escoles Reviews

The Snow Queen (2005 TV Movie)

On the level of a (really) bad Saturday morning cartoon.

[1/10 · 27 December 2008]

This is a confused and confusing adaptation, wherein stylish minimalism substitutes for story and meaningless special effects replace plot elements until the story is more or less completely gone.

A key plot event, for example, entails utterly unexplained and un-anticipatable magical powers being deployed, where Andersen's original invokes more poignant and symbolically instructive natural cycles.

The writers of this adaptation transform a story with powerful symbolic resonance into a bad Saturday morning cartoon.

Instead of this I strongly recommend you seek out some version of the 1959 Lev Atmotov / Nikolai Fyodorov adaptation, which preserves the symbolic power of Andersen's material.

Jekyll & Hyde: The Musical (2001 TV Movie)

Hackneyed Pastiche Larded With Obligatory Sex & Romance

[2/10 · 8 August 2006]

I have had the dubious privilege of seeing an excellent production of this profoundly mediocre play. While I'm not a Hoff-Hater, I sincerely doubt that even Al Pacino could improve it. The music is occasionally pleasant, but always highly derivative (it sounds like every other Broadway play ever made); the pop-philosophical mauling of Stephenson's idea is offensively simplistic; the plot "twists" manage to be at once predictable, heavy-handed, and misogynistic (my young niece perceptively mis-observed: "All the womens died").

If you're looking for a good musical, look somewhere else. If you're looking for a good, interesting interpretation of the Jekyll-Hyde story, look to the Christopher Lee / Peter Cushing vehicle "I, Monster", which makes genuinely interesting and creative changes to Stephenson's idea. ("Hyde:Jekyll" becomes "Blake:Marlowe", for example, to highlight the Faustian and gnostic aspects of the story.) It's a typical '60s low-budget screamer, but at that, it has ten times the heart of this vacuous product.

Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence (I) (2004)

Strong sequel that stands on its own

[9/10 · 2 January 2005]

I agree with an earlier reviewer that both hardcore Oshii fans and narrow-minded American viewers are missing the point by not viewing this movie on its own terms. In many ways, it's more thoroughly conceived, and less action-justified (more thoughtful) than Ghost in the Shell. For me, it progressed naturally from its predecessor: Where Ghost in the Shell asks questions about the nature of human individuality, Innocence asks the next set of questions, about human existence. And it asks them in ways so much more directly pertinent to our own lives than utterly fantastic treatments like the Matrix films and silly diversions like The Butterfly Effect.

The ideas of the story are genuinely original, and thoroughly conceived. I don't think I've ever seen a science fiction film that was as true to the real spirit of the genre as this pair; Japan in general seems to take science fiction much more seriously than any western film-culture, and so out of Japan we get real, serious attempts to tell science-fictional stories, filled with real ideas and real characters, instead of the Bat-Durstonized monstrosities we get in the west.

For me, the integration of 2D and 3D elements was jarring; but the story stands on its ideas and the strength of its plot.

The Unbelievable Truth (1989)

The only question is: Is it bad enough to be good?

[1/10 · 30 December 2003]

This was one of the most deeply awful movies I can recall ever seeing. It mixed high-dramaturgy with low production values and a sense of deep self-seriousness that makes it difficult for me to understand why people found it amusing. Poor acting, bad dialog, awkward blocking...where do I stop?

And yet, I suppose that a few beers and some good friends could transform it into a bonding experience....

Warrior Queen (2003 TV Movie)

Heavy-Handed Political Metaphor...

[13 October 2003]

... but, that said, an interesting document of its time. (Which is to say, 2002-2003, the time of the Second Iraq War.)

Romans are painted as arrogant evangelists for the Roman Way and "true" Roman religion -- as decadent in the extreme, by comparison with the virtuous (and bloodthirsty) Celts.

The radical inaccuracies of this picture are instructive. For example, imperial Romans are seen as intensely focused on the illegitimacy of Celtic religion -- real Romans of Nero's time probably wouldn't have cared that much about enforcing their state religion until the subjects were in the economic loop of the Empire. Standard Roman field punishments (e.g., death by slow public crucifiction) are conveniently witheld so that central characters can live on to avenge their humiliation. Roman camps, contrary to the usual marching discipline, are left un-palisaded and conveniently open to attack by the much-feared Britons. And the Celts themselves are turned into some kind of bloodthirsty hippie-clan, where Celt-on-Celt violence is conveniently glossed over and women easily sit at the head of armies.

