Senator_Corleone Reviews

Straw Dogs (1971)

Most painful movie-watching experience of my life (spoilers)

[25 February 2004]

The title of Sam Peckinpah's 1971 film "Straw Dogs" is in reference to a type of ancient Chinese artifact that was worshiped, and then sacrificially burned. When seen in this context, the title makes perfect sense despite the fact that it is never mentioned by any of the characters. The movie is the story of how a normally meek, cowardly man "burns away" his personality and finds within himself the ability for violence and murder. When it was released, it was thrust to the forefront to the "violence in movies" debate alongside such films as "Dirty Harry" and "A Clockwork Orange." And it is, at times, quite violent. However, this film contains content that goes beyond mere violence to take it into another realm of shock. Watching "Straw Dogs" was the most painful viewing experience of my life. However, the fact that it is a necessary, important film is inescapable. Much has been made of how it is Peckinpah's statement on the nature of masculinity and manhood, complemented by his misogynistic, masochistic view of the world in general and women in particular. However, I believe there is another level it can be viewed on-that "Straw Dogs" is a nightmarish vision of the evil and beastial aspects inherent in every human being. It is a brutally harsh, cynical, and hateful cinema experience, routinely counted as one of the great disturbing movies along with films like "The Cook, the Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover" and "Battle Royale." Most films side with one set of characters against another. "Straw Dogs" does not. It despises all of the participants in its drama, from the "protagonist" David Summer (Dustin Hoffman in one of the great roles in his long, wonderful career) and his vixen wife Amy (Susan George in a brave, powerful performance) to the group of inbred English miscreants (a European counterpart to the Mountain Men in "Deliverance") who terrorize them. Peckinpah holds all of these people in contempt, and the particularly sadistic ending purges them all, in one way or another, from the system. There are two famous disturbing sequences in the movie. The first is the rape of Amy by two of the English hoodlums. This scene starts off innocently enough, with Charlie, Amy's former boyfriend, appearing at the Summer cottage. It soon turns ugly, however, as Charlie hits Amy and forces her into submission. During the actual act, Peckinpah uses quick cuts to tell the story in implied images. The action becomes something more than rape, however, when quick cuts to Amy's face seem to suggest she is enjoying what is happening to her. This was HUGELY controversial, angering women around the world. However, in the next few moments we see Amy ravaged again by Scut, Charlie's friend. Her horrified reaction to this development draws the line and shows Amy as a real woman, not a sex-addict (as many critics claimed the scene suggested). This is even more appalling when we realize that David never finds out about his wife's rape at the hands of the men. The second violent scene is the 30-minute finale. David, inadvertantly protecting a simpleton-giant named Niles (who is guilty of a completely different crime) in his house, fights off the gang as they try to break in to get at the large man. In this sequence, men are killed with shotguns, beaten to death with fire pokers, and (in a truly startling moment) garroted with a bear trap. While fighting, David gets no help from his parasitic, immature wife-who has turned to Charlie as her protector. Only when he slaps her does Amy listen to David. Is Peckinpah suggesting violence is the only way to get respect? That's what many contend. Also, the only sympathetic character in the entire film, the Colonel, is shot dead in cold blood by one of the drunken mob. After the massacre, David drives Niles back into town. "I don't know my way home," the large man tells the American. "Neither do I," is David's chilling answer, a smile curling over his lips. This movie stares angrily in the void of the human soul. It is unlike any of Peckinpah's other films, because, while many are very violent, he usually looked on his characters (who were killers, robbers, and bounty hunters) and found warmth and humanity in them. With "Straw Dogs," he looked upon his subjects and found only perversion, sickness, and hate.

Natural Born Killers (1994)

An important, unique film

[5 February 2004]

Few films ever made have been as controversial as 1994's "Natural Born Killer." Some critics felt it was an atrocity-an assault on good taste, movie-making craft, and humanity in general. Others felt that it was a masterpiece, a cinematic statement that went where no movie had gone before. I believe, personally, that the film is a must-see. Not because I think it is one of the best movies ever made (there are flaws, like an over-abundance of themes that muddy the film's message), not because I think it's one of director Oliver Stone's best ("Platoon" and "JFK" are both superior films), but because I think that it represents a unique cinematic experience. You will never see any film that affects you in the same way that "Natural Born Killers" does. In that way it shares the same place in filmdom with such diverse titles as "Eraserhead," "Being John Malkovich," and "Plan 9 from Outer Space": there's just nothing out there like it. Its attitude towards its lurid, frightening, and oftentimes repulsive subject matter alone distinguishes it from many other movies. It has fun with death and violence in a way that makes you contemplate on the nature of what is being shown to you on screen. The fact that it simultaneously decries and glorifies violence would seem hypocritical if the movie seemed to be unaware of the conflict of interest inherent in it. However, Stone is all to cognizant of the problem, and is indicting himself as well as the glory-chasing media with the final product. The fact that the two serial killers are watching "Scarface," a movie Stone wrote, is as important for its commentary on the filmmaker as its film buff in-jokeness. Another aspect of this movie that received a lot of attention was its singular editing style. Characterized by multiple cuts, lighting patterns, filming techniques, and even some animated interludes, the movie acts as a technical geek show. It is a full-frontal assault on your eyes and ears. And I, for one, think Stone's jack-hammer style fits his subject perfectly. A wild, disorienting plot deserves a wild, disorienting storytelling style. You will also be hard-pressed to find realistic characters in this movie. Stone has filled "NBK" with a gallery of grotesque monsters, from Tommy Lee Jones' screeching redneck-from-hell prison warden, to Robert Downey Jr.'s parasitic Robin Leach-like talk show host, to Tom Sizemore's virulent psychopathic bad cop. All these characters add to the vision of the film, because an insane film with an insane filming style deserves insane characters. But, when it comes down to it, "Natural Born Killers" is an important modern film not just because of its style, tone, and characters, but because it causes discussion about America's modern obsession with serial killers and the media's infatuation with violence. Pop culture itself is on trial with this movie, and Oliver Stone delivers it a visceral knockout punch. Great soundtrack, too.

Unforgiven (1992)

Eastwood gives us the last true Western

[10/10 · 5 July 2003]

"Unforgiven" is one of the greatest films ever made. A fatalistic, dark, emotional masterpiece, it is the last true Western. It is no accident that no great Western films have been made since "Unforgiven" came out in 1992. The film effectively closes the book on any other statements that could be made in the genre. It is a fitting elegy to a type of film that brought cinema great achievements ("The Searchers", "Shane", "The Wild Bunch", and many more).

