urbanstruggle Reviews

Two-Minute Warning (1976)

Probably the worst scripted movie I've ever seen

[20 October 2002]

Though I was not alive when it came out, I can imagine this looking even more dated & out of place in 1976 than it does today. The movie is about a mad sniper who perches himself atop a football stadium in L.A. during a Super Bowl-like game. Though I'll admit I only made it three quarters of the way through this monstrosity before falling asleep, here is just one example out of many as to how badly this film is scripted:

As an older couple enter the stadium, the woman leans over to her husband and says "Did you bet on the game?," to which her husband replies "We've been married for what, five years, and you're asking me if I bet on the game? (prolonged silence) . . . of course I bet on the game!"

This is without a doubt the worst establishing dialogue I have ever heard in a Hollywood film. There is better banter carried on between characters in most Ed Wood films, fer chrissakes! The acting isn't nearly as bad as the dialogue written for them is, with Cassevettes and Heston both being as professional as one could with a godawful script like this (which features the inane idea of evacuating the entire stadium in a slow manner, so that the sniper wouldn't notice . . . umm yeah, a sniper with a bird's eye view of a football stadium crowd is not going to notice seats gradually emptying??), but the end result is still one of the cheesiest and utterly non-believable films I've ever seen. Scriptwriting students everywhere should see this film to learn how NOT to write a film. After watching dialogue this inane being performed by major Hollywood players of the time, that should scare any would-be Tarantino film school brat into paying a whole lot more attention to how inhuman their dialogue sounds.

Crumb (1994)

The Best Movie of the 90s

[10/10 · 17 January 2002]

"Crumb" is not only the best documentary film I've ever seen, but it is also the best movie of the 90s, by far. Not since "Raging Bull" has their been an American film as brutally honest and artful in it's portrayal of its tortured protagonist. Robert Crumb was a sick cult figure to many; a depraved, perverted, misogynistic and racist comic / pop artist that was one of those "once in a lifetime" celebrities -- a true original and intriguingly weird character in a world known for weird and original celebrities. But compared to his horrifyingly screwed up family, Robert Crumb is a COMPLETELY NORMAL person.

This is the most revealing documentary movie ever made. By the end of the movie, you feel as though you know EXACTLY why Robert Crumb grew up to be the way he did, and you actually admire his resilience and his ability to live through the crap he had to go through with a psychotic military father, a mother who was strung out on painkillers throughout much of his childhood, and two brothers who are COMPLETELY crazy (Robert also has two sisters, but they declined to be apart of the film)! The part that makes this film so unbelievably entertaining and watchable is how interesting and deep all of these characters are, especially Robert's scene stealing older brother Charles, whom is in his 50s and has lived at home with his mother virtually his entire life! Charles has never had sex and lives among mountains of read books in a house he hasn't really left for any reason at all in twenty-five years, although he also happens to be on an incredible amount of pain-killers and anti-depressant drugs at all moments of his life, so leaving probably wouldn't have been a good idea. He's so unbelievably insane that he's brilliant. Charles disconnected theories on life, love, social status, sibling rivalry, and his recollections of the childhood the imaginative Crumb family offspring had are some of the highlights of the film.

His other brother Max is also quite compelling. A self-proclaimed sex-offender, Max lives in a cheap hotel room somewhere in San Francisco, where he begs on the street for money, paints paintings of considerable talent, passes a six-foot nylon strip through his digestive system for "cleansing purposes" and sits on a bed of nails all day that it is speculated that he made himself. Crumb's mother, who originally did not want camera crews interviewing Charles, is also quite intriguing. By the point in time we meet her, we already are aware of her addiction to pain killers throughout her kids lives and her lost, goofy "woo, are we really on camera?" demeanor is quite funny in a disturbing way. She also boasts jokingly about such things as beating her children and threatening to give the children enemas if they misbehave.

"Crumb" also brilliantly treats R. Crumb with humility towards his art. Robert Crumb is never displayed as a freak and his artwork is never discussed along the lines that normal comic book art is usually discussed. The movie treats Crumb like a serious artist and social satirist. Scenes are shown in which Crumb's art is being displayed at galleries as prestigious as the Museum of Modern Art in New York, and the film features expert art-critics as interviewee's, who all uniformly praise Crumb's art and humor (although some do it as though they are in no way endorsing Crumb's strange world view). There are also many brilliant scene's where we see Crumb doing exactly what he does best: drawing. Many art films focus on the personal lives of the artist more so than the art itself. While Crumb is a highly personal film, the film largely focuses on his art itself (some of his more infamous drawings and strips are debated and discussed with pro and con viewpoints by various art critics and activists) and how autobiographical a lot of it really is. Some of the best scenes in the movie show Robert Crumb just sitting down on a bench or at a table somewhere, drawing the people who walk by him. Crumb focuses in on the most clichéd details of the people he draws, exaggerating the ad-wear that they wear (Nike, Addias, San Francisco 49ers, etc...), the looks of desperation in the eyes of some of the crowd, to the loudness and crudeness of the sounds coming out of a kid's boom box (in which he quaintly observes that "everything coming out of kids stereo's these days sounds like a piercingly loud guy screaming 'cocksucker motherf**ker'").

"Crumb" also gives insight into the artist's personal struggles with the female species and the strange misogynistic art it has produced. Through revealing interviews with ex-girlfriends and his longtime wife Aline, Crumb comes across as a Howard Stern-like 'softy-on-the-inside,' with kinky sexual fantasies. The alarming difference is that Crumb's childhood was so devoid of love and normalcy that Crumb himself does not have the ability to truly love another human being apart from his young daughter whom he had with Aline (Crumb also has an older son from his first marriage, but they are not quite as close).