(BTW, I'm not entirely sure these should be Celts, as they're said to be during the screenplay. But I'm sure someone can come forth in a later review to correct my apprehension...)

And consider: The phrase "terrorism" is bandied about self-righteously at every turn; sober elder-statesmen with a workable plans are subverted by treachery; a devious ruler vetoes the sensible advice of rational military men in favor of a plan that results in needless bloodshed; clerics drive the action behind the scenes, exhorting their leaders to fight for the honor of their god and heritage, against the corruption of their people.

All in all, it's a fairly heavy-handed metaphor for Americo-British imperialism in the Islamic world -- a cautionary fairy tale, if you will.

Oh, and, by the way -- it's a really dumb movie. If the production values were a little higher, it would be a real candidate for a bad movie night.

Twice Upon a Time (1983)

Almost forgotten, and that's too bad

[9/10 · 26 August 2003]

This is the kind of picture John Lassiter would be making today, if it weren't for advances in CGI. And that's just to say that he'd be forgotten, too, if technology hadn't made things sexy and kewl since 1983. _Twice..._ has got the same wit, imagination, and sense of real excitement that you'd find in a Pixar flick, only executed under the restrictions of the medium c. 1983. Innovative animation techniques combine with a great script and excellent voicing to produce a movie that appeals on lots of levels. It should be spoken of in the same breath with _Spiritited Away_ and _Toy Story_.

Indian Summer (1993)

How I Spent My Lost 97 Minutes

[7 April 2003]

I have no idea why anyone likes this movie. It's really just a weak _Big Chill_ knockoff. Sure, it's got some beautiful fall colors -- it's set in deciduous forest in southern Canada at the height of fall color, after all. But the premise is preposterous, the plot is even more preposterous, and -- most egregious of all -- a cast of talented actors is given insipid dialog and absurd motivation to work with.

If there's one positive aspect to this flick, it's that it demonstrated to me just how good _Big Chill_ really was (even though that film really annoys me, too). At least the characters in Kasdan's flick act like real people and have real lines.

I'll add that it has one of the most absurd "munchies" scenes ever committed to American film. Do NOT waste your time on this, unless you're a sucker for feelgood nonsense.

Lathe of Heaven (2002 TV Movie)

Subdued, but effective and moving

[8/10 · 1 November 2002]

Better-acted, with production values out of proportion to the actual money spent, it seems to me to hit much closer to the sense of the novel than the 1980 PBS version starring Craig Wasson.

This ranks with Gilliam's _Brazil_ as an example of line-art science fiction film-making, as simple and inexpensive elements are combined to create a sense of otherness that shifts in subtle ways from scene to scene as George's dreams change the world around him. (Note especially the use of Audi's futuristic A2 model to stand in for a "car o' the future", and the raincoats assembled neatly from tire inner-tubes.) The techniques are often mis-used, much as impressionism was appropriated to serve the sofa-art industry; but here, it's a genuinely skilled execution on limited resources.

Reign of Fire (2002)

Give it a chance

[23 August 2002]

Critics just seem to keep piling on... Don't be too quick to follow the herd -- take a look at Elvis Michell's take in the NY Times. This picture has terrific energy, and touches a lot of good-old-fashioned archetypal chords. The acting is far from nuanced, but nuance would have just gotten buried, and Bale hits all the right notes as the guilt-ridden protector.

Pictures like this do not stand or fall on plausibility, and there's little of that, here, but the human notes ring true.

And boy, do those dragons look great.

Mirage (1965)

"I'm...a cost accountant."

[9/10 · 29 March 2002]

Severely under-rated and almost unknown, this is the film that Hitchcock's _Spellbound_ could have been without its stilted dialog and hokey sets.

Beyond the signature line (the Peck character's only remnant of his horror at learning his true role), the intent was hardly ironic, but this film's packaging would have delighted '90s/'00s ironists: It distilled the lingering, submerged distrust that many middle-class Americans felt for the corporations they were engaged in glorifying, and then shaped that distilled essence into a tight and well-played thriller.

Point Break (1991)

So very, very awful, it's almost good

[1/10 · 14 June 2001]

This movie is painfully, exquisitely bad. As he does in _Speed_, Keanu struggles to project virile masculinity (perhaps in an effort to shed Bill & Ted?), managing to come off about as studly as an eight year old pretending to be the man of the house. Swayze isn't much more believable as the zenmaster/bankrobber/surfin'-guru. Add an over-wrought soundtrack, over-the-top action sequences (I fear this movie may be singlehandedly responsible for the sport of sky-surfing), and dialog straigt out of "Nietzsche for Dummies", and you have the makings of an evening with Joe Bob Briggs. There have got to be some great drinking games for this movie.