The film chronicles William Munny (Eastwood at his best), a retired gunslinger, who was once the "rootin' tootin' meanest son of a bitch who ever lived," deciding to pick up his guns one more time to kill a few cowboys who mutilated a prostitute. There is a bounty on their head, and Munny is a failing pig farmer trying to raise his two children, so the money looks might promising. Before he sets off, however, Munny picks up his old partner, Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman). "How long's it been since you fired a gun, Will? Ten years?" Munny answers "Eleven." It is true that Munny is rusted over-he continually says that his wife Claudia "cured him of wrongdoing". However, he says this so much it sounds more like the affirmation of a man in denial than someone who has actually changed.

So Munny and Logan ride off (in several beautifully shot scenes) to meet the Scofield Kid (Jaimz Woolvett), a young hotshot who claims to be a killer. But as the film progresses we learn there is more (or less) to the Scofield Kid than is apparent. As the three men ride toward Big Whiskey, Wyoming (the site of the whore-cutting), the town's sheriff, Little Bill Daggett (Gene Hackman in one of his great performances), tries to keep order. A brutal, violent, and menacingly intelligent man, Little Bill is a formidable presence indeed. As these elements come together, the film's tension is racketed up to almost unbearable heights. The film's climax is one of the most truthful, brutal, and sobering finales in cinema history. We learn that no one can escape their past, and no man who was once a killer will ever be anything else. As you watch the final scenes, it comes as a sudden shock to you that the people you thought were heroes and villains were nothing of the sort. In a film like "Unforgiven", there are no good guys and bad guys, only a gray existence between the two. That is the message of "Unforgiven": that when it comes to violence, there are no good guys and bad guys, only men who do as much damage to themselves as to others by killing.

That is the film's message, but there are other things in "Unforgiven" that make it unforgettable. The acting is top-notch, including Richard Harris as an ill-fated outsider looking for the bounty, Saul Rubinek as his leach-like biographer, and Frances Fisher as Strawberry Alice, the leader of the prostitutes and a singularly unforgiving individual. These characters interact against the backdrop of a quickly eroding culture. The Old West is in its final days in this film, and that sense of soon-to-be-loss carries over the entire movie. "Unforgiven" is a film about the end of something: the end of a lifstyle, the end of a culture, the end of lives. Because it so effectively and brilliantly takes place in this dying time, it acts as the final chapter to the Western genre, ending a celluloid odyssey on a pathos-filled guitar note.

Punch-Drunk Love (2002)

PTA unlocks Sandler with a brilliant film

[10/10 · 11 April 2003]

We've come to expect a lot from Paul Thomas Anderson. After his twin masterpieces "Boogie Nights" and "Magnolia", not to mention the sure-handed and satisfying "Hard Eight", we knew he was a filmmaker of skill and magic. So when it was announced that the next PTA film would be a 90-minute romantic comedy starring (Gasp!) Adam Sandler, I was, for one, not worried. This man had taken Mark Wahlberg and turned him into someone we could be proud to watch onscreen. He cast icon Tom Cruise, gave him the character of Frank "T.J." Mackey, and directed the actor to one of the most repulsive, offensive, and inspired performances of the "Top Gun" star's career. So, I was pretty confident in his ability to handle the star of "Little Nicky". But, boy, I still wasn't prepared for what I saw. Sandler just wasn't good, he was INCREDIBLE. I couldn't believe my eyes-here was the man behind "Eight Crazy Nights" creating a completely realized, utterly human character with a studied, nuanced performance. Many have commented on the fact that Barry Egan, Sandler's character, is not that different from his previous incarnations. Socially akward and prone to explosive violence, Barry might just be the key to explainging Sandler's Billy Madison or Happy Gilmore. The character helps shine a light on the inner torment of those man-children.

The plot is a bit more complicated than your usual romantic-comedy fair. First off, it's really not a comedy. Second off, the two major players-Sandler and Emily Watson as the beautiful and mysterious Lena Leonard-both have quirks and tension that ordinary movie characters who fall in love don't in movies today. Barry has been terribly scarred (perhaps irreperably) by the constant torment and abuse of his seven sisters. There are several scenes where he bursts into destructive rages for no real reason-to sum it up, this guy has problems. Lena seems to have some of the same hurt simmering under her, but she controls it and accepts Barry for who he is, eventually coming to a stage where she understands him better than anyone truly ever has. Much of "Punch-Drunk Love"'s story is how Egan manages to regain control of himself and experience truly human feelings for the first time. Lena is his salvation-through his devotion to her he saves himself.

The film's other specifics are a bizarre, but extremely original mix of details. Barry is a toilet-plunger salesman. He one day wanders onto a loophole in a snack-foods sponsored contest that would allow him to get enough frequent flier miles to never have to pay for a plane ticket again. First, however, is the nasty business with a small-time porn entrepeneur in Utah who is trying to extort a large sum of money from Barry, using the company's "Four Blonde Brothers" to threaten the (for a time) hapless Egan. The film is so utterly free that to reveal how these disparate elements come together would ruin the movie. Much of the joy of "Punch-Drunk Love" is that you never truly know where the movie is going to go next.

The performances are uniformly excellent. Philip Seymour Hoffman is "the heavy", but he puts a small line of tragedy in his character. Dean Trumbell seems fierce, but a telling look at his "empire" reveals he is all bark and no bite. The always-great Luis Guzman is Sandler's well-wishing co-worker, Lance, who is constantly supportive of Barry despite his doubts about what is really going on inside his boss's head. And Emily Watson is appropriately fascinating and quietly alluring as Lena, who drops her car off one day and admits the next she did it just to meet Barry.

The film might seem weird and violent, but this is truly one of the sweetest movies I have seen at a long time. At its core, "PDL" is decent, honest, and beautiful. It is reminiscent of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", which, despite its rampant drug use and other disturbing subject matter, was a film that had a heart of gold. One of the best of 2002, "Punch-Drunk Love" will be seen in the future as a shining moment for all involved. Here's to hoping it will also be seen as the beginning of Adam Sandler's serious film career.

