser: Bloodline
(1996)
Don't waste your time.
2 December 1999
Life is too short for movies like this. In every aspect,
Bloodlines is the biggest snooze of the series, even eclipsing
the shameless marketing exercise of Hell on Earth. This one
starts out on a space station, flashes back through a lame
history of 'the box', and follows a 'past, present, future'
framework, which doesn't even contain the logic and complexity
of a second-rate comic book. The story doesn't even work in its
own terms, and despite makeup artist cum auteur Kevin Yagher
having his directorial credit removed, I can't believe that
somehow a passable film was left on the cutting room floor. The
one thing this movie has going for it is the stalwart Doug
Bradley reprising his role as one of the great contemporary
screen villains, Pinhead. But unlike the earlier three movies,
he is used to little effect, rambling through long monologues
which don't inspire a fraction of the menace found in earlier
episodes. At one point the hero slips away while Pinhead is
bragging about what he's going to do to them. Pinhead was never
such a ham, more frequently letting his hooks do the talking for
him. And what is he trying to achieve in this movie? Why does
the toymaker go to the trouble of summoning him to destroy him,
instead of just leaving well enough alone? His efforts are a
good analogy for the whole movie. A lot of time, money, talent,
and technology wasted to destroy something which it seems was
already finished to begin with.
Bloodlines is the biggest snooze of the series, even eclipsing
the shameless marketing exercise of Hell on Earth. This one
starts out on a space station, flashes back through a lame
history of 'the box', and follows a 'past, present, future'
framework, which doesn't even contain the logic and complexity
of a second-rate comic book. The story doesn't even work in its
own terms, and despite makeup artist cum auteur Kevin Yagher
having his directorial credit removed, I can't believe that
somehow a passable film was left on the cutting room floor. The
one thing this movie has going for it is the stalwart Doug
Bradley reprising his role as one of the great contemporary
screen villains, Pinhead. But unlike the earlier three movies,
he is used to little effect, rambling through long monologues
which don't inspire a fraction of the menace found in earlier
episodes. At one point the hero slips away while Pinhead is
bragging about what he's going to do to them. Pinhead was never
such a ham, more frequently letting his hooks do the talking for
him. And what is he trying to achieve in this movie? Why does
the toymaker go to the trouble of summoning him to destroy him,
instead of just leaving well enough alone? His efforts are a
good analogy for the whole movie. A lot of time, money, talent,
and technology wasted to destroy something which it seems was
already finished to begin with.
Divorcing Jack
(1998)
You could do worse
21 October 1999
'Divorcing Jack' starts off a bit like Mike Leigh's 'Naked'
played strictly for laughs. Soon it takes off to appear more
like a Hollywood actioner set in Ireland, even going so far as
throwing Richard Gant (who was last seen in 'The Big Lebowski',
also featuring Thewlis) in as his black American buddy. Still
lots of laughs, with David Thewlis as David Thewlis (i.e. Adam
Sandler as Adam Sandler, Jim Carrey as Jim Carrey), specifically
a miscreant journo in big big trouble with his wife, his boss,
the police, the IRA, and anybody else the producers could think
of. The film has basically nothing to say about the situation in
Northern Ireland (thankfully). Apart from a nearly pointless
'gun-toting nun' and Thewlis captured-by-his-enemies -only-to-miraculously-escape a few too many times, you could do
a lot worse than this flick. Thewlis is definitely the focal
point, and he saunters through with his usual 'charming as a
drowned rat' panache. Could somebody please write this guy a
fantastic script, because he has a lot of talent and presence
and it would be great to see him do something else as noteworthy
as 'Naked' before he packs it in and decides he wants to direct.
played strictly for laughs. Soon it takes off to appear more
like a Hollywood actioner set in Ireland, even going so far as
throwing Richard Gant (who was last seen in 'The Big Lebowski',
also featuring Thewlis) in as his black American buddy. Still
lots of laughs, with David Thewlis as David Thewlis (i.e. Adam
Sandler as Adam Sandler, Jim Carrey as Jim Carrey), specifically
a miscreant journo in big big trouble with his wife, his boss,
the police, the IRA, and anybody else the producers could think
of. The film has basically nothing to say about the situation in
Northern Ireland (thankfully). Apart from a nearly pointless
'gun-toting nun' and Thewlis captured-by-his-enemies -only-to-miraculously-escape a few too many times, you could do
a lot worse than this flick. Thewlis is definitely the focal
point, and he saunters through with his usual 'charming as a
drowned rat' panache. Could somebody please write this guy a
fantastic script, because he has a lot of talent and presence
and it would be great to see him do something else as noteworthy
as 'Naked' before he packs it in and decides he wants to direct.
