- My biggest issue with the film was the sheer number of times when a character did something that was nonsensical on a purely logical level. The most glaring (or at least closest to the end) moment that this struck me: when Brody takes off to befriend the normal sized predator, does so, runs away mid-predator battle and then just leaves the Israeli commando and the then-innocuous Topher Grace in a pit where, when he is inevitably soon victorious, the mega-predator will proceed to immediately spinerip the shit out of them. Like, did his character realize the dramatic value of just leaving them there for a bit, even if it meant that they might be hashmeat by the time his clever plan played out? I also thought the part where he intentionally summons a mega-predator to the labyrinthine and tight confines of the abandoned spacecraft inhabited by Morpheus was ludicrous. What back-against-the-wall situation could POSSIBLY be worse than that? "We're in a tiny, crawlspace-heavy ship with next to no resources... let's summon our mighty and unforgiving adversary to help free us!" Sure but no.
- By similar accord, the biggest difference between this and the original is the way in which characters are developed. In the original, the characters are rapidly introduced, developed (however briefly) and then thrown into the conflict. In PREDATORS, the development is threaded throughout the narrative, which makes the audience give much less of a shit about who the characters are or why they are doing what they are doing. As black and white as the original seems in contrast, the rapid character rollout dovetails so much better with the themes of almost ANY action film. The middling attempt to push some kind of message, only to abandon it by the film's end, seems extremely foolish.
- I heard not one but two people in the showing that I was at suggest that the IDF sniper was "the girl from the original". Like, are you even listening to the words?
- On that same note: why did a rank-and-file (by all accounts) Israeli soldier get briefed about the existence of predators? I can only imagine the conference room filled with thousands of soldiers, headed up by a general saying, "Now... I know it's EXTREMELY unlikely that you will ever come across one of these things... but if you do, here is what we know:" WHA'? And then she remembered every last detail?! Goddamn it, why is this movie so lacking in the brains dept.?! Also, when Brody was like, "You knew why that thing was there!", I thought that she was going to admit that she was luring PLO agents with an injured comrade then sniping the shit out of their brainstems.
- I really, REALLY hope that the befriended predator was not supposed to be the same predator as the one from the original despite their aesthetic similarity because... WHY?! Why would that be important to the arc of these characters! It isn't!
- OK, I did laugh at the "do so much coke" line. Why the FUCK did it have to be followed by a rape joke? Seriously? You couldn't write any other line that would explain how CRAZY that Joe Pantaliono-looking skinnyman was without resorting to rape jokes? Just awful. My disgust was later compounded by the dude sitting a few rows behind me who, when Brody was consoling the paralyzed and injured Israeli sniper after dispatching with the nefarious Grace, declared that "Now is the time, bro! HIT THAT SHIT!" Faith in humanity: waning.
- I won't even address that fat-fuck Larry Fishburner cameo.
- This is minor, but Topher suddenly and inexplicately regains the use of his walking after getting some serious ligaments and shit shredded just right prior to the part when he uses the obvious first-act-gun of a paralyzing toxin knife to disable the lady in the pit.
- On that note: who was on the predator "Good Prey Selection Committee" the day that they opted for both Topher's third-act psychopath and the Joe Panataliono turdsack with a shiv as potential adversaries for 9'-tall death machines equipped with shoulder lasers? Like maybe their stable psyches could somehow enable them to outwit the feral veracity of giant murderslabs?
- Why the HELL was such an explicate homage to the original as Brody running around covered in mud and screaming, "C'MON! KILL ME! I'M RIGHT HERE!" needed? They couldn't have shot that exact same scene without having him directly aping the climactic attire and dialog of the original? Who ARE these wretchedly shitty screenwriters? It's a saddener.
- I understand that the extended samurai sword battle was some half-ass attempt to visually reference classic Japanese samurai cinema, but why did it have to be so corny, sound-stage-y and horribly limp? Also, it does not speak to the strength of the script that the yakuza assassin was one of the more sympathetic characters despite speaking less than ten English words through the entirety of the runtime.
- Two different alternate endings that would have been hugely superior to the actual ending:
1) The camera spins around to reveal what Brody is marveling at to reveal... an '80's-era chopper! As the chopper approaches ground level, Arnold, revealed to be sitting in the chopper's side, throws them a rope and says, "LET'S GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE!"
2) The crates from the original ending fall to the ground. The door to the crate closest to Brody et al. blasts open to reveal an ebony void. Suddenly, a pair of red eyes light up and the TERMINATOR 2 theme plays. Cut to black screen, credits.
- I hope that the "Russian" chain gun guy wins the governorship of MN or some other Midwestern state in the next 20 years.