Road to Perdition (2002)

Strong film, but not a masterpiece

[8/10 · 29 March 2003]

SPOILER WARNING-MULTIPLE SPOILERS FOLLOW

Tom Hanks has gotten to a stage in his career where he is so uniformly excellent in everything he does that it's beginning to diminish his impact. He gives a great performance in every single movie he does, and at this point his consistent brilliance is causing us to become complacent and not truly pay attention to the fact that he is one of THE great actors of our generation. "Road to Perdition" is a film that is hampered by this fact. While the finished product is nothing to cough at, a lot of it feels remote, not grabbing our attention as much as it should. This is mostly because the two characters we should care about most-Michael Sullivan (Hanks) and his son (Tyler Hoechlin)-do not engage our emotions as they should. The character development of this father and son, a crucial point in the film, is neither as deep or expansive as the other characters in the movie.

The film's plot involves hitman Michael Sullivan being propelled on a quest for revenge after his wife and youngest son are murdered by Connor Rooney (Daniel Craig), the loathsome, greedy, and ultimately pathetic son of Irish mob boss John Rooney (a brilliant Paul Newman). With Sullivan after his son's life, Rooney, who is in principle a fair and decent man despite his unlawful business practices, is forced to order a hit on the man he loves like a son. Actually, he loves him more than his own son, which is why this whole situation got started in the first place. The hitman they call to kill Sullivan is a odd-looking photographer of the dead named Maguire (Jude Law). The first time you see this guy, he notices that one of the dead he's shooting (camera, not gun) is not exactly dead-only wounded. Instead of alerting the authorities, however, Maguire finishes the wounded man off-smothering him with an ammonium-soaked handkerchief. From this point on it is clear that Maguire is completely psychotic. Jude Law is very impressive, playing the character as a subdued, quiet loner instead of a raving maniac-thus making the character all the more frightening and monstrous.

The film is filled with powerful moments. Most of these moments belong to Newman, who in his twilight years gives one of his finest performances as a man confronted with an impossible situation, quite aware that he will probably not come out of it alive. The scene where Rooney beats his son after the murder of Sullivan's family, then embraces him saying "God help us", is effective, but it's just the beginning. There is also the incredible scene where Rooney has to order the hit to Frank Nitti (Stanley Tucci). Newman truly embodies the terrible conflict that faces his character-he doesn't want to order death on his spiritual son, but he just can't let his actual son die either. "God help me" he whispers as he does the deed. "Nothing happens to the kid" is another order, even after Frank warns him that the kid will come for revenge-does Rooney want the son's vengeance? There is a tense scene in a diner between Maguire and Sullivan, a fatalistic speech in a church basement by Rooney that highlights the entire situation, and a brilliantly shot (this film deserved its cinematography credit-wow Conrad Hall was truly great) slow-motion segment where Hanks guns down all of Rooney's men, then (with a look of infinite sadness and pain-Sullivan doesn't want to kill his spiritual father any more than Rooney wants to kill his spiritual son)Rooney himself. Newman's final line, "I'm glad it was you", is heartbreaking and illuminating-he has been aware of the inevitability of his violent death for many years-but he is glad he dies by his "son's" hand. The one moment, however, that should be most powerful has barely any emotional weight at all. The moment where Tom Hanks is shot down from behind by a vengeful Maguire should be shocking and tragic, but it just feels tacked-on. Maybe the director, Sam Mendes, is trying to show how, in Sullivan's world, everyone is just waiting for the bullet with their name on it. But in this case it seems like the film is just being sad for no other reason than to be sad. Hanks' remote character is also at fault (but that is to be blamed on the script, not Hanks, who is brilliant as always). Hoechlin's pretentious monologues at the beginning and end of the film don't help either. Nevertheless, "Road to Perdition" is a very good movie. Great performances, a truly compelling plot, and excellent production values (let me again stress that the cinematography is INCREDIBLE) make this film a keeper. Just a few small flaws keep it from being a follow up masterpiece to Mendes' previous film, the perfect "American Beauty". But those flaws do not diminish its amazing strengths.

Monster's Ball (2001)

Truly powerful and beautiful

[10/10 · 28 March 2003]

When I first heard that Halle Berry was getting publicity over a film called "Monster's Ball", a movie I had never even heard of, I was a little skeptical. I mean, come on, this is HALLE BERRY. The star of "B.A.P.S.". The actress who said "You know what happens to a toad when it gets hit by lightning? The same thing as what happens to everyone else," in "X-Men". I was not convinced. Then I saw the movie and my jaw dropped. Who knew Berry had this in her? A performance of emotion, range, and power, Berry's Leticia Musgrove redefined the actress' career and brought new meaning to the phrase "emotionally distraught". The film's plot, while fundamentally simple, hides layers of emotion and deep character analysis. Billy Bob Thorton is as strong as he's ever been as Hank Grotowski, a selfish and racist prison guard who lives with his vicious and hateful father, Buck (Peter Boyle), and his sweet and utterly decent son Sonny (Heath Ledger). Hank hates his father, who has ruined his life up to this point in time, and also says he hates his son, in who he sees the character traits he lost so long ago. Halle Berry is a deadbeat African-American mom of an overweight son (Coronji Calhoun) with a husband (Sean Combs) who is on Death Row. Unforseen tragic events bring these seemingly unmatchable people together, and their mutual hurt and sadness climaxes in one of the most powerful and emotional love scenes in film history. A common complaint I have with sex in the movies these days is that it doesn't ever seem to make sense with the story. This sex scene, however, is a perfect evolution of the story and is an extension of the two characters' mutual need to feel something other than grief. "Make me feel good" Berry cries in a mix of ecstasy and anguish. In another brilliant moment later in the film, Hank gives oral satisfaction to Leticia, but the moment is not uncomfortable or pointless because it illustrates Hank's devotion to this woman and how he is now wholly devoted to giving everything he has to this other person ("I've never done that before."). His act of rescuing her is his own redemption. "Monster's Ball" is a truly beautiful and effective film about redemption and the importance of our love for other human beings. The final shot, with Hank and Leticia on the front porch of Hank's house with a bowl of ice cream, is one of the most quietly poetic and effective endings I have ever seen, and Hank's final line is a perfect closer to a film about the ultimate redemptive quality of love-"I think we're gonna be alright."