Naked Lunch
(1991)
Filming the Unfilmable... why not?
14 October 1999
This film of 'Naked Lunch' is the first of Cronenberg's Trilogy
of filming three of the most challenging literary works of the
20th Century, and arguably the most difficult... as anyone who's
read Burroughs' 1959 novel can attest, in conventional terms it
is a book without a cohesive plot or even structure, largely
assembled from the paranoid rambling letters of the world's most
notorious drug addict. Cronenberg's approach to the material is
ingenious in that he attempts to fictionalize the circumstances
under which the book was written rather than trying to weave a
storyline from the mass of twisted plot threads which comprise
the text. The cast is impeccable, particularly Peter Weller and Judy Davis
as the leads, Ian holm as a psuedo-Paul Bowles, and Cronenberg
regulars Robert A. Silverman as Hans and Nicholas Campbell as
Kerouac-ish Hank. Julian Sands and Roy Scheider don't quite
infuse their roles with the ridiculousness of their counterparts
from the novel, but their cameos are brief and don't detract
from the overall effect. The overall effect being a hypnotic, schizophrenic blend of
biography and folklore, equal parts Cronenberg and Burroughs, a
self-tortured portrait of the creative process. To the
director's credit, he relies on the script (his own) and the
performances over visual trickery or stock travelogue scenery to
set the mood and propel the action. The astonishing soundtrack,
by the superb Howard Shore, underscores the drug-filled malaise
of this Tangerine dream perfectly... it lacks any musical sense
of time and therefore hangs over the proceedings like a
mysterious haze. Haunting, powerful cinema... but most
definitely not for everyone. Wise up the marks before laying
this on them.
of filming three of the most challenging literary works of the
20th Century, and arguably the most difficult... as anyone who's
read Burroughs' 1959 novel can attest, in conventional terms it
is a book without a cohesive plot or even structure, largely
assembled from the paranoid rambling letters of the world's most
notorious drug addict. Cronenberg's approach to the material is
ingenious in that he attempts to fictionalize the circumstances
under which the book was written rather than trying to weave a
storyline from the mass of twisted plot threads which comprise
the text. The cast is impeccable, particularly Peter Weller and Judy Davis
as the leads, Ian holm as a psuedo-Paul Bowles, and Cronenberg
regulars Robert A. Silverman as Hans and Nicholas Campbell as
Kerouac-ish Hank. Julian Sands and Roy Scheider don't quite
infuse their roles with the ridiculousness of their counterparts
from the novel, but their cameos are brief and don't detract
from the overall effect. The overall effect being a hypnotic, schizophrenic blend of
biography and folklore, equal parts Cronenberg and Burroughs, a
self-tortured portrait of the creative process. To the
director's credit, he relies on the script (his own) and the
performances over visual trickery or stock travelogue scenery to
set the mood and propel the action. The astonishing soundtrack,
by the superb Howard Shore, underscores the drug-filled malaise
of this Tangerine dream perfectly... it lacks any musical sense
of time and therefore hangs over the proceedings like a
mysterious haze. Haunting, powerful cinema... but most
definitely not for everyone. Wise up the marks before laying
this on them.
Fresh
(1994)
Best of its genre
13 October 1999
I watched 'Fresh' again recently, with several other examples of
its genre (urban crime drama, or words to that effect). It
stands out head and shoulders above the rest as an engaging and
intelligent film. Part of 'Fresh's strength is that it belies
many of the genre's expected conventions. Rap music is vaguely
incidental, giving way to a poignant soundtrack by Stewart
Copeland. For once, gang life, alcoholism, and drug addiction
are never glamourized as they are simultaneously condemned...
the fault of so many films which purport to be morally aware of
the destructive nature of these things (but seem to say,
backhandedly, "isn't T-Bone a badd mutha, though?") And as
another reviewer noted, the central character as an intellectual
prodigy is neither a joke nor a gimmick, his mind is the means
of his survival and eventually his triumph over the forces
around him. The cast is excellent, the standouts being an
extraordinary debut by Sean Nelson as the Fresh and the reliable
Samuel L. Jackson as his alcoholic speed-chess-master father.