The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle (2000)

A mildly interesting failure

[4/10 · 17 May 2001]

TV show remakes are always hard to do well. This one does better than some, but falls down in the execution. It's as though someone took the Rocky and Bullwinkle lines from a reasonably good R&B serial, and then wrapped an amateurish script around it.

The Rocky and Bullwinkle parts really are pretty good (June Foray still has it, for sure), but the live action / cartoon integration is very poor, and only Randy Quaid and John Goodman (in a bit part as a Highway Patrolman -- "You're an FBI agent? Right -- and I'm John Goodman....") seem up to the challenge of playing to badly-blocked spaces where actors ought to be. Russo and Alexander are wasted on this script. And Piper Perabo comes off as miserably inept. I found myself feeling sorry for the Moose and Squirrel for having to put up with all this nonsense.

In many ways it seems as though the cartoon and the live-action movie are -- well, different movies, written by different people. Almost all the cartoon stuff is funny (if you do see it, look for cameos by a character from Roger Rabbit); almost all the live-action stuff falls miserably flat. If you do see this, I suggest getting friends together and making a party of it. Just don't expect too much, and you'll probably be OK.

Thirteen Days (2000)

Blinking in Private

[8/10 · 14 May 2001]

There's probably some irony in the quality of Canadian Bruce Greenwood's portrayal of Kennedy -- he's very, very good, and it's the little touches (like casually grabbing hold of passing objects to stay upright, a reference to the legacy of Kennedy's intensely painful wartime back injuries) that make you feel he's stepped into Kennedy's soul. Though it's no surprise he wasn't nominated, it was Oscar-caliber material. Even as he challenges the Kennedy myth by playing him as a man who can anger and entertain doubt in private, he burnishes it by letting his Kennedy submerge all doubt behind perfect resolve whenever it's demanded: the mythic Kennedy nerve.

Overall, the film plays a little fast and loose with persons and actions (though history seems largely unscathed, by contrast with Stone's JFK), so it's best to see this as parable, and see Costner's character as a sort of greek chorus to Kennedy and his cabinet. It's a wonderfully made film, though -- what may become a classic study in how to craft a thriller without physical thrills. The few battle scenes are inconclusive (they conclude in situation and briefing rooms) or end in more or less ignominious American defeat, and as I write this it occurs to me that's critical in the film's success: We're given images and rhetoric of taking punishment as a form of _standing ground_, of _not blinking_.

Moscow on the Hudson (1984)

This is the film that put Robin Williams on the map as a "serious" actor...

[8/10 · 11 May 2001]

...and it would be worth checking out for that reason alone -- except that it's also a _really good_ movie, too. Aside from one brief nude scene (he and Maria Conchita Alonso are lounging in the bath to cool off), it's also about as wholesome as you're going to get in a film for adults. Maltin pretty much hits the nail on the head: It's a bittersweet story about finding out that the land of your dreams is great, but still not all it's cracked up to be. It could be hard for viewers born after about 1970 to really grasp the finality of the Williams character's decisionm, as he finds himself with no real prospect of ever seeing his home and old friends again.

Some may find it a little slow going, but this is one of those movies that's about the characters, and they're developed beautifully. Mazursky and his casting people wisely selected veteran character performers to complement Williams and Venezualan soap-opera pro Alonzo. No one, not even Williams, steals their scenes, and that's as it should be in a movie like this.

Alien: Resurrection (1997)

I laughed, I cried...

[7 March 2001]

No, really!

This movie is terrific fun -- but as science fiction or even an "Alien" franchise flick, it's garbage. And you have to suspect that WEaver knew it, too -- she seems to lay back and play it mostly for irony, giving a remarkably good impression of a macho male action-hero.

Curiously, this is the first flick I recall seeing Weaver in where they don't make an effort to shoot around her height. In fact, they augment it with a set of platform parachute boots that look like they came straight out of a goth boutique.

Wincott and Perlman turn in their usual slimily fascinating bad guys, but Ryder is woefully miscast and out of place.

Bottom line: This is the ideal choice for a "bad movie" night with a few beers and some friends.

Silent Running (1972)

Poignant & Slightly Mad

[8/10 · 7 March 2001]

It's hard to look back now and remember that in 1971, a lot of people really did think it might all be gone in 30 years. So it would probably be difficult for people born after about 1966 or so to understand the poignancy of the scenario: What if you were the last park ranger on earth, and you were told to destroy the park and come home?