Legally Blonde (2001)

No-brainer and Predictable, but fun all the same

[7/10 · 1 March 2003]

Reese Witherspoon is starting up a nice career starring in fun romantic-teen-comedies for people my sister's age. This will stand as her first foray into the world of sweet, easy-on-the-mind comedy films, a type of film that will dominate the rest of her acting life. I find it slightly disappointing that we will probably rarely (if ever) see her again in something like "Election", but Witherspoon is now slowly becoming America's sweetheart, and if she can live up to the standard that is all we can ask of her.

The movie itself involves Witherspoon getting into Harvard Law for the sole reason of winning back her snob boyfriend. Selma Blair shows up for the 18th straight film as the "other girl", Luke Wilson is Witherspoon's new love interest (which is obvious the first time you see him), and the rest of the cast is a bunch of character actors no one knows the name of.

It doesn't really matter, seeing as the film is solely a vehicle for the beautiful Witherspoon to work her charm on us. She is not a cynical hero like most teen movie characters are, but a sweet, naive, and utterly determined young woman who succeeds in the end by her very get-to-itiveness. Although much of "Legally Blonde" is rarely in doubt, it provides and hour and a half of silly fun. And sometimes we need that when we're taking a break from "Fight Club" and "American Beauty".

America's Sweethearts (2001)

Good cast but lackluster movie

[6/10 · 28 February 2003]

This film could have been so much better. "America's Sweethearts", despite an able cast and a few inspired bits, really doesn't hit the mark. John Cusack is good but clearly not stretched, Catherine Zeta-Jones is on autopilot, and Billy Crystal has nothing to do. This type of movie must be getting WAY too easy for Julia Roberts, who I believe only did this because her pal Joe Roth directed it. "Directed" is a loose term, as Roth really doesn't have a handle on how to do this type of thing yet. He seems to have way too much fun with inappropriate sexual humor and wild, baseless personalities to be given a cast of this talent. Hank Azaria is good as a slimy love interest, but I think it's about time he actually talked in his REAL voice for a change. Clearly, the best parts of this movie are Cusack and Christopher Walken as a batty film director. This isn't the worst film ever made, but it's far from anybody in the cast's best.

Annie Hall (1977)

Woody's best?

[10/10 · 21 February 2003]

Although I debate as to whether or not I truly believe it, I often find myself believing that "Annie Hall" is Woody Allen's best film. This statement is strongly challenged by Woody's other masterpieces like "Manhattan", "Hannah and Her Sisters", "Crimes and Misdermeanors", "Interiors", and "Another Woman", but I have to firmly stand by it because of the fact that this film marked Woody's evolution from the Funniest Man in the Movies to one of cinema's great auteurs. From here Woody graduated from the slapstick silliness of "Bananas" and "Love and Death" to the more emotionally and intellectually mature mature films he has been making since then (save one or two). The film takes on the major subject of romantic relationships in the sway of big-city life, and how two people who are perfect for eachother in so many ways can be terrible for eachother in so many others. The film stars Woody Allen as Alvy Singer and Diane Keaton (who won as Oscar for her performance) as the title character. The entire movie is centered around how Annie enlightens Alvy's life for a brief moment, then is driven away by his neuroses and selfishness, and how Alvy learns ultimately from the experience that relationships are a matter of give-and-take: you give the best of yourself and take all the bad parts of the other person in stride. If I'm making this film sound like a pathos-spouting art-film retread, I'm sorry. Because what makes this film alive is how Allen's whipsmart wit and eccentric characteristics color the film. The film is, simply stated, flat-out hysterical. Like the scene where Alvy produces Marshall McLuhan to dismiss a film-buff cineaste snob, or Christopher Walken's small, but hysterical role as Annie's space-cadet brother. Or the scene where Annie and Alvy struggle with a live lobster in the kitchen (later used as a payoff as Alvy tries unsuccessfully to recreate the moment with an uninterested woman interest after the breakup with Annie), and the famous cocaine sneeze. And what about Alvy describing a cockroach as "big as a Buick", Tony Roberts lecturing about his "anti-aging" head-sunroof, and a young Alvy losing all faith in existence in grade school ("If the Universe keeps expanding, one day it's going to break apart-and then where will we be?")? Through it all, however, is the inevitable truth that Annie is just too alive for Alvy-characterized by her yearning for the Los Angeles sun as opposed to Alvy's refusal to leave drab New York. The bittersweet ending has Alvy mining his heartbreak for Broadway success, and meeting Annie for lunch one day. At the end of the get-together, we see, in long shot, Annie and Alvy say their goodbyes at a street corner. As Alvy narrarates, we see Annie, then Alvy leave our sight. But the narraration continues as we look at the empty street corner. The movie ends up as Alvy tells us the "my brother is crazy, he thinks he's a chicken" joke-a humorous anecdote symbolic of his entire relationship conundrum. It's this quiet ending scene that ends "Annie Hall", one of the funniest movies ever made, on a perfect note. The film where Woody showed that he was a master.

Enemy at the Gates (2001)

Overlooked sniper film full of power, emotion

[9/10 · 18 February 2003]

It surprises me that this film did not receive very much attention upon its release. It definitely deserved it, because "Enemy at the Gates" is a powerful and intense war film that centers on a type of soldier that rarely gets a full movie devoted to it: the sniper. This film's major accomplishment is that it shows the maddening and awful pressure-filled world of the sniper. Centering around Vassili Zaitsev, a young up-and-coming Russian private who has amazing shooting accuracy, the film not only shows the awfulness of battle and the carnage of war (with the Russians killing their own attempting-to-flee soldiers), but how the media turns Vassili into a hero-even though he is chafing under the constraints of his new role. Thus, "Enemy at the Gates" is simultaneously an action-packed war drama and a grim media satire. The peformances are high-quality, with Jude Law as Vassili, Joseph Fiennes as his tormented friend Danilov, and Rachel Weisz as Tania Chernova, the woman who tears the two apart. Also, Bob Hoskins is coarse and humorous as Nikita Khrushkev, while Gabriel Thomson gives an excellent portrayal as Sacha Filipov, the Russian boy who attempts to play both sides against eachother-but learns that one does not mess with the Nazis as easily as one would like to. The standout, however, is the incomparable Ed Harris as Major Konig, a master Nazi sniper who the Germans bring in to take out Vassili. Harris' performance is one of his lesser-known roles, but it shows his mastery of understatement. In fact, it is his character's very emotionlessness that makes him all the more frightening. There are amazing battle sequences (the early Russian vs. German, where the Russians are basically mowed down, is heartbreaking in its futility, as there is a packet of ammo and a gun for every two soldiers), and the final moments between Konig and Vassili show Law and Harris at the top of their game (the quiet physical statement Harris makes at the end is a perfect representation of his character). Also, the love story is as heartfelt as it is desperate. Many comments say this section of the movie was "clumsy" and "unnecessary". I disagree, I feel that the attraction between Tania and Vassili is beautiful, while Fiennes is perfect in expressing the pain-filled jealousy of Danilov. These important relationships are what leads up the final shocking moments-without the love story, the film loses much of its power. Truly, "Enemy at the Gates" is a worthy film-at least better than "Windtalkers".