The final scene is one of the most devastating and memorable
scenes in the last decade of films. The sincerity and unpredictability of 'Fresh' are unparalleled in films of its
type.
its genre (urban crime drama, or words to that effect). It
stands out head and shoulders above the rest as an engaging and
intelligent film. Part of 'Fresh's strength is that it belies
many of the genre's expected conventions. Rap music is vaguely
incidental, giving way to a poignant soundtrack by Stewart
Copeland. For once, gang life, alcoholism, and drug addiction
are never glamourized as they are simultaneously condemned...
the fault of so many films which purport to be morally aware of
the destructive nature of these things (but seem to say,
backhandedly, "isn't T-Bone a badd mutha, though?") And as
another reviewer noted, the central character as an intellectual
prodigy is neither a joke nor a gimmick, his mind is the means
of his survival and eventually his triumph over the forces
around him. The cast is excellent, the standouts being an
extraordinary debut by Sean Nelson as the Fresh and the reliable
Samuel L. Jackson as his alcoholic speed-chess-master father.
The final scene is one of the most devastating and memorable
scenes in the last decade of films. The sincerity and unpredictability of 'Fresh' are unparalleled in films of its
type.
His Girl Friday
(1940)
Frantic fast-talking comedy
19 September 1999
'His Girl Friday' had me howling with laughter from the first
(seemingly endless) string of words. Probably the fastest
talking talkie ever made. Grant and Russell sizzle throughout,
and Bellamy provides the perfect third point in the triangle...
in the fast-paced, dog-eat-dog world of journalism, a nice
mild-mannered guy like Bruce Baldwin is sure to get eaten alive.
("That guy looks like Ralph Bellamy" - ROFL!) Grant's timing and
delivery are superb... apart from Gary Cooper, has there ever
been a more suave, charming leading man? And Russell goes tooth
and jowl with him the whole time. Warrants repeat viewings to
catch all of the dialogue you miss while laughing. Delightful.
(seemingly endless) string of words. Probably the fastest
talking talkie ever made. Grant and Russell sizzle throughout,
and Bellamy provides the perfect third point in the triangle...
in the fast-paced, dog-eat-dog world of journalism, a nice
mild-mannered guy like Bruce Baldwin is sure to get eaten alive.
("That guy looks like Ralph Bellamy" - ROFL!) Grant's timing and
delivery are superb... apart from Gary Cooper, has there ever
been a more suave, charming leading man? And Russell goes tooth
and jowl with him the whole time. Warrants repeat viewings to
catch all of the dialogue you miss while laughing. Delightful.
The Waterboy
(1998)
Another silly tongue-in-cheek farce from Sandler
13 September 1999
I find Adam Sandler a bit of a guilty pleasure... I know his
movies are monumentally stupid but I find myself laughing my
head off. And if you look closely, the predictability of their
structure and exaggeration of genre conventions... in 'Waterboy', there's a barely detectable jab at the sort of
hackneyed clichés that form most of 'Good Will Hunting' or
'Rudy'... you find a bit of a wry satirical edge below the
goofy, affable surface. In the case of 'Waterboy', Sandler's
over-the-top Cajun charicature is eclipsed by Kathy Bates who
nails the accent on the head from the first "Come give yo mama a
kee-yus". Sandler is not in the top form of 'Happy Gilmore',
mostly deprived of his characteristic temper tantrums, but
Bates, along with a great group of supporting archetypes, some
hilarious flashbacks (Winkler sports a humongous afro in his
dream 70s pad), another well chosen soundtrack, and some great
physical comedy on the field pick up whatever slack there is. If
you like the rest of Sandler's films, this won't disappoint. But
it's not likely to change your mind if you don't.
movies are monumentally stupid but I find myself laughing my
head off. And if you look closely, the predictability of their
structure and exaggeration of genre conventions... in 'Waterboy', there's a barely detectable jab at the sort of
hackneyed clichés that form most of 'Good Will Hunting' or
'Rudy'... you find a bit of a wry satirical edge below the
goofy, affable surface. In the case of 'Waterboy', Sandler's
over-the-top Cajun charicature is eclipsed by Kathy Bates who
nails the accent on the head from the first "Come give yo mama a
kee-yus". Sandler is not in the top form of 'Happy Gilmore',
mostly deprived of his characteristic temper tantrums, but
Bates, along with a great group of supporting archetypes, some
hilarious flashbacks (Winkler sports a humongous afro in his
dream 70s pad), another well chosen soundtrack, and some great
physical comedy on the field pick up whatever slack there is. If
you like the rest of Sandler's films, this won't disappoint. But
it's not likely to change your mind if you don't.
