Change Your Image
boo_squib
Reviews
David Copperfield (1913)
A Faithful Adaptation
Thank you Grapevine Videos for preserving so many classic silents like this one.
The remarkable thing about this film is the obvious love of Dickens' writing that the director and cast show. The director made sure of using the real settings that Dickens' describes in his story. So that when David enters the city of Canterbury, we see the famous stone arch that welcomes the typical visitor to this day.
Even the over the top acting works well, as it gives modern day audiences an idea of how Dickens timeless melodramas were treated by its Victorian actors.
A definite must see for the Dickens' fans.
Vampyr (1932)
A LIFE CHANGING EXPERIENCE
Dreyer was one of those few filmmakers who uses the art to expand the viewers' mind beyond what they normally experience when watching a movie. whether you see Vampyr as proof for blood-sucking vampires, or just as a fantastic tale of one man's tenuous grip on reality, this is an experience that will hold you for a long time past its running time.
What Dreyer, and possibly Tarnovsky, gives us as an audience, is the rare chance to see ourselves through the magic of highly personal filmmaking. What I realized as I watched this amazing film was not allan grey's viewpoint, but a real chance to explore my own spiritual and intellectual ideas of reality and fantasy and how blurred they are for each of us at various times.
because Dreyer did not give us much background on the main character and cast a non-actor for the part, it gives us a rare chance to feel the experiences he encounters in whatever way we wish. By manipulating the way in which we view grey's experiences, the filmmaker challenges us to take a second look at how quickly we try to make up our mind on what we are viewing. as grey is given a second chance to see things in a different way and escape from the prison, or coffin, he places himself in initially, so must we all open our minds up to the manipulations placed on us by others and break out of our own self imposed and often terrifying confinement.
Faces (1968)
an avant-guarde event
this film was so many eons in front of any other film event of the time, that even now it hits people in a personal way. every modern independent filmmaker should be, if not already is, aware of the power of this auteur's mark on their own personal vision.
after almost thirty years after witnessing this movie for the first time, i am made more aware of the invaluable efforts he has given both to the non-hollywood, innovative filmmaker, and more importantly to the viewer who desires something more than a fleeting emotional right turn into la la land.
this film lives to remind us not only of our fragilities as human beings, but also our potential strengths when suddenly made aware of the support others need from us. witness the amazing moments when jeannie and frankie in two seperate parts of the movie are suddenly made aware of their strengths in helping the person they are with to at least temporarily survive their emotional and real attempts at destroying themselves.
this film is replete with sudden jolts underlined by the deliberate use of disturbing visuals and unfinished dialogue to remind us of our own often disjointed and unfinished lives. just as one person in the film must get slapped to wake-up to her own reason for being, we must be able to take the slaps this movie gives to see ours. thank you john.
Slacker (1990)
Insightful Statement
At the time that Nirvana was redefining where popular music was going, Richard Linklater was creating a new way in which the focus of movie narrative was leading its audience. This movie event set the Nineties, and beyond, manner of communicating film images far ahead of the 80's formulaic, corporate influenced movie-making. Many of the teen-oriented films especially ( such as "Clueless" and even some of the Adam Sandler embarassements ) are still trying to emulate the distancing effect of psuedo-intellectual dialogue combined with edge - of - society characterizations to reach its disaffected audience that Slacker does to perfection. Many of the negative reviews site the amateur acting to base their attitude about the movie. If it were not for the awkwaredness of the characters in trying to express themselves, the movie's power of showing how meaningless most conversation is would not come across so profound as well as so entertaining. This movie is never boring due to the excellent cross-cutting, the seperate framing for each moment of dialogue sharing, and the sheer unique qualities of those amazing inhabitants of Austin. I recently discovered this masterpiece and find that its vision of how societies' desire to facade itself is still way ahead of any mega-budgeted 2000+ movie attempt.
What Happened to Rosa (1920)
A Bitter Sweet Picture
Mabel Normand was one of the finest commediennes in popular entertainment. Her wonderfully understated comic timing, incredible physical dexterity and utter fearlessness out does anything Lucille Ball and almost all modern actresses have to offer. Unfortunately, this film underuses that talent in a weakly contrived script. Also she works with some of the worst actors I have seen with a major actress onscreen. There are two scenes that do her skills justice. One involves Mabel behind a store counter with the bare legs of a mannequin, her struggle to put stockings on them, while a misunderstanding man embarassedly believes those are Mabel's bare legs. Another is a rather protracted scene involving Mabel in disguise as a very scruffy boy of the streets. Her efforts to appear tough and yet vulnerable as she tries to get a doctor, her object of desire, to examine her "injuries" is an amazing presentation of sustained physical flexibility and intense emotional strength. Although not worthy of her incredible talents, for anyone interested in seeing Mabel Normand, a truly unique performer, in one of her few surviving feature films, its worth the viewing.