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back (2001)

Intelligent? No. Hysterical? Yes.

[8/10 · 9 February 2003]

This is going to be short because for a film like "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back", there is really no need for long-winded "critical interpretation". "Jay and Silent Bob" is simply an uproarious comic rout that packs a lot of crude sexual humor and clever pop-culture references into its "plot"-something about Jay and Silent Bob stopping the production on a "Bluntman and Chronic" film. Jason Mewes and director Kevin Smith rehash their roles as the two title characters-one a foulmouthed stringbean and the other a short, stocky dude who doesn't say all that much. Packed with hysterical short almost-Laurel and Hardy-type comedy bits and sly celebrity cameos (plus ample support from Sean William Scott, Shannon Elizabeth, and the incomparable Will Ferrell), "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back" is not Kevin Smith's most artistically sound achievement ("Chasing Amy" or "Dogma" fits that description), but it is the type of movie that makes you smile when you think about it-an hour and a half of escapism that goes a bit beyond what you were expecting. Recommended.

P.S. I have a question-why does it seem, in the movie universe created by this film, that the film "Dogma" didn't happen? All of Smith's other films from "Clerks" to "Chasing Amy" are presented as solid fact in the film world, but at one point you see Matt Damon (playing himself) telling Ben Affleck (playing himself) "hey, you convinced me to do 'Dogma'." We know "Dogma" couldn't just be a movie in "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back"'s universe because Jay and Bob were both major characters in that film-and we know from "Strike Back" that they have never been a part of Hollywood. Why is "Dogma" a work of fiction while all of the other Kevin Smith films are presented as fact in this film?

The Manchurian Candidate (1962)

Dark and disturbing look at the paranoia inherent in Cold War

[10/10 · 24 January 2003]

Spoilers

John Frankenheimer's greatest film, "The Manchurian Candidate", is one of those rare political dramas that is still relevant after its release date-which, for this film, would be about 40 years ago. This film tells the story of Raymond Shaw, an arrogant and obnoxious army officer who is brainwashed, along with all of his platoon, by Communist higher-ups on an overseas mission. When he returns to the United States, it is revealed that he is the key to an intricate assassination plot that involves his monstrous mother and her odious husband (Raymond's father in law), a senator with deadly ambition. What these schemers never factored in was Bennet Marco, a member of Shaw's platoon who has managed to fight through the brainwashing and is forced to stop this insane plot that will put a Communist pawn in the White House. This is one of the films, along with "Chinatown", that defines the genre of "thriller". Suspenseful and shocking, "The Manchurian Candidate" plays off the era's anti-Communist hysteria, and although the Cold War is long over, it still stands as a powerful representation of a nation's fear of outsiders and the dread of the effect these outsiders would have on our moral, economic, and political beliefs. But more than that even it is a character study of two men who couldn't be more different but are thrust into this terrible situation by forces beyond their control. Raymond Shaw has been cruelly manipulated by the controls the Communists have over him-but his character is already tragically warped by his mother's hostility and coldness. Marco is an ordinary man who takes on a huge quest all by himself, and his final speech at the end of the film provides the perfect closing note. The three principle actors are at their best in this film. Sinatra showed that he could act in "From Here to Eternity", but here he is given the starring role and he shows how well he is able to carry a movie. He gives Marco layers beyond "the hero", he shows him as a man who was never close to Raymond Shaw-in fact, he doesn't even like the guy-but is willing to put that aside to help a tortured man and, in effect, save his country. Lawrence Harvey was the only person they could have cast as Shaw, a humorless dirge of a man without any real redeeming qualities. He is not a likable person, but that is because he has been so utterly damaged by his mother's "care" that he is not able to feel cheer. His only hope at happiness, Jocelyn Jordan (Leslie Parrish), is destroyed by the control of the Koreans and the Queen of Diamonds (more on that later). The famous scene, where Sinatra destroys the "links" in Shaw's head using the Queen of Diamonds-the visual clue that jumpstarts the links-is an acting lesson in itself. Harvey, who doesn't say a word for most of the scene, is able to convey mountains of emotions through his face and eyes. When Marco asks him "Who killed Jocelyn Jordan and her father?", you see realization and utter pain and dismay in Shaw's eyes before Marco washes the horrible truth away by saying "Forget that, forget all of that." It is truly a beautiful moment-or is it? Is Marco truly destroying the links, or is he just re-brainwashing the links out of Shaw's head? This is a question that rarely is asked when the film in discussed, but in it lies the true center of the movie. Angela Lansbury is magnificent as Mrs. Iselin, who is at heart a psychotic control freak and is using her son to become the ultimate controller-the person who runs the most powerful nation in the world. Lansbury, who we all know from "Murder, She Wrote", performs brilliantly as one of the greatest villains of all time. But, she too is not a one-dimensional character. In a short but essential speech, Mrs. Iselin reveals that she never knew her son would be the one who was brainwashed. Lansbury delivers the most heartbreaking line in the film-"in a world full of killers they picked you"-which reveals that she is, in fact, capable of human connection and feeling. That she actually did love her son is a fact that makes the ending even more shocking and tragic. A film with multiple brilliant ideas, images, and characters, "The Manchurian Candidate" will remain an essential film-a political parable with a human heart and conscience.

Network (1976)

Brilliant and biting indictment of modern culture

[10/10 · 11 January 2003]

Spoiler Alert When I first viewed "Network", I thought it was pretty good, but I didn't think that it was the masterpiece everyone said it was. But on my second viewing my opinion changed radically. I finally picked up on the level of the dialogue, the subtleness of much of the humor, and (most importantly) what the movie was really trying to say. "Network" is not just a brutal satire of TV, but one of the whole "entertain me now" culture that TV has created. It shows us that this new mindset is slowly destroying our intelligence and ability to reason-as William Holden (in one of his best-ever performances) says, "She's been raised by Bugs Bunny."