The Getaway
(1972)
Kept me riveted to my seat
12 September 1999
The Getaway is better than it really has any right to be, considering the clash between star and director over the film resulted in the mediocre actor getting his way and the excessively talented director hating the final cut. The opening montage relates the set-up in quick-cuts and sound collisions (compare with Boorman's Point Blank) and in no time we're right down to the action, all double-crossing, triple-crossing, and slow motion shoot-outs. Sure the acting is a bit stilted throughout, with the exceptions of Al Lettieri as the indestructable Rudy and noteworthy walk-ons by a young and buxom >Sally Struthers and an old and toothless Slim Pickens. But McQueen and MacGraw plod through this awkwardly, perhaps distracted by their off-screen romance, leaving this viewer waiting for the next action scene. Luckily not much of a wait, as things flow pretty fast and furious, and the whole affair winds up reasonably satisfying, eclipsing the shortcomings of the wooden leads. The scene on the train is a real nail-biter, and it's that type of scene (as in most of his vastly superior 'Straw Dogs') which shows Peckinpah's biggest asset as a director... after Hitchcock, who else could milk suspense like this? The remake was redundant and ultimately unrewarding. This version still seems well fresher than any of the contrived Hollywood product today.
The Night of the Hunter
(1955)
Malevolent, moody thriller... Laughton's one-hit wonder
8 September 1999
Charles Laughton's single completed film as director, and a damn shame too because there's so many fantastic ideas throughout. Stanley Cortez's eye is so self-assured it becomes hypnotic, with an amazing variety of moods and compositions (though the night scenes really steal the show). And yet despite the crisp, moody, sometimes lyrical quality of the visuals, everything hinges on Mitchum's intensity as the irreverent Reverend Harry Powell, one of the greatest and most terrifying film villains ever. All the more despicable for his pious posturing, the same venomous charm which blinds the townspeople somehow works on the audience, and its difficult to hate the pathologically dishonest Powell. We see his evil from the outset and inexorable movie logic tells us he is schemes are destined to backfire. (Even his eventual comeuppance is overshadowed by the stoic little John Harper's cathartic emotional collapse.) As a result, the soft resolution belies the early shocks, in a way that makes you say "they don't make em like that anymore" and you're right... in today's Hollywood equivalent, the climax would have Powell blown away by the kid with a '45 in slow motion.
Crash
(1996)
If it's the worst film ever, why all the comments?
7 September 1999
Reading the voluminous feedback on Cronenberg's Crash, it amazes me to read that so many users see it as the worst film they've ever seen. What's the matter, you don't like thinking? Because all of this feedback can't be attributed to the more sensational elements of the film... one doesn't have to look far to find a film with more sex, violence, or grotsequerie... and therefore the film must be considered successful in its attempt to provoke thought and debate. It makes sense that the audience which enjoys mindless, hackneyed, contrived, by-the-numbers Hollywood idiotfests like 'Armageddon' would resent a film which challenges them to actually (gasp) think about something, especially something which doesn't fit into the acceptable subject matter of literature and cinema. To those poor close-minded viewers, my advice is to stay away from anything which says "Directed by David Cronenberg" or "A novel by J.G. Ballard" and stick with "Starring Jim Carrey". As for Cronenberg and/or Ballard fans who were disappointed by Crash, yikes I can't imagine what you were hoping for. Ballard himself considers Cronenberg's film a work of genius, saying that it's captured all of the necessary elements of his novel. Crash is a milestone piece of cinema, equal in daring and psychological scope to Pasolini's Salo. Both films are similarly polarizing in that they're difficult for conventionally-minded audiences to accept and recognized as classics by those who are up to the psychopathological challenges they present. If you fall into the latter category, my advice is read the book, see the film. For those who enjoyed Crash, I can highly recommend BFI's Modern Classics serie
Tell Your Friends