Playing Dead (1915)
A Fascinating Oddity
This is one of those many films of the era that almost was lost. I could tell because the print that I viewed was unfortunately almost unwatchable.
Sidney Drew, who directed and starred in this fascinating domestic drama, was the uncle of John, Lionel, and Ethel Barrymore. He had a long and distinguished career on stage himself, which shows in a very professional and subtle performance in this film. Since he fills the screen with his presence so often, it is his thoughtful and, sometimes literally, multifaceted performance that keeps your attention throughout this rather farfetched and melodramatic scenario. His young wife, who plays his young and restless spouse in the film, wrote the scenario filling it with great gobs of dialogue, but also with some unexpected twists as well as some interesting asides to socialism and feminism.
Overall, this was a well worth viewing of a rather rare era in filmmaking with an actor who should be valued to this day, but is often overlooked.
Holiday (1938)
An Important Lesson
I just saw this incredible film for the third time. Unlike what most people comment about this movie, it is more than just "delightful" and "whimsical", or worst yet calling it a screwball comedy. If you call Holiday a screwball comedy, you may as well call It's A Wonderful Life the same thing. There are distinct parallels between these two groundbreaking works. Both deal with strong dreams being crushed. But in the case of Lew Ayres' character it is his "place" in society that stops him from becoming a serious composer. And though he comes from a wealthy family he does not have the freedom that many believe (falsely) to chose what he truly wishes to do. In a tightly-wound capitalistic society as ours, the obligations to continue the legacy of money-making overwhelms the individual's desire to create what many believe is frivolous artistry. What many of us, as well as his father, fail to realize is when this desire is crushed apathy sets in. This brings up the singularly amazing theme of this movie, a theme Philip Barry uses in many of his works, that a society that chases wealth without conscience, that suppresses truly individualistic idealism is a society of superficial, mean-spirited and back-biting people. The party scene in Holiday is a clear-eyed view of our society and how lost we are. Everyone talks down about others under their breath, than hypocritically smiles and fawns over these same people to insure their own place in society. Those who refuse to go along with this status quo are relegated, as Hepburn,Ayres,and the Professor and his wife are, to the childrens' playroom until they "grow-up" and accept things as they are. This films warms an audience with it's superficial whimsy, as "...Wonderful Life" did, yet can drive a cold stare with its slashing and often hurtful glances at how we are all relegated to the playroom of society if we express criticism of the narrow-mindenness and suffocating aspects of capitalism.
Holiday should be an important lesson to many of us on not just how important Life is, but shows us how much more important it is to grasp on to what truly makes it worth living.
The Raven (1935)
Guilty,Yes,Pleasurable,NO
By 1935, Universal must have run out of credible scripts or decent ideas for teaming Lugosi and Karloff again. The Raven proves that! This is one of the sorriest movies I have ever seen. The only reason I made it to the end was to wait to see if the director could redeem himself.
First of all what gives any movie company the right to use Edgar A. Poe and his works to hoist trash like this onto a movie-going public. It seems the running gag of motion picture history is to exploit the name of Poe for any pseudo horror/fantasy film. I am still waiting for the one brave filmmaker to break this trend and actually take one of Poe's stories and bring out the author's words in a mature and compelling manner.
Back to The Raven. Everything in this Z-Grade film yells insults to an informed and intelligent watcher. First of all, if Lugosi is such an admirer of Poe, why would he be entranced with the obviously healthy looking leading lady. He, like I, would have been disgusted with her horribly choreographed "Spirit Of Poe" number. What does moving around a stage like a child who hasn't been taking her daily dosage of ritalin, during a solemn reading of the title poem have to do with Poe's deeply tortured and complex work.
Everyone in this film mentions Poe's name and his works, yet obviously none of them has read any of his main body of work. Why else does the judge intone Poe's work for helping Lugosi's character develop a taste for human torture. Poe's work spoke more of psychologically self-induced torture than the Spanish Inquisition kind. Beyond the obvious misuse of Poe, there is the more obvious misuse of both Lugosi and Karloff. Lugosi definitely needed reigning in. Not only is his acting over the top, which is some of the fun of watching him in films, it quickly slides over to the other side, what with his overuse of the manure - eating grin to signify any of his character's self-satisfying moments. It is actually painful to watch his contortionist style of acting, along with difficult to understand multi-monologues delivered by him. Karloff comes off as Igor meets the Elephant Man, what with the amateurish face make-up that makes him sound like a man trying to draw a breath every time he talks, while his movements looks like his waiting for any kind of direction.
Mix this mess with sloppy editing, a non-existent plot, and a supporting cast that should have stayed in bad community theater productions and you have a huge waste of time. I felt all guilt and no pleasure after getting through this.
This movie is not fun to watch, unless you enjoy watching respected icons of Horror/Fantasy- Karloff, Lugosi and Poe being treated like last week's garbage.