The one person who does show a lot of love in this movie for its characters and its subject is Terry Zwigoff, the director of this film and one of Robert Crumb's closest personal friends. "Crumb" travels into territory that few documentary films are ever aloud by their subjects to travel through. It is clear throughout the film that the entire Crumb-clan knows Zwigoff quite well from over the years and feels completely comfortable with him, in spite of his camera crew being there -- Charles especially, who romanticizes the camera with his funny tales of teen-angst (of which he seems permanently trapped in, in a disturbing, J.D. Salinger-esque way) and growing up in a strange household. Robert Crumb himself seems anxious to get it all over with by the end of the film when he and Aline move to France (the film was shot over a period of six years by Zwigoff at a time with both Zwigoff and Crumb were suicidal), but the film has the feeling a lot of times like your watching a group of old friends sitting around reminiscing about the past and catching up on things with each other. Very few films capture that personal feeling as well as "Crumb" does, and very few films treat their subjects with such honesty & humility. The film is a complete labor of love, and it is the best film of the 1990s by a landslide.

The King of Comedy (1982)

One of the most disturbing and jaw dropping movie's ever made

[17 January 2002]

Yeah, I know, for every "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull," there's a dud like "New York, New York" thrown in there to make you think that those two movies may have been a fluke. But seeing the ultra-black "The King of Comedy" will prove to you once and for all that De Niro and Scorsese are the single greatest actor/director combo in film history.

I say this film is "ultra-black," because it literally is a jaw-dropingly disturbing film. But what makes "The King of Comedy" such an interesting and completely watchable experience is the way the material is handled. This is not an R or X-rated shocker filled with "offensive imagery," or depraving drug use, or rape. "The King of Comedy" is a PG-rated film. However, it is darker and makes the viewer feel uneasier than most NC-17 rated movies I've seen.

The story centers around a 34-year-old loser named Rupert Pumpkin (De Niro) who lives with his mother. He's in his own world. Literally. Between unbelievable daydreams about fraternizing with his idol, the ever so Johnny Carson-like "Jerry Langford" (Jerry Louis), who hosts an ever so Tonight Show-like show called "The Jerry Langford Show" (the similarities are so closely drawn together here, that they even have guys who work for, and have been guests on the Tonight show playing themselves in the movie), Rupert also stalks Jerry under the self-convinced guise that he and Jerry are meant to be a comic-duo.

Rupert is a wannabe standup comedian who has spent years perfecting his mediocre standup routine in his basement while his mother yells at him to "keep it down." Set up in his basement are cardboard cutouts of Jerry, the Jerry Langford show set, the band and various guests who have been on the show before. Jerry sits down between all of them and acts out a fantasy as though he is a guest sitting down on the Langford show, talking to Jerry like he's know him forever. From the first scene shown in his basement, it is clear that Rupert Pumpkin is a very sick man.

Furthermore, Rupert finds himself in a situation where his obsession level escalates to an all-time high. After "saving" Jerry Langford from a mob of fans who were mauling him after a show one evening, Rupert jumps into Jerry's limo with him. Instead of throwing Rupert back out onto the cold street, Jerry decides to be nice and listen to what Rupert has to say, and let him pitch why he would be a good guest on the show. Jerry lets Rupert down with a typical "come into the studio some time and drop off some of your material to my agent and we'll look into it" response. Naturally, Rupert takes Jerry literally and sees what he said as a definite interest in his material, rather than a quick way of letting down a guy who won't take no for an answer.

De Niro is incredibly great in this film. Not quite as great as his subtly brilliant roles in "Taxi Driver," "Raging Bull" and "The Godfather Part II," but definitely near the same level and way off the stratosphere in terms of intensity. De Niro is so utterly believable at playing a man that has absolutely no clue whatsoever how to behave and act normally in public that you often wonder about the state of his own psychosis at times. The scene's where De Niro is waiting in an office trying to get an interview with Jerry to be on the show are gut wrenching. Never has a movie so clearly and brilliantly conveyed the uneasiness of a moment and the hopelessly clueless demeanor of a man who quite simply isn't all there.

Moreover, "The King of Comedy" is also a brilliantly executed satire on the nature of fame and the unbelievable things that people will do to achieve a certain level of it... even if it is for only 15-minutes. What makes the movie so astounding almost twenty years later is how ahead of its time the film feels. Despite some examples of bad 80s fashion, film production aesthetics (well, at least on the typically poorly transferred 80s VHS copy I watched) and the fact that this film is sending up the Johnny Carson-era of the Tonight Show, "The King of Comedy" never feels like an 80s film at all, and it ended up pre-dating the 90s media-psycho fascination by nearly fifteen years! A brilliant, brilliant film that I cannot say enough good things about. Paul Zimmerman's script must have been amazing. Pay close attention to the scene where Rupert finally performs his stand-up routine. Some of his jokes actually are quite funny, but most of them are direct and disturbingly autobiographical tidbits about his life and his horrible, horrible childhood. This is top-notch writing.

Scorsese and De Niro were just the men to bring such a story to life during their creative zenith from the early 70s to the early 80s and "The King of Comedy" holds up extremely well next to known classics like "Mean Streets," "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull." One of the most underrated and under appreciated movies ever. If you have a weak tolerance level for watching EXTREME social depravity, you might want to avoid this film, though. I give it a 10 out of 10.

Bad Lieutenant (1992)

One of the most disturbing and depressing movies I have ever seen

[7 January 2002]

I am shocked to see that this movie is only rated a "6.5" with IMDb voters. "Bad Lieutenant" features what may be the best performance of Harvey Keitel's distinguished career as a NYPD Lieutenant who struggles with just about every vice imaginable: drug addiction, alcoholism, gambling, prostitutes... and Catholic guilt.

The Lieutenant's life is already spiraling dangerously out of control when the film starts, but he finds himself real-evaluating his grim life after he begins investigating the brutal rape of a nun. Extremely depressing, disturbing and powerful look at depravity and a tortured soul. The movie was rated NC-17 for a full-frontal nudity scene with Keitel, but the movie is so grim and disturbing that it probably would have been rated that anyway (as evidenced, there is an R-rated version of the video that is 5 minutes shorter). Nevertheless, it is a great and powerful film that will be engraved in your mind years after you first see it. 9/10

Series 7: The Contenders (2001)

Pretentious crap

[6 January 2002]

The fact that this movie has been embraced as great satire in this day and age is sad. The film has all the subtly of a car-horn, and is about twice as unfunny. Keep in mind when you see this movie that Minahan was a producer at the FOX network responsible for those "When Good Pets Go Bad" and "Worlds Wildest Police Chases" shows. It's pretty hypocritical if you ask me to write and direct and satire of the sad state of reality television when you were one of the people responsible for the perpetuation of the trash in the first place. "Man Bites Dog" (1991) was light-years of a better than this film and dealt with very similar subject matter while pre-dating the reality T.V. craze by over five years. It was also a film that took real chances (make sure to rent the NC-17 version), while Series 7 remains fairly pedestrian throughout..