The film has many funny moments. Not laugh-out-loud funny, but chuckle-ironically-to-yourself funny. Like when the woman terrorist tells Faye Dunawaye "Don't f*ck with my distribution rights!" Or when Robert Duvall responds to the idea of having someone killed by saying "OK, let's think about this for a second." One of my personal favorite scenes is where Dunawaye makes love while blathering about her TV-scheduling schemes, pausing only once in her diatribe in order to climax. The complete brilliance of this scene didn't hit me on the first viewing, but it is amazing in the way it reveals just how obsessed Dunawaye's character is with this success through mass entertainment-how much her life revolves around it. Her character is the template for every career-obsessed sitcom female in history.

The dialogue is on another level. "Network" is one of the greatest screenwriting achievments in film history. Of course, what else would you expect from something written by Paddy Chayefsky? Somewhere in between "The Maltese Falcon"'s hard-boiled block prose and "Pulp Fiction"'s flowery pop-culture riffing, "Network" seems to have all of its characters saying the exact right thing at the exact right time. Without actors to carry the dialogue, though, it falls flat. Luckily for the film (and for us), "Network" has on its roster some of the strongest acting presences at the time of it being made. William Holden gives his last truly great performance as an aging TV producer who sees the dangerous shift around him and (eventually) decides not to go with it. Faye Dunawaye in what might be her greatest role as Diana Christensen, the seemingly confident career woman who is coming apart at the seams. Beatrice Straight won an oscar for her 5 1/2 minute part as Holden's betrayed but forgiving wife. Robert Duvall continued his streak of great films in the 70's as Frank Hackett, the TV station's cold-as-ice hachet (get it?) man. And Peter Finch won an oscar posthumously for his role as Howard Beale, a man who is robbed of the only thing he has left, his job, and fly off the deep end. Then he is cruelly used and exploited by the network he so dilligently served for so many years. His yell of "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!" is one of the more unforgettable moments in filmdom. The fact that De Niro deserved the oscar more for "Taxi Driver" isn't a factor when you are watching "Network", one of the most powerful of all films. Few movies give you something new every time you watch them, but this film gave me so much more on my second viewing than on my first that it seemed unreal. One of the beginning scenes shows a dejected Beale, upon finding out he is going to lose his job, telling a national audience he is going to blow his brains out on the air. It takes the control room hotshots a few moments before they even realize what he has said. This lack of concentration, this shortened attention span, this jaded and bored outlook-this is what "Network" is about. I realized that, but not until I saw it for a second time.

Killjoy (2000 Video)

Oh.......good lord.

[1/10 · 31 December 2002]

"Killjoy" is one of the 5 or 6 worst movies (if you can call it that) I have ever seen. EVER. It is soooo bad in so many ways I can't even begin to describe it. The plot is ludicrous, the dialogue is completely stupefying in its lameness, and the "visual effects" (if they qualify as that) are laughable. Actually, the whole affair is laughable. Then, after you are done laughing, you will cry for a long time-for someone put effort into this. How this ever got made is beyond me. Other distressing factors that contribute to its soul-sucking terribleness: the fact that it is a horror movie and the villain is just annoying (call it "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" syndrome), the deaths are lame, the plot twists don't make any sense, there is a bunch of unnecessary sexual content, and the film WILL NOT END. WHY WILL IT NOT END? ENDING AFTER ENDING-IT JUST KEEPS GOING TILL YOU WANT TO SCREAM AND JUMP OUT THE WINDOW BUT YOU DON'T CAUSE YOU REALIZE "KILLJOY" WILL STILL EXIST AND THAT SWEET SWEET DEATH WILL BE TAINTED BY THIS "FILM"'S PRESENCE! Surprisingly, the acting is tolerable, but that doesn't come within a billion light years of saving this.....thing. If you see "Killjoy" at the video store, run away screaming or destroy the film with a giant hammer. Destruction is good when it involves destroying "Killjoy". The fact that there is a sequel is just one more piece of evidence that the apocalypse is near. Oh, and the last line is the worst in recorded history.

It's a Wonderful Life (1946)

The fable still holds up

[10/10 · 19 December 2002]

I just re-watched this film with my family as an annual Christmas tradition (first time on DVD though). I have to say, despite the 10-11 times i've seen this, it still holds up with magnificent strength and emotion. The scenes where Bailey has "never been born" with Clarence the angle and the triumphant concluding scene in Stewart's house where all his friends come to his aid are famous beyond comparison, but still are mesmerizing and emotional. What often is overlooked is the mountain of great dialogue in this film. Barrymore and Stewart have so many great lines-"I'm and old man and most people hate me, but I don't like them either"; "Oh, why don't you stop annoying people!"; "Is it too much to ask that people can live their lives with a few nice rooms and a bath and not have to live in your slums? We need this run-down old building just so there can be somewhere people can go and not crawl to Potter." Jimmy Stewart gives one of THE performances of all time as the ultimate put-upon good guy George Bailey. All he wants to do is get out of Bedford Falls, travel the world and go to college. But, because of a string of coincidences and occurences where George puts others above himself, he ends up never leaving the town. Donna Reed is his loving wife Mary, who waits around for George to realize that he loves her. This situation leads to one of the most touching and romantic scenes on film, where as the plastic magnate Sam Wainwright talks to George and Mary on the same phone, they look into each other's eyes and you see the what they truly feel for eachother. George grabs Mary, saying "I don't wanna get married to anyone anywhere at anytime", but he is cut off in the middle of his speech by the emotion, and they embrace. Rob Reiner claims he can't watch or discuss this scene without tearing up. How Stewart and Reed didn't win Oscars for this scene alone is unthinkable. Also, Lionel Barrymore is great as the evil Mr. Potter (with his wheelchair pilot/crony, Potter is the predecessor to everyone from the Beatles "Mean Mr. Mustard" to Mr. Burns on "The Simpsons")-who you believe is just a mean old man at the beginning, but then when he gives his final major speech to Stewart you realize what a twisted and cruel monster he truly is. The director, Frank Capra, must also be given credit when praising this film. He directs the actors and frames them in such a way that the true relationships and actions between them are so much more meaningful. He really knew what he was doing when making this film. The make-up and lighting department also successfully show the wear of 18 years on the principle actors-this movie takes place with the same actors from the period of 1928-1946, and Reed's and Stewart's make-up jobs are extremely convincing. Some great moments: The close-ups of Stewarts face when 1.) He lears if he doesn't take over the Bailey Building and Loan, the board of trustees will vote with Potter and drive the institution out of business, and 2.) In the fantasy scenes, where he runs away from "Ma Bailey's Boarding House" and realizes that not even his own mother regognizes him. The speech Bailey gives condemning Mr. Potter after Pa Bailey's death and Potter's appeal to liquidate the Building and Loan. A young George Bailey reveals to the pharmacist Mr. Gower that because he was so grief-stricken over the death of his son that he put the wrong medicine in the wrong tablet, and the look from Gower when he realizes that if not for Bailey, he would have done a terrible, terrible thing (this moment always gives me goosebumps). The look of disgust and horror on Stewart's face after shaking Potter's hand after being offered a job, then wiping his hand on his jacket-symbolising his realization that if he had agreed to work for Potter, he would have been selling his soul to the devil. This scene is followed by the wonderfully tender moment between Stewart and Reed where he stares at her in the dark as she tells him she is pregnant. Capra's greatest gift to the common man, "It's a Wonderful Life" still holds up beautifully. It is a morality tale with a timeless message that no man is poor who has friends. It's the ultimate happy ending, and the ultimate Christmas story.