The most successful part of this picture is probably Dern's performance, as he carefully modulates the obsessive madness of his character -- going over the top only as needed, and then turning around to reveal that even a mad loner is human.

Not great science fiction, but a good story with good characterization -- better in most regards than most of what either Trumbull or Bochco have produced in the years since.

A High Wind in Jamaica (1965)

There's really no evil, here

[24 February 2001]

... and that's really the point -- not "evil is banal."

To explain what I mean would require a spoiler. Suffice to suggest that if you watch this, you pay close attention to Captain Chavez's face in the courtroom scenes.

I do recommend this movie highly, by the way. Coburn and Quinn really are excellent in it, and Hughes's adaptation of his own novel is also excellent. It's a little slower than the standard pirate fare, but much, much more realistic.

The Patriot (2000)

Nigh-jingoistic and wildly inaccurate... but a ripping yarn, nonetheless

[7/10 · 27 January 2001]

Don't see this looking for accuracy -- there are a thousand details either wrong or fancifully construed (why would redcoats waste valuable lead to kill rebel wounded, when they were so well known for their bayonets? why do we only see characters reloading or priming when it suits a plot-point? how do characters manage to carry their muzzle-loaders barrel down and still fire the weapon?). It's rife with stereotypes such as the ruthless Tavington (obviously modeled loosely on the Tory dragoon commander Tarleton, for whom was coined the term "Tarleton's Quarter").

Some of the special effects are a bit hokey and gratuitous. The cannonballs-taking-off-limbs effect got old... oh, I dunno, THE FIRST TIME?!... and why did they have to digitally matte some shots of troops manouvering in the field?).

And the plot -- hoo, boy, hard to recall a more manipulative effort in recent memory. Burning the whole town to death in the church was a bit over the top. And Gibson pulls out every item in his bag of tricks to jerk the tears.

But you know what? Despite all that, it's still a well-made hollywood flick. Gibson pulls out all his tricks -- but he's _got_ the tricks to pull (easy to forget with some of the tripe he's turned out that he's actually a damn good actor). Honestly, I found myself watching it again the morning after, and got engrossed.

Black Robe (1991)

Brutal but beautiful

[7 January 2001]

_Black Robe_ is an under-appreciated gem. With fine acting, a strong, literate screenplay, beautiful visuals from the spare, cold Canadian wilderness, and a lyrical, dialogue-light storytelling style, this film is an absorbing experience. Viewers with less patience for visual storytelling, or who don't like having to pay attention to details, will probably find it slow-going.

Be forewarned: _Black Robe_ is a brutal film, by modern western standards. Gruesome torture is openly referred to; native americans, particularly the northern Mohawk and Huron peoples, are _not_ substantially idealized.

Nice ethnographic touches are preserved -- for example, the Alqonkian-speaking group who agree to guide the Black Robe are permitted to clearly express their perplexity at the Jesuit's rudeness for not sharing his tobacco. Similarly, a Mohawk war-leader keenly sees opportunity in permitting the French to live: they can be traded for muskets, and forced to teach the Mohawk how to use the powerful new weapons. No "simple savages", after all: The Iroquois did not come to control much of the northeast through stupidity.

While widely excoriated by some native american advocates for its depiction of Mohawk and Huron brutality, the film actually soft-pedals the reality (as noted by other reviewers). The southern, Five-Nations Mohawk may have abandoned ritual cannibalism by this time, but it's certain that ritual torture and cannibalism were practiced throughout the Iroquois sphere of influence up to the early contact period. It was an aspect of their culture, and really no stranger than similar practices as recorded among christianized Scandinavians circa 1060 AD.

Romeo + Juliet (1996)

Fun, but not very good

[6/10 · 15 December 2000]

While a much bigger-budget and more "serious" work, this isn't really nearly as good as Luhrmann's earlier _Strictly Ballroom_.

This wildly experimental movie is, overall, a dismal (albeit instructive) failure. The plot narrative arc runs parallel to _Strictly Ballroom_, beginning in a much wilder, freer, more experimental style early in the picture, shifting gradually over to a more conventional mode of storytelling about a quarter of the way in. As with the earlier picture, I wonder if the real reason for the switch is not that Luhrmann simply ran out of steam and energy for the frenetic editing.