Frontline: The Merchants of Cool (2001) Season 19, Episode 5

Amazing

[10/10 · 19 November 2001]

This one-hour PBS documentary is one of the most effective and scathing examinations of popular culture ever made. The guy who made this movie is a goddamned genius who should win any and every award given out to a TV program of its kind. After viewing "The Merchants of Cool," you will wonder why no one has yet attempted to tie every single one of today's MTV-generation teenagers to chairs and force them to watch this movie. It would be a great service to all of humanity.

"The Merchants of Cool" is about exactly what the title suggests. It chronicles the late 90s surge in the marketing of "cutting-edge" culture to youths in North America. This movie shows you exactly how MTV and their ilk were able to turn teenage rebellion into a profitable industry in corporate America. By the perpetuation of ready made so-called "cutting-edge" musical groups like Limp Bizkit and Blink-182, along with "dick, balls, crap and fart" joke comedians like Tom Green and sexually flaunting pop-star-cum-role-models like Britney Spears, corporate America have managed to turn good ol' Teenage rebellion into big fat dollar signs.... and the kids just keep on buyin'.

The movie sheds insightful light on the process of setting trends. Dozens of youth oriented companies in the U.S. seek out confident, ordinary high school teenagers and sign them to fairly lucrative contracts to endorse, wear, listen to or even just talk about their products in a light that makes the product look like something that the kids just "gotta have" in front of friends and school peers. The thought that the 15-year-old kid sitting next to you at the bus stop next time could be a walking, talking endorsement is truly repulsive.

Even more repulsive is how MTV and Hollywood movie studios have managed to dumb down the level of vulgarity in mainstream culture to the point where it makes being offensive "cute." Essentially, as MTV would have you believe, boys acting like 13-year-olds up until they are in their thirties is not only perfectly acceptable, but damn cool! And 13-year-old girls dressing not unlike Vegas hookers would have dressed 10 years ago, all while flaunting a sexuality that they do not yet understand is not only "cool," but perfectly acceptable in most fashion circles. And of course, the kids will eat this crap up because they are so warmed over by the fact that music, movies and other facets of mainstream culture with this false "cute" offensive edge to it are so readily accessible to them now, that they'll still feel like they are rebelling against their parents, all while unknowingly feeding the wallets of entertainment industry big-wig's.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing of all was the shot in this film of the kids participating in MTV's annual spring break telecast. Here was a group of kids, whose age ranged probably from 14 to their early-20s, grinding and dry humping each other in an orgy of misunderstood sexuality that I have never seen the likes of before. Seeing 14-year-old girls shove their barely covered t**s into the faces and bodies of surrounding males in a giggle some fest of sexual overexertion surely lead me to believe that 80% of 'em don't understand or hold the slightest bit of esteem of their own bodies or sexuality. Girls who grew up with Britney Spears and such do not dress "sexy" because they want to flaunt their sexuality, but because essentially it is what most visible females of this faux-counter culture dress like. Sexuality in that sense, at least for young teenage girls, has become less of a self-discovery and more of a fashion.

This documentary did not stop there, though. It went onto scathe the ever-popular mainstreamization of the "anti-mainstream." In particular, we see acts like Insane Clown Posse and Slipknot schlock up a routine of saying "F**k You" to the establishment and acting as though they were somehow a voice to an underground legion of fans who were all brought together by their music as though they were outcasts of society, shown for what they really were -- rock stars. As a hilarious end-note to the film, we get to see the ICP gang participate in a Professional Wrestling match and are told very matter-of-factly by the narrator that they had very recently signed to an outright major label.

I could go on for hours describing many of the issues covered in this movie, but I'll refrain from doing so and let you seek it out for yourself. If you are someone who rolled your eyes at the inexplicable amount of kids who champion music like Limp Bizkit and films like "Scary Movie," this movie perfectly articulates what has been on the tip of your tongue for the last couple of years. What is most extraordinary about this documentary is how much ground it managed to cover in only one-hour. Quite an amazing feat, if you ask me. If I were the President of the United States, I would make this film mandatory High School viewing.

Glengarry Glen Ross (1992)

One of the best acted movies I've ever seen

[18 February 2001]

"Glengarry Glen Ross" is a movie that seems to get better and better as years go on. Made 5 or 6 years before telemarketing call centers begun littering practically every urban center in North America, the film is actually much more relevant today than it was in 1992.

The film is about a seedy, underlying real estate branch-office in a bad end of Chicago during a period of slow sales and salesmen that work there. After the honcho's at the head office decide that this particular branch was not performing up to expectations, they send one of their guys down to the office to tell them, in no uncertain terms, that only the two top salesmen this month will be kept, while the rest will be fired. The big problem here though is that the particular salesmen caught in a rut at the moment are running on "leads" (an industry term for cards with the names, addresses, telephone numbers and personal information of people whom are potential sales) that are tremendously outdated (meaning they've been used at least once before) and the coveted new leads (newer, better leads almost assure you better sales) are given to those only who have made enough recent sales to qualify.

While this film (and the David Mamet play) was made in relation to that particular form of real estate sales, anyone who has ever worked a job in the telemarketing industry will be able to easily relate to this movie. As a student, I did telemarketing for 6 months for 2 different companies and saw this film a few months later and was shocked at how much unintentional relevance this film had on telemarketing viewed in the later stages of the 90's. The system of leads, sales pitches and corporate policy is nearly identical to what I saw when I worked as a telemarketing sales rep. You had the seedy, conning sales pitch that we all had to memorize and act out on a daily basis, the office managers who circled around the call center, hammering on people with slow sales with their only form of motivation being for you to win the monthly "office prize", you had the first class sales people, who got all of the golden leads, naturally, and then you had guys like me, people clamming onto stale, outdated leads, lucky enough to make one sale for every 200 calls we made, all while trying to score some of the Golden leads that the so-called top sales people were only allowed to land. Like the tagline of this film says: "Lie, Cheat, Steal: All in a day's work".