13 July 2010
04 March 2010
Exhaustive list of three-sentence reviews, Volume III
CRANK: HIGH VOLTAGE (2009)- This movie left me torn; there are very brief flashes of brilliance, but CRANK was also chock full of racist caricatures of all stripes, splashes of misogyny, and an overwhelming sense of forced wackiness. Jason Statham perfectly captures the character of the immense leading prick, whose profession is seemingly the only plot detail I might have been missing out on not having seen the first installment. I would challenge co-directors Mark Nedelvine and Brian Taylor tone down their schtick a half dozen degrees for their next picture and see what happens, as it would surely be much more enjoyable.
EVENT HORIZON (1997)- Many folks whose opinions closely mirror my own on sci-fi and horror genres have recommended checking this out to me in the past, so it was a pretty steep disappointment to finally take in this half-baked horror flick. The cast is the most enjoyable aspect of the film, as Larry Fishburne, Sam Neil and Jason Isaacs (who later played Lucius Malfoy in the Potter films) chew through scenery like so many milk-soaked graham crackers. The plot, about a space rescue mission attempting to locate an experimental spacecraft, starts strong and then falls apart as Neil's Dr. Weir's motivations and true origins remain unnecessarily obfuscated through even the lame "twist" ending.
FAME (2009)- Having watched only the first half of the original FAME (1980) after finishing this, I am offended at this limp remake. While the original FAME features gritty sets and cinematography, characters who are provided with actual backgrounds, and several story arcs varying between the comical and the brutal, neo-FAME instead spotlights lamely sexualized teen robots, a seemingly unending parade of unneeded musical set pieces, and a New York city that looks a lot like Toronto. Most offensive is the wholesale replacement of the lower class origins of the original's characters, instead replaced by an elite group of selfish and interchangeable automatons.
FUNNY PEOPLE (2009)- Adam Sandler has always struck me as an actor capable of a lot more than he is willing to normally commit to, an idea inspired by his dually subtle and intense performance in PUNCH DRUNK LOVE. FUNNY PEOPLE, while tonally quite different from PUNCH DRUNK, also offers up a nuanced Sandler performance in the form of a selfish, lonely, and self-destructive comedian whose character surely draws a lot from Mr. Sandler's actual life and success. Like all of director Judd Apatow's work, FUNNY PEOPLE is slightly uneven throughout, but the characters and situations that they subject themselves to ring truer to life than almost any other big budget comedy.
I CAN DO BAD ALL BY MYSELF (2009)- This was the first time I have ever encountered anything by Tyler Perry and I enjoyed it a good bit, lacking in subtlety though it may be. I CAN DO BAD slips and slides tonally all over the map from slapstick comedy to heartfelt drama to balls-out musical, and while the experience is somewhat jarring, all of the components are well-crafted as individual elements and result in an enjoyable whole. Hope Olaidé, as a troubled teen acting as a surrogate mother to her two younger brothers, and Taraji Henson, in the role of a self-destructive lounge singer and initially unwilling adoptive mother, offer excellent portrayals of women forced down similarly difficult paths in life.
LAW ABIDING CITIZEN (2009)- Despite knowing better, I really hoped that LAW ABIDING CITIZEN would be something more than a dumb revenge-themed cat and mouse procedural given that it was set in Philadelphia and starred that guy from 300 (who has yet to make another good movie). Not only did it fail at that, it outright fell flat at being entertaining or making any sense, for that matter. The only aspect of the film that I even took any note of was director F. Gary Gray's restraint in not showing any of the potentially very gory SAW-like torture scenes, and that is truly not saying much for a film. (Bonus sentence: From visiting links from this picture's IMDB entry, I discovered that they are remaking TOTAL RECALL, which is one of the worst ideas in the history of cinema, followed closely by the idea that this film's writer, Kurt Wimmer , should be in charge of writing its script.)
MOON (2009)- Atmospheric science fiction is a genre that has fallen greatly from grace since it's heyday of the '70's and '80's, aside from a sparse number of recent offerings like Soderbergh's 2002 SOLARIS remake and Danny Boyle's 2007 slow burner, SUNSHINE. MOON continues in the revival as a (briefly) mysterious and gauzily shot tale of space madness and corporate greed. While Sam Rockwell does everything he can with the role of Sam Bell, an astronaut/space miner eager to reunite with his family, the film unveils its secrets far too rapidly and obviously to wring out the full psychological tension that the film could have potentially mined.
THE STEPFATHER (2009)- Not much can be said about THE STEPFATHR that isn't already revealed in the trailer: stepfather guy meets mom, kills elderly neighbor, terrorizes her/her kids. If you go into this expecting dumb entertainment and nothing more, you will come out unscathed. Here is another sentence to meet my quota of three sentences.
TERMINATOR SALVATION (2009)- While many dismissed TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINES as an awful entry into the franchise, I found it's extremely clever writing, novel premise, and willingness to portray John Connor in a negative light as a refreshing change from James Cameron's previous two blunt slugfests (which were both excellent in their own right). SALVATION, on the other hand, lacks both the creative and humorous writing of RISE as well as the visceral brio of the first two installments; were a few details and names changed, this would have been on par with any other generic mid-budget sci-fi movie of the last ten years. Michael Ironside, who has been in some of the best sci-fi pictures of the last ten years, is utterly squandered in the two scenes he appears in, and the rest of the cast is so lacking in charisma that the third act's dramatic finale is easily forgotten by the time the credits roll.