House on Haunted Hill (1999)

#3 on my "All-Time Worst Films" list.

[1/10 · 14 December 2002]

"House on Haunted Hill" is one of the most upsetting experiences I have ever had watching a movie. I went in expecting to be scared and entertained since I had enjoyed the original 1958 version so much. Instead I was grossed-out and thoroughly depressed. I have rarely felt so bad after watching a movie. As opposed to "plot", this film uses gore and disturbing visuals (think NIN's "Closer" video without all that "artistic creativity" stuff) to get its point across. What is the point? Uh.....gore is cool? WHY IS JEFFREY RUSH IN THIS MOVIE? WHY IS PETER GALLAGHER IN THIS MOVIE? HECK, WHY IS TAYE DIGGS IN THIS MOVIE? There are only two good parts in this whole mess: Chris Kattan and the scene where Rush grabs the security guard to reveal that the security guard's face is gone. Awful premise, terrible over-the-top effects, unnecessary violence, and one of the single lamest endings ever makes this film one to avoid like the plague.

The Song Remains the Same (1976)

Great, underrated concert film

[8/10 · 9 December 2002]

Originally panned by critics, "The Song Remains the Same" stands up today as a rocking, if long, concert film. The bombastic, epic, mysterious performance might not be Zep's best, but it's the best available to the general public. It definitely is interesting; I get something new out of it every time. It's not perfect, however. The camera tricks are annoying and disorienting, and some segments of the fantasy segments are pretentious at best (why are Jimmy Page's eyes red at the beginning-does it have to do with his interest in the occult? I don't really care). But it's made up for with the awesome music-and let's not forget that awesome mafia mass-execution by Peter Grant of several deformed monsters in suits (do these represent Zep's critics?), that part was awesome!

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948)

Probably Bogart's best performance in one of Huston's best

[10/10 · 8 December 2002]

John Huston made a lot of good films in his career-"The Asphalt Jungle", "Moby Dick", "Key Largo", "Beat the Devil"-but this film is one of his best, a masterpiece that stands above (along with "The Maltese Falcon" and "The African Queen") not only his other work but also other movies in general. Telling the story of three men who go into the mountains of Mexico for gold and finding greed and madness instead, "Treasure of the Sierra Madre" is an brilliant character study that shows Humphrey Bogart's character, Fred C. Dobbs (one of THE famous characters in film history) turn from a ragged, homeless loser into a paranoid monster. Very grim considering the time it was made, "Treasure" is a very mature take (much like "The Asphalt Jungle") on the subject of pathetic people with hopeless, desperate dreams. Walter Huston deservedly won an oscar for his portrayal of Howard, an old coot who is revealed to be smarter and wiser than he appears. His speech about what "gold does to men's souls" is haunting when taken into context. Tim Holt is also strong as Bob Curtin, the young man who hooks up with Dobbs and ends up almost losing his life for it. Come to think of it, there are no slackers in this cast. But, inevitably, it is Bogart who stands above the rest, even oscar-winning Huston. His performance is on another level, watching his transformation is a mesmerizing experience. On the AFI 100 Greatest Movies special, Mel Brooks says Bogart's performance is "beyond Oscars". Well, apparently it is because Bogart didn't even get nominated for this film. When viewing the film you realize just how criminal this exclusion was. The layers Bogart puts on as this character go beyond simple portrayal. Bogart is nuanced in a way that when Dobbs threatens Curtin, he is simultaneously scary and tragic. There is a scene where he grabs Curtin and points a gun at his face, and as you look at Bogart's dirty, unshaven face in the intense firelight you don't see a man, you see the embodiment of mad, the personification of insanity. Huston obviously also had the "genius" switch on for knowing how to frame this movie, how to make the interactions between characters seem so real and original when the subject of the film is something so universal and common as greed. But the strength of Bogart is what makes this film reverberate with meaning and power. He is the engine to this vehicle, and everyone else seems to play off him. No one else can be Fred C. Dobbs. No one else can be Humphrey Bogart. 10/10

Thir13en Ghosts (2001)

This movie sucks

[3/10 · 14 November 2002]

It amazes me that so many people SWEAR that this movie is good. It's not. It's bad. Real bad. Why is F. Murray Abraham in this? Why is Tony Shaloub in this? Why is Shannon Elizabeth in this? WHY IS ANYONE IN THIS? The plot is convoluted, the characters apparently made out of cardboard, and the villain's plot is so complicated it rivals the one in "Chinatown". Also, I was so annoyed with the "heroes" that I was ready for them all to be killed off by the ghosts (many of whom, if you think about it, can not actually hurt you). The only bright spot that this film has is in the theme and makeup design of the ghosts. This design job is one to be noted by future horror filmmakers, they just need to forget the rest of the movie. Oh, and the terribly racist caricature of the nanny character is a nice touch too. Just awful, thematically wise.

Singin' in the Rain (1952)

What a Glorious Feeling!