The acting itself in the film is what gives it it's bite, though. Jack Lemmon gives easily the best performance in his entire career as aging, former top-flight salesman stuck in a prolonged rut. Alec Baldwin's highly praised performance in this film as the ruthless mouthpiece of the head-office is among the best of his career as well, but the real gem of this film in a film with a lot of gem performances comes from Al Pacino, in my opinion. Pacino plays the current top-sales guy at the office and the speech he gives to a client he's trying desperately not to lose nearing the end of the film is one of the most utterly believable and real performances I have ever seen captured on film. I was blown away.

All in all, one of the best and most underrated films of the 90's. I give it a 10 out of 10.

Drunken Master II (1994)

Spectacular

[31 January 2001]

Most hardcore martial arts film fans try to separate themselves from the commercial and comical efforts of Jackie Chan, however "The Legend of a Drunken Master" (or "Drunken Master II" as I'm told it's called in Hong-Kong) is quite simply a film that no action/martial arts fan can deny and arguably the best martial arts film I have ever seen.

Jackie Chan's stunts and seamless action sequences have always been pretty incredible, but this film is jaw-dropping. It also appears to be much more violent than his other movies and adds an element of brutality to his film's here not seen in North America since his "Rumble In The Bronx". The story, as usual, is pretty stupid. Chan is the son of some Martial Arts master, who happens to own and is located on land that contains priceless Chinese artifacts that some bad-ass Hong Kong gangsters and British diplomats want to steal. Chan practices and occasionally executes a fighting style known as "drunken boxing" (which involves a stagger step in which a fighter moves as though he was drunk.... although Chan shows us over and over again in the movie how much better this actually works when you really do get drunk to do it), but it is forbidden by his father, so if his dad finds out, he usually gets a beating or two. Anyway, Chan battles the gangsters and then takes on the whole damn mob after they take his father's land and shut down a factory.

To tell you the truth, I don't think I can remember anything else about the plot, but that's not what's important here in the first place. What's important is that the action sequences here are so incredible that you have to see them to believe them. All the while, keep in the back of your mind that Chan is doing all of his own stunts and many of the other actors are, as well. The drunken boxing scene between the gangsters in the middle of town with a crowd gathered around and Chan chugging ample amounts of booze while smashing bottles on the gangsters and promptly beating the living daylights out of them is, in two words: Bad ass! And the 20-minute final action scene is easily the most incredible action sequence I have ever seen. You'll be amazed at how dedicated Chan is to his films and their realism once you see the punishment Chan's body took in that scene. It needs to be seen to be believed!

All in all, this is one of the best action films I've ever seen. Not in story, that's for sure, but for sheer action, I really don't think you have much chance beating this film. Period! 8/10

Snatch (2000)

The most pretentious film I've seen in a long time

[27 January 2001]

I really did like Guy Ritchie's debut "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels", but "Snatch" is really over the top. It has some funny moments, but all in all, this is not a good movie.

First off, as many critics and viewers alike have citied, this is pretty much the same movie as "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels". I'm sure people who liked this film will argue that I'm wrong and that's just a generalization, but the two films are so alike, its not even funny.

Secondly, Ritchie has taken his "hip" style to the utter extreme, here. I enjoyed the way Ritchie subtly used his quirky camera effects and quick shots in 'Lock Stock', but the key word here is "subtly". In "Snatch", he goes for the overkill and the whole movie ends up feeling like a 90 minute music video. It was so bad that I honestly felt like walking out of the theater only 10 minutes into this film. The whole film felt like a giant forced exercise in pseudo-coolness for the MTV generation. Christ, I was surprised not to see Kurt Loader or Carson Daily standing anywhere in the film, holding a microphone with screaming fans in the background. As you can expect from this description, it is filled with so many shots that just scream "Hey, look at me. I'm Guy Ritchie. Look how cool this shot is. I'm so cool". Reminded a lot of that modernized "Romeo and Juliet" movie that came out 4 or 5 years ago (with DiCaprio and Claire Danes). It's dumbed down, wannabe slick, cool and hip entertainment for people who like to think they are above, say "Dude, Where's My Car?" or "Scary Movie", but are certainly well below the works of David Mamet or The Coen Brothers.

Thirdly, this film seems very stereotypical to British culture. I would be very surprised a British born director would give his characters such fake brit/cockney tripe dialogue if I wasn't already aware that this film was so obviously made with an American audience in mind. I would also have a very hard time believing Guy Ritchie was really British at all and wasn't just an American posing as a Brit if it weren't for the fact that his American characters in this film were just as fake and badly stereotyped. Brad Pitt wasn't half as bad as I thought he would be, but he certainly wasn't funny, unless you happened to be a North American male in Junior High that still thinks that a stereotyped British accent alone is funny enough. And Benecio Del Toro's fake (insert nationality here of which I honestly can't remember in the slightest) accent was even worse, in my humble opinion.

That's not to say this was a really bad film. I did laugh several times and enjoyed the scene's with that big, tall, brute hit-man guy that was also in 'Lock Stock', but all in all, this was a very pretentious and useless re-hash of "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" and I'm not impressed with the masturbatory filmmaking direction Ritchie has taken. I'm aware that Ritchie was a TV Ad director before deciding he was a filmmaking protege, but that doesn't give him an excuse for making a film like a TV Ad (let's just hope that Spike Jonze doesn't make the same mistake). Nothing worse than a show-off filmmaker, just ask Brian DePalma's and Oliver Stone's critics. I give it a 5/10.