The biggest failing is in the casting. While both exceptionally pretty, neither Danes nor diCaprio ever come to grips with the meaning in their lines -- falling victim to the most common failing when doing Shakespeare, they never manage to forget that the lines are supposed to be POETRY. Several supporting players, most notably Harold Perrineau as Mercutio and John Leguizamo as Tybalt, overcome this problem with ease. Perrineau in particular is flatly amazing, easily stealing every scene; that's not hard with material like Mercutio, but as so often happens with this play, a good Mercutio serves no end so much as to show up the weaknesses of the story in general (to wit, these are all a bunch of witless adolescents that most of us wouldn't give a thought to outside of The Theatre).

Good eye candy, and some really fine performances (although none from the principles).

Best in Show (2000)

Brilliant deadpan farce

[25 October 2000]

This movie was just a joy to watch. Chris Guest has few (if any) equals at the devilishly simple art of creating space for humor. He appears to have taken a basic script outline and given the pieces of it to the players bit by bit, trusting them to work out the details as they go. The comparisons with _This is Spinal Tap_ are inevitable, but thankfully they do it no harm: _Best In Show_ can stand up against _Tap_ which no shame whatsoever.

Posey and Hitchcock nearly steal the film as a pair of infantile, materialistic yuppies sublimating their feelings toward one another through their dog. The rest of the cast swings valiantly and with verve (Ed Begley and the legendary Fred Willard deserve special mention). But what really makes this ad-lib showcase work is the editing, and the space that Guest creates for the laughs by letting the characters be ridiculous (and yet somehow likeable) all on their own. He resists the temptation to telegraph the punchlines (as if there were any!), and in so doing allows them to sneak up on you.

If you don't get a chance to see this in its theatrical run, by all means rent it and share it with friends -- this is not a movie to watch alone -- it begs to be shared.

Last of the Dogmen (1995)

Under-rated: Good script, good performances, beautiful cinematography

[8 October 2000]

HG Wells once recommended that writers of 'fantastic fiction' choose to break only one rule per story, to avoid stretching their readers willful suspension of disbelief to breaking. _Last of the Dogmen_ proves how well a story based on an implausible premise (traditional Cheyenne surviving in the mountains with their culture intact) can work if everything else is kept real. The action is realistic, and the characters are drawn honestly and allowed to behave in a natural, realistic manner.

As others have pointed out, it's a quiet little story as these stories go, and it's also one of Berenger's better performances; I feel as though I should bird-dog this director, because all the principles turn in good, nuanced work.

I recommend this movie as light or even moderate fare, with something for both romantics and adventurers.

(Curiously, as far as I can recall, the title is never explained in the film. 'Cheyenne' is a French corruption of a Blackfoot or Arikara word meaning "dog people", for the dogs the Cheyenne once used in preference to horses to haul their household goods between camps. The leading Cheyenne warrior society eventually adopted the name "dog men" or "dog soldiers" in defiance. The survivors depicted here would be the descendents of a dog soldier group and their families.)

Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle (1994)

Curiously flat and affectless

[5/10 · 8 October 2000]

While the performances and the writing are technically good, the overall impression is that of a lack of affect -- nobody in this movie really seems to care much of anything about anything. The only glimpses we have of Dorothy Parker (and slim glimpses they are) as anything but a sadly underestimated party girl are in her poetic interstices. Perhaps that's the point, but if so, it's lost in an Altmanesque whirl of cameos. The title accomplishes more to drive the theme than the whole of the movie; for me, that's a sign the movie just -might- have been better made.

Cobra (1986)

Almost as funny as "Rambo, First Blood Part II"

[1/10 · 8 October 2000]

I had the dubious privilege of watching Cobra the equivalent of several times through. See, I was workin' as a security guard at the time, and the theatre management thought people would use it as an excuse to get rowdy. (As it turned out, the few people actually in the theatures laughed more than cheered....)

One of the funniest films of 1986.....

Das Boot (1981)

"Of the 40,000 German U-boat men in World War II, ...

[9/10 · 25 August 2000]

"... 30,000 did not return." -- from the preface to the American paperback edition of _The Boat_

This was what moved me most about the story: Men going to sea with a 3 in 4 chance of dying -- and knowing it ahead of time. Petersen's claustrophobic direction, mixed with judicious use of grand technique (what an amazing soundtrack, laced with thick allusions to Brahms!), brought me into the strange and horrifying world of the tiny VII-series U-boat.

Buckheim's novel is one of the few survivors of my adolescent collection of "true" war stories (it's condensed from Buckheim's _3_ tours of duty on U-boats). Petersen's film, even in the cut-down, dubbed versions (fortunately Prochnow dubs his own voice, though the others suffer), more than lives up to the haunting atmosphere of the novel. Nor does Peterson flinch from Buckheim's final, brutal reminder that these men fought on the losing side.