[10/10 · 12 November 2002]

"Singin' in the Rain" is #10 on AFI's list of the 100 best American films. When I first saw this placement, I was a little iffy. A musical over "Bridge on the River Kwai", "Star Wars", and "Psycho"? I was not convinced. Then i SAW the film, and I realized why it places so high. Movies are made to entertain and make the viewer feel good, and "Singin'" might do this better than any movie ever made. It's not the great songs, the dances that accompany them, or even the gloriously positive ending ("She's the star of the picture!") that makes the viewer feel so good when watching this film. There seems to be a certain something, a certain, well, happiness, to the whole film. Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen definitely did what they set out to do when they made this. Filled with bright colors, unforgettable moments, and utterly touching, human characters, "Singin'" is the perfect antidote for films like "House on Haunted Hill" and "Rollerball"-films which make the viewer feel upset upon finishing them. The feel-good movie of the year in 1952, "Singin' in the Rain" is now considered the feel-good film of the century.

Taxi Driver (1976)

One of THE great films of all time

[10/10 · 10 November 2002]

I'm going to keep this short seeing as I cannot do the justice to this masterpiece it deserves. For the best essay on the film, I suggest you go to www.suntimes.com/ebert and find it in "The Great Movies". I will say that this is one of the few movies I have ever seen that has so completely sucked me in upon viewing. I don't think I blinked during the whole thing. The pathetic Travis Bickle, a Vietnam War vet with a scarred mental state, is a loner who decides "if all I'm gonna do is ride around nights, I might as well get paid". The movie then sucks you into his descent from a maladjusted sociopath to a full-on homicidal maniac. The climax of the film might be the most brutally violent in screen history-but it makes sense because the entire film has been leading to the moment. Featuring Robert De Niro in one of THE performances in the film lexicon, "Taxi Driver" is a movie that will always have a place reserved only for it in history.

Blue Velvet (1986)

Masterpiece

[10/10 · 9 November 2002]

Love him or hate him, David Lynch cannot be ignored. This film, possibly his most famous (and probably his best, although many people will have differing opinions), is one of the most controversial movies ever. While it is on many people's "Top 100/200 Films" lists, Roger Ebert gave it one out of four stars in his initial review. I am in the first group, the one that thinks that "Blue Velvet" is a masterpiece. In the Lynch filmography, it is somewhere in the middle in terms of hyper-reality. It is not the phantasmagoriphica surreality of "Mulholland Drive", "Lost Highway", or "Eraserhead", but it is not the straight-faced drama of "The Straight Story" or "The Elephant Man" either. Few films of more power, more emotion, and more determination to stare unblinkingly into the dark side of human nature have ever been made. As is Lynch's style, he gets a great everyman (Kyle MacLachlan as Jeffrey Beaumont) to symbolize humankind as he puts the character through unimaginable, oftentimes surreal experiences that are disturbing, yet truthful in one way or another. Few films are more challenging and disturbing than "Blue Velvet", as well. The subjects of the movie are kidnapping, murder, drugs, sadomasochism, rape, sexuality, and Roy Orbison songs. Add to that Dennis Hopper's character Frank Booth, a being of seemingly pure evil, and you have yourself a terrifying descent into depravity and sickness. I have rarely been as scared as when I was watching this film. Films are best when they ask the viewer to think about the subject on the screen, and that is what "Blue Velvet" does best. Are you a bug or a robin? That question is the heart of "Blue Velvet", David Lynch's masterpiece and one of the great movies of all time.

Eraserhead (1977)

Probably the weirdest movie I've ever seen

[9/10 · 9 November 2002]

***There might be spoilers in the following summary*** "Eraserhead" is the weirdest movie I have ever seen (like that hasn't been said before). It is David Lynch's first film, and it really showed the world what this controversial filmmaker would be creating throughout his career. Now, when I say it is the "weirdest" movie I've ever seen, I do not mean "weird" in a negative sense. It is strange, but it is also intelligent, challenging, experimental, thought-provoking, and breathtakingly ambitious (especially when you consider this was Lynch's first major film). The film contains maybe 8 characters (some of whom are more implied than actually seen), but the film really revolves around Jack Nance, a truly likable screen presence with a malleable face who, despite his wicked-vertical hair-do, is probably one of the best everyman in film history. "Eraserhead" shows how Nance's character, who seems to be an ok guy, has his life tipped-turned upside down and right-side up again. He accidentally gets his girlfriend, Mary, pregnant. That is bad enough, but it gets even worse when the "child" turns out to be a horribly mutated accident of nature. The rest of the movie takes place over one night and shows how this offspring effects his life. My opinion is that the film is a nightmarish vision of a possible apocalyptic future we are headed toward-but that is just my interpretation and should not be taken as fact. I could go on and on, but there is a 1,000 word limit to these things. So let me just say that "Eraserhead" is a truly unforgettable film full of images, ideas, and thought. It is one of the great art films, and possibly one of the great films, of all time.

Mr. Deeds (2002)

Inferior, but fun.

[6/10 · 21 October 2002]

"Mr. Deeds" is Adam Sandler's weakest comedy (a view that might have to be altered when I see "8 Crazy Nights"-which looks awful). Many of the jokes in this remake of the Frank Capra classic seem underdeveloped and disturbingly, unnecessarily violent. Sandler himself seems to be going through the motions in this film. Winona Ryder is sadly miscast and misused-she is the worst part of the film. The film is saved and made enjoyable by John Turturro (who steals so many scenes he should be arrested). The "sneaky" butler that Turturro plays is the best part of this film. Watch this film for a silly, easy-on-the-eyes-and-ears comedy, but if you want a superior comedy from Sandler rent the now-classic "Happy Gilmore" or "The Wedding Singer". Heck, you might as well go see "Punch-Drunk Love" (that looks like a masterpiece).

Rushmore (1998)

Anderson's first masterpiece

[10/10 · 3 October 2002]

"Rushmore" is the film that let the world know that Wes Anderson was an important new filmmaker. It simultaneously showed his brilliant touch for wit, irony, pathos, and drama all in the same film. Also, it is a testimony to his skill with actors. Jason Schwartzmann (the drummer for Phantom Planet) gives a startlingly good performance as Max Fischer, a Benjamin Braddock with a touch of Charles Foster Kane. Bill Murray might give the performance of his career as Herman Bloom, the millionaire steel-magnate alum of Rushmore Academy who befriends, then becomes the enemy of Max by falling in love with the beautiful Ms. Cross (Olivia Williams). Truly a great film, "Rushmore" is a movie that touches the heart and the mind. A masterpiece.