Heat (1995)

A film worth seeing, if just for the Pacino/De Niro coffee break scene

[23 January 2001]

The biggest reason you should justifiably sit through this 2 hour and 50 minute film is to watch a scene about half way through the film where Pacino and De Niro's characters sit down to have a cup of coffee together. The first half of "Heat", a crime caper film by Micheal Mann, is Pacino and De Niro playing a game of cat and mouse. Pacino plays a veteran police lieutenant and De Niro plays a veteran high stakes thief. The scene is one of those magical cinematic moments that only come every so often. Pacino and De Niro, legends, masters of their acting trade, acting together on screen for the first time, at last! Mann's casting of the two to play opposing cop and robber was a masterful choice. The impact of the scene where the two momentarily put aside their differences to come to terms with the fact that they truly do need each other to do their own jobs goes above and beyond the film itself. It's as though the scene was two masters of the trade acknowledging each other for the first time.

The rest of the film is good, but it never quite lives up to the validity and authenticity of that scene. Mann tries too hard to make this film an "Epic" in the lines of "The Godfather", much in the same way Brian De Palma tried with "Scarface". The film is a top notch crime caper film with great, well thought out action scene's, wonderful cinematography and a plot that rings with authenticity (which gives it a one-up on "Scarface" right there), but much of the film seems forced. I wish filmmakers would realize that "Epic" films are a happening and not a pre-fabricated film made with the intention of being remembered as an "Epic" (for recent examples, see "Braveheart" and "Gladiator"). While "Heat" certainly is a lot more than a contrived wannabe-epic, it is, at the most, a very good crime film (apart from the amazing coffee break scene) no more, no less. I give it a 7.5 out of 10.

What's a Nice Girl Like You Doing in a Place Like This? (1963)

Good Early Scorsese short

[15 January 2001]

I saw this film a few months ago as part of a package that was showing five of Martin Scorsese's early short films (the other films included were "The Big Shave", "It's Not Just You, Murray", "Italianamerican" and "American Boy") at the local art-house theater.

"What's a Nice Girl Like You Doing in a Place Like This?" is very similar to his other NYU film-school effort "It's Not Just You, Murray". It is a quirky little film about a writer and his obsession with a photograph he has on his wall. This obsession has caused him to develop writers block.

The film plays out like a short fable and displays a much more humorous and playful side of Scorsese. You can tell it's Scorsese, but his style is much quirkier and less potent here. Still, it's a good, funny short movie worth seeing if you want to see where Scorsese was routed.

Scary Movie (2000)

Lame. Very Lame!

[16 December 2000]

The Wayans brothers should have known better. "Scary Movie" is a spoof of "Scream", which was itself a spoof of the concept of the "80's teen slasher" movie genre, which itself was a spoof of the cheesy Roger Corman exploitation horror movie genre of the late 50's and 60's. Sounds great, huh?

If you thought "National Lampoon's Loaded Weapon 1", "Fatal Instinct", "Hot Shots Part Deux" and "Silence of The Hams" were bad, you ain't seen nothing yet! The writing here is awful, the good jokes in this movie (like the funny ode to the Usual Suspects) are few and far between and the rest of the jokes for the most part are stupid and designed to not exceed beyond the intellect and comprehension of the average 8th grader. In short, this movie sucked.

Shawn and Marlon Wayans can be funny (and have been in the past). They were clearly in their element when they wrote "Don't Be A Menace To South Central While Drinking Your Juice In The Hood" in ode to the utterly ridiculous, black stereotyping "hood" movie craze of the early 90's. That movie was funny because they actually made it in line with films like "The Naked Gun" and "Top Secret" -- It was a true spoof. The jokes in there were well thought out and well timed. The movie was well written. It was a film that had to be made, eventually, given how utterly ridiculous these "hood" movies were starting to get.

"Scary Movie" on the other had was a film that didn't need to be made. The original "Scream", as it is, was a great spoof of the teen slasher genre already, filled to the brim with self aware pop-culture dialogue that made even Tarantino shake his head at the utter pretentiousness of it all. It was great. It spawned a whole genre of the exact same types of self-aware slasher films that never took themselves seriously in the first place. Making a film like "Scary Movie" would be like making a movie spoofing "Austin Powers". It relies solely on a couple of unfunny offensive sight gags with no comical timing whatsoever (which are surprisingly non-subtle, given the knack for comic timing these guys displayed during some of the scene's in "Don't Be A Menace") and on a bunch of dumb jokes about `weed' and other current pop-culture things (those insipidly stupid "Wuzzzup" commercials, The Matrix, etc....). I think I laughed thrice during the entire duration of this film. As one other person here said, I can't imagine the feeling watching a movie like this 20 years from now. Its movies like this that make you appreciate a good "spoof" film. The genre was very overdone for awhile, but a film as witless as this makes you yearn for a good ol' Mel Brooks film and another film staring Leslie Nealson. It also makes you cringe at the glaring double standard in Hollywood. If you an make interesting, intelligent and unconventional film like "Eyes Wide Shut" or "American Psycho", you will probably have to censor vital scene's of the film to avoid an NC-17 rating, but if you want to make a buffo box-office, brainless, laughless and witless teen comedy, you can include all the tasteless "dick" shots and "cum" shots you want and still get an "R" Rating, since we know an NC-17 would cut into your core audience. I give it a 2 out of 10.

Swimming with Sharks (1994)

A very funny & underrated film, featuring Kevin Spacey's best acting performance EVER!

[7 December 2000]

Yes, this includes his subtly brilliant performance in "The Usual Suspects" and his wonderful middle-age angst ridden turn in "American Beauty". "Swimming With Sharks" is not a film on par with either of those two films, but in my opinion, this is Kevin Spacey's most dynamic and utterly believable performance. It is worth renting 8 times over to watch Spacey's do his foul mouth, smarmy, sarcastic, ultra-egomaniac act better than he has ever done before and better than he has done since.

Spacey plays "Buddy Ackerman", a powerful Hollywood studio executive with a menacing reputation as the "Boss From Hell". Frank Whaley plays "Guy", a film school graduate that becomes Buddy's assistant as a way to gain eventual clout and power in the business, like Buddy's other past assistants. He quickly learns that Buddy really is the `Boss From Hell' like his former assistant warned him and the movie is about him going off the deep end as a result.

Spacey's performance is not only ruthless and menacing, it is bitterly hilarious and downright amazing. Think of every single cutting putdown and insult that has been directed at you by someone else in your entire lifetime and odds are, Spacey's "Buddy Ackerman" character can top all of them all in about three sentences combined. He says things to Guy like "My bathmat means more to me than you". His code of ethics to any of his assistants is "You Are Nothing. Your Opinions Are Nothing. You Are Here For Me. I Call The Shots. You Listen". This is the kind of boss that you'd fall out of your chair laughing your ass off watching him yell at all of his employee's, but that you'd feel like a worthless piece of trash if you ever had to work for him.

The movie itself does have its flaws. I am not convinced by the "love story" subplot between Guy and the woman producer. And compared to Spacey, Whaley looks like a fish out of water in the portrayal of his character. But the true message of the film lies within the scenes between Spacey and Whaley in Buddy's home. Buddy might be the boss from hell, but he "earned that right". He fetched coffee and licked boots as an assistant once, too, and he didn't complain because that's life. The ending (which trust me, you won't see coming) contrives the message a little, but it follows the general theme of the movie (be it to the complete and utter extreme): Show Business is ruthless and you don't get from point A to point B just being nice.

"Swimming With Sharks" is not an easy movie to find at the video store. This is one you have to look for. It is a comedy (be it a `Black' comedy) and you will find it in that section. I have no idea why critics were not as warm to this film as Spacey's other films. I gather it is because he was not a notable Hollywood leading man then. Had a film like this come out in the year 2000 in the aftermath of Spacey's "American Beauty" performance, they'd be hailing it as one of the best films of the year and would be naming Spacey an Oscar favorite. I give this an 8 out of 10 (for Spacey's performance mostly, but the film itself is pretty good on it's own rites)

Curdled (1996)

Not Funny

[4 December 2000]

This movie had the potential to be a great black comedy with the idea behind it, but it falls very short. There is very little in this film that impressed me or made me laugh. It's like a black comedy without the black (the film tried to be violent and gory, but looked little more than ridiculous) or the comedy. The film is about a woman (Angela Jones) who quits her job and decided to go work for a company called PFCS (Post Forensic Cleaning Service) when she becomes fascinated with a serial killer known as the "Blue Blood Killer", a psychopath who goes around Miami beheading rich women. The company is a cleaning service that is called in to clean up the blood and guts left behind in homes in the aftermath of a murder, after the Cops haul the body and evidence away. The premise for a company like this is funny (one of the only moments in the film that caused me to laugh was their T.V Commercial), but the end result is not.

I can see why Quentin Tarantino was attracted to a project like this. Word on the street is that this was originally a funny short film that was shown at Sundance in the early 90's and after the success of "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction", Tarantino bankrolled this full length version of the movie and released it later on video with his "Rolling Thunder Pictures". Tarantino seems to be very amused and fascinated with the idea of a cleaner or cleaning service to clean up the mess of the deceased. He surely watched Luc Besson's "La Femme Nikita" many times in the later stages of his video store clerk days and used the idea of "Victor the cleaner" for his Winston Wolf character in "Pulp Fiction". The idea of a "cleaner" is quite funny and worked very well in both films, but here, it simply does not work beyond the admitted hilarity of the T.V commercial and of the mock-up sensationalist reality-TV show excerpt in the middle of the film. The rest of the movie is boring and pointless and the acting, apart from Angela Jones, is pretty stale. If you want to see real black comedy that will make you laugh (and cringe, that's another thing this film was missing), I would suggest seeking out the early works of Danny Boyle ("Trainspotting", "Shallow Grave") and the Coen Brother's "Fargo" over a boring film like this. 4 out of 10

3 Women (1977)

One of the strangest and most intriguing films I've ever seen

[1 December 2000]

I saw this movie very late at night on a PBS channel some 3-4 years ago and it's stuck with me ever since. It took me up until 3 or 4 months ago to figure out the title of this film and who directed it after searching for plots that had something to do with this film. I managed to narrow it down after remembering the lead character in the film was played by the same woman who played Jack's wife in The Shining (Shelley Duvall, of course), but I still have not been able to find this film on video anywhere.

I have a feeling this is one of those films they only play late at night and it's for a good reason. When I stumbled upon it, I immediately felt like I was dreaming something (then I later learned that the idea for this film came to Altman in a dream). Then when I realized I was awake, I was drawn into the film and mesmerized by it. There is a very, very strange subliminal quality in the way that this movie was filmed that you can never quite put your finger on and the stop-start score is very effective and especially chilling in its effect. I can't imagine what watching this film in a heavily intoxicated state would be like.

I would give anything to see this film again and if any of you ever get the opportunity to view this film on PBS or any late night film channel with the courage to show something interesting and unusual, DO NOT MISS THIS FILM AT ANY COST! I had never seen anything like "3 Women" before or and I have never seen anything like it since.

Howard the Duck (1986)

A Great B-Movie

[24 November 2000]

I vaguely remember seeing "Howard The Duck" some 12 years ago when I was a young lad and decided to rent it for nostalgia reasons and watch it again today. Anyone who is a fan of B-movies must see this movie!

"Howard The Duck" was one of the most notorious box office bomb movies of the 80's. George Lucas was the executive producer and the movie cost many millions of dollars to make (and took 7 actors to play the duck, alone!), but it was one of the most poorly critically rated films of 1986 and it brought in about a third of what it cost to make. I have seen this movie on dozens of lists about the worst films of all-time, but I think that is unfair. The movie might be bad, but it is hilarious and far from painful to watch.

This movie has everything an appreciator of bad cinema could want. A cheesy story and setting. Horrible acting and dialogue and best of all, great special effects done in a cheesy fashion. The story? It's really irrelevant here, but it's about a talking, cigar smoking, beer drinking duck named Howard who gets beamed out of his apartment (and right off his Duck planet, for that matter) accidentally across the galaxy and somehow ends up landing on Earth, in Cleveland. He meets a foxy new wave chick (Lea Thompson) that's in an all girl new wave band called Cherry Bomb. She tries to figure out how to get him back home. Along the way, the dark lord of the universe manages to get zapped inside the body of the scientist trying to help him get back home and now not only does Howard have to try and get back to "Mashington, D.C." (the town he lives in), but he has to save Earth from being conquered by the dark lord of the universe, too. What else? Well, Howard knows "Quack-Fu" and uses it to kick some booty all while shakin' his tail feather.

I laughed throughout nearly the entire 110-minute duration of this film. It gets long in some parts, but it is well worth watching if you want a good laugh. The musical sequence at the end of the film is especially priceless and hilarious. Anyone who says this film is a pile of c**p and is painful to watch is an idiot. This movie may be a pile of c**p, but it a really funny film and I'd recommend it to any B-Movie fan, right up there with `Killer Klowns from Outer Space'. Completely ridiculous 80's fun.

Shallow Grave (1994)

A great film

[23 November 2000]

Danny Boyle seemed like he was destined for directorial greatness before the surprise success of "Trainspotting" got to his head. His first two pictures, however, are wonderful. "Shallow Grave" is one of the best modern thrillers I have seen in a long time.

The story centers around three British roommates who are trying to rent the empty room in their flat out to another person. When they finally do find a man to rent the flat out to, he dies in his sleep, leaving behind a briefcase full of a whole lot of money. What to do?

Much like "Trainspotting" of a few years later, "Shallow Grave" has very dark comical undertones to it. Unlike "Trainspotting" however, it is a much more serious film. Like Sam Raimi's "A Simple Plan" of four years later, it explores a moral dilemma between three friends on what to in a situation when you find a lot of money that does not belong to you. Do you compromise your morals for the money or do you do the right thing? One is never quite sure how the story will turn out and as you approach the ending of the film, you are never quite sure which one of the three friends is more sinister than the next, which makes the twists in the last part of the film such a darkly hilarious and chilling delight.

Films like "Shallow Grave" are exactly what independent filmmaking is all about. It's a smart, sleek and stylish film made on a small budget, driven by a cleaver story and interesting characters. Ewan McGregor and Christopher Eccleston both give great performances in this film. `Shallow Grave' is miles better than any thriller Hollywood has come up with in the last 10-15 years (if not longer). I give it an 8 out of 10.

Happiness (1998)

Someone Spoiled the ending below

[12 November 2000]

I just like to say that in the review by "mrhonorama", there is a major spoiler to the ending of this movie (in fact, he spoils the whole thing by describing exactly what happens). I have seen the movie, but I would certainly not would have wanted my film experience to be spoiled by this and think you should remove his comments.

Goodfellas (1990)

One of best mob-films ever made

[12 November 2000]

I do not think there is much I have to add to the film that other IMDB users have not already highlighted, but I will say that the Oscar Joe Pesci got for this film is one of the most deserved and completely justified Oscar's of the last 20 years (and definitely the last decade in a time when there have been many undeserving ones being handed out). Joe Pesci is hilarious and amazing in his performance as a lifelong gangster with two deadly & volatile traits: A short temper and a chip on his shoulder. While all of the performances in this movie are very strong, Pesci was clearly in his element here.

It's a shame that Martin Scorsese was once again cheated out of the Best Director Oscar he so rightfully deserves in favor of Kevin Costner's directing of "Dances With Wolves" in 1990. This movie would have never been even close to the film it was had it been without Scorsese's amazing filmmaking skill behind it. The Academy better be ready to hand Marty one hell of a lifetime achievement award one of these days because after close to 30 years of being one of the greatest directors of his time, he has yet to be rewarded with an Oscar. The fact that "Raging Bull" was ripped off for a Best Picture Oscar in 1980 was bad enough, not giving Marty the Oscar he deserves after all these years, especially in lieu of making two films in the last decade that he clearly deserved to win for (Casino being the other one) is just salt in the wound at this point. I give this film a 10/10, it's one of the best story telling movies ever made and it gave insight into the code of the mob better than any film had done before it (The Godfather included) and has done since.

The Sopranos (1999–2007)

Easily The Best Show on Television (Cable or Network)

[10 November 2000]

The Sopranos is ground breaking television. Never has their been a series on television with so much intriguing depth outside of the "mini-series" format. Never has their been a show that explores the parallel's of organized crime life and everyday family life with even a shred of the authenticity of this show.

The story centers around New Jersey Mafia boss Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) and his two families (home family and crime family). Tony is a middle aged man going through a mid life crisis and is feeling the pressure of not only having to support and handle his wife and children, but having the added pressure of being "The Don of New Jersey". After suffering panic attacks and a hospitalization, Tony begins secretly seeing a shrink to deal with his problems and learns that he suffers from depression. The series is a continuing character study of Tony Soprano and all of the characters around him. It not only provides some incredible insight into the life of organized crime, but into general family life as well.

What makes The Sopranos so absorbing and astonishingly great is not necessarily the relentless strong language or occasional bursts of excessive violence on a television show, but it is how well each episode is constructed. Issues are not resolved over the course of one weekly episode, but over the courses of many episodes. There is no "Tune in next week" cliched cliffhangers either, as seen with most of the drama's on network television. Most of the issues and stories on the Sopranos are resolved over a full season. There is no plot filler or stories thrown in that just fade away afterwards. Everything in each episode of the Sopranos is there for a reason and will come back later on in the season. The show's writing is exceptional, an unprecedented feat for a television show. The characters on the show, starting with James Gandolfini's incredible Tony Soprano, have unbelievable depth and over the course of a season, we get to know each and everyone of these characters on a strikingly personal level.

It is too bad that there is not an American TV network with the balls to broadcast the Sopranos where it belongs. It is not nearly as offensive as HBO's other profane hit "Oz" and would get unprecedented ratings on Network TV. It was thought that Canadian Television network CTV would begin broadcasting the Sopranos as a series, but it turned out they just broadcast the first 13-episode season in a row on 13 consecutive nights to draw ratings away from competitor CBC during the recent Sydney Summer Olympics. A shame, because Canadian network television (which is far more liberal than U.S. network television [no censoring of language, nudity or violence]) would be a perfect outlet for this remarkable show.

Bringing Out the Dead (1999)

The "Taxi Driver" comparison is inevitable, but the film doesn't even hold a candle to it

[31 October 2000]

The biggest problem of Martin Scorsese's "Bringing Out The Dead" is not that the story parallels on many of the same theme's as his brilliant "Taxi Driver" (one of the best films ever made), but it is that the story is nowhere near as absorbing or compelling as "Taxi Driver". Scorsese does an admirable job with a rather weak story here, throwing in some incredibly chilling and unconventional filmmaking sequences and topping it off with a patented Scorsese "killer soundtrack" (featuring two songs from the first Clash album in their glorious entirety!!!), but in the end, this film comes up short of making any impact on the viewer.

I don't think Nicolas Cage's acting in this film is the problem, as many others have cited, its just his character is so weakly developed in the script that you cannot feel for him in even close to the same way you feel for a Travis Bickle or a JR (Harvey Keitel's character in "Who's That Knocking On My Door?" and the brilliant "Mean Streets"). You can sense his loneliness and his desperation, but his character is still as thin as a wet paper bag. The other characters in this film are also unremarkably thin and bland. It's a shame all this great filmmaking work, style and execution had to go to waste on a story that wouldn't have made a great film no matter who made it. I give it a 5.5/10

Casino (1995)

The second most absorbing 3-hour film ever made

[31 October 2000]

(The first of which being "The Godfather", of course) Martin Scorsese's "Casino" is a film that you can watch in all of its grand length and not feel as though you are watching a marathon. Just about the only thing there to remind you that this is a 3-hour film is the fact you have to get up and change video cassettes 2/3's of the way in. While the film is not as great as Scorsese's other mafia epic "Goodfellas", it is told in the same narrative style and lets you view the other side of the mob in Las Vegas. DeNiro is once again dynamic in his role as a Casino operator and Joe Pesci (one of the most underrated film actors of his generation, save for the Oscar he got for "Goodfellas") gives one of his patented high energy, ruthless and funny performances as the Mafia enforcer from New York who is sent to Vegas by the mob to keep things in line in Vegas. Sharon Stone also does a surprisingly good job in her role as a strung out gambler and former call-girl that becomes the apple in DeNiro's eye, easily the best performance of her career. But the film is not about individual performances, per-se, like "Goodfellas", the film is an exercise in brilliant story telling, style and superb filmmaking skill. The visuals, colors and images in this film are among the most mesmerizing of any Scorsese film since "Taxi Driver" and as many IMDB users have noted, the soundtrack of the film is among the best in film history and is used perfectly along the way and plays an important part in the storytelling. This is among an elite class of mob movies and an excellent film on its own rites. How Martin Scorsese has never won a "Best Director" Oscar in all these years of brilliance is Hollywood's greatest mystery. Lets hope he's due for a "Lifetime Achievement" one pretty soon. I give it a 9/10

Taxi Driver (1976)

Funny, Powerful, Charming and Unforgettable

[15 October 2000]

Those four words are the best I can use to describe this film. Very few times in film history has there ever been a character as real as Robert DeNiro's "Travis Bickle". Anyone who has ever gone through a period in their life of loneliness or isolation can relate to Travis Bickle. The only fictional character I can think of that has the amount of depth and authenticity of Travis Bickle is Holden Caufield in the novel "Catcher In The Rye". In fact, I can see many similarities between the two characters. While Holden Caufield's mental breakdown did not have the consequences of Travis Bickle's, they both shared many of the same character traits. Both had dark, cynical views of the world, both were tremendously charming, but at the same time lacked the social skills to benefit from their charm, thus both were extremely isolated and lonely individuals. Both were extremely respectful towards women and held them to the highest esteem. I guess you can say Holden held an advantage in intelligence over Travis, as Travis held a slight advantage in confidence over Holden, but still, I can see many similarities between the two characters and am surprised no one has made the same comparison.

The film itself is a brilliant character study and a gritty and unforgettable look at urban life. Scorsese's vision of New York's urban jungle from the front seat of a taxicab is one of the most mesmerizing film experiences you'll ever witness. The film also features a career establishing and gutsy performance by a 14 year old Jodie Foster as the pre-teen prostitute that becomes Travis's focal point of redemption in the movie. Cybil Shepherd's performance as Betsy, the fixation of Travis, is tremendously underrated. She pulls off just the right amount of grace to Travis's charm to make this film work. You can feel the instantaneous chemistry between the two characters. If only Travis had the social skills!

There isn't much else I can add to this movie that hasn't already been said by the other people who've reviewed this, but I can say that this is my favorite movie of all-time and a movie that never seems to lose it's power over repeated viewing's. In fact, I seem to find something in each viewing that makes repeated viewing's of Taxi Driver an experience all on their own. I give it a 10 out of 10!

2 Days in the Valley (1996)

Moderately Entertaining for a poor-man's Pulp Fiction

[6/10 · 9 September 2000]

Some of the other reviews here have tried to present a bunch of reasons that are supposed to prove that this movie has no resemblance to that of "Pulp Fiction". And to be honest with you, the story is in fact completely different from that of "Pulp Fiction" and it is followed chronologically over the period of 48 hours and not in pieces. But the idea of the ensemble dramatic action film to begin with was brought fourth by "Pulp Fiction" in 1994 and that's exactly what this film is -- An ensemble film with many, many intertwining sub-plots and characters. If anyone can tell me with a straight face that any movies like this would be made today if it was not for "Pulp Fiction", than they are giving the makers of this film and others like it a whole lot of undeserved credit.

That's not to say "2 Days in the Valley" is a pale rip-off and a bad film. It is pretty entertaining throughout the course of the film and has some interesting storylines. But unlike Tarantino, the writers and director of this film do not give these characters any depth. Sure, there are a few surprises here and there and revelations about characters that are unexpected, but you don't see anything more. The only characters in this film that seem to be developed at all beyond their minor shells and can hold the interest of the viewer are that of the washed up film director (played very well by Paul Mazursky) and the hardened by-the-book cop (Jeff Daniels, in one of his better roles in recent years). Besides that, it's a cast of predictable bad guys, bumbling small-time criminals and forgettable characters.

To sum it up, "2 Days in the Valley" is a decent rainy day rental, but nothing to write home about. If you want to see much better Tarantino inspired work of recent years, I suggest Doug Liman's great and highly underrated "Go" and most recently, Christopher McQuarrie's very stylish and entertaining "The Way of the Gun".