THE THING (1982)- John Carpenter is responsible for several of my favorite childhood movie experiences and what I consider to be the best science fiction picture of all time, so I was hesitant to elevate my expectations for THE THING when I first saw it several years ago. While THE THING is a vast tonal departure from his other output of the era, totally lacking in any comic relief, Carpenter proves his mastery of restraint and tension here, with a story whose shrouded details and loyalties result in a mass of hysteria and suspicion that ends in tragedy on a personal, or possibly global, scale. The atmosphere of THE THING is perfectly realized with both sound and image, making the viewer feel like one of the research team members trapped in a seemingly impossibly fatal situation.
TWILIGHT (2008)- Much like my original viewing of HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE, watching TWILIGHT was inspired not so much by an interest in the subject matter or storytelling but rather gaining a perspective on the cultural discourse that it inspires. While Potter & co. pleasantly surprised me with a tale that would make Joseph Campbell proud, TWILIGHT offered not only low production values and poor characterizations, but also a story that made me feel like an old woman as I asked myself, "What is wrong with kids these days?" since Bella and Edward's relationship is clearly abusive on several levels. The only aspect of the film that I enjoyed was the idea of a vampire family, a concept which was not very thoroughly fleshed out aside from a couple of short asides.
WORLD'S GREATEST DAD (2009)- While Robin Williams has indeed been in a few good movies over the years, his presence in a cast usually means you're going to end up with a JUMANJI or perhaps a BIRD CAGE. He has a history of playing everything atrociously over the top, from gay caricatures to sentimental schmaltz, and DAD is no exception, as he takes on the role of a pathetic go-nowhere high school teacher who uses his son's death by auto-erotic asphyxiation to further his own dreams of becoming a professional writer, a role he inhabits almost freakishly easily with his frumpish physique. Director Bobcat Goldthwait (yes, that guy) takes a bitterly misanthropic view of his subjects without every offering any sympathetic characters or moments of hope, thus rendering the film unpleasant for all but the most hateful of souls, even through the anti-climax of a nude Robin Williams diving into a pool like an oafish, elderly version of Benjamin Braddock.
YOU DON'T MESS WITH THE ZOHAN (2008)- Quite a different beast from FUNNY PEOPLE, ZOHAN is much closer to the films parodied to hilarious effect in the above-reviewed Apatow picture (the idea behind MERMAN was genius). The vigor with which Sandler inhabits the role of an Isreali secret agent-cum-NYC hairstylist is hard to not enjoy, and the message of peace between Jews and Palestinians is admirable, though quite confusingly staged. I consider this to be the A SERIOUS MAN of the "sex with old lady jokes" genre of comedy films.
EVENT HORIZON (1997)- Many folks whose opinions closely mirror my own on sci-fi and horror genres have recommended checking this out to me in the past, so it was a pretty steep disappointment to finally take in this half-baked horror flick. The cast is the most enjoyable aspect of the film, as Larry Fishburne, Sam Neil and Jason Isaacs (who later played Lucius Malfoy in the Potter films) chew through scenery like so many milk-soaked graham crackers. The plot, about a space rescue mission attempting to locate an experimental spacecraft, starts strong and then falls apart as Neil's Dr. Weir's motivations and true origins remain unnecessarily obfuscated through even the lame "twist" ending.
FAME (2009)- Having watched only the first half of the original FAME (1980) after finishing this, I am offended at this limp remake. While the original FAME features gritty sets and cinematography, characters who are provided with actual backgrounds, and several story arcs varying between the comical and the brutal, neo-FAME instead spotlights lamely sexualized teen robots, a seemingly unending parade of unneeded musical set pieces, and a New York city that looks a lot like Toronto. Most offensive is the wholesale replacement of the lower class origins of the original's characters, instead replaced by an elite group of selfish and interchangeable automatons.
FUNNY PEOPLE (2009)- Adam Sandler has always struck me as an actor capable of a lot more than he is willing to normally commit to, an idea inspired by his dually subtle and intense performance in PUNCH DRUNK LOVE. FUNNY PEOPLE, while tonally quite different from PUNCH DRUNK, also offers up a nuanced Sandler performance in the form of a selfish, lonely, and self-destructive comedian whose character surely draws a lot from Mr. Sandler's actual life and success. Like all of director Judd Apatow's work, FUNNY PEOPLE is slightly uneven throughout, but the characters and situations that they subject themselves to ring truer to life than almost any other big budget comedy.
I CAN DO BAD ALL BY MYSELF (2009)- This was the first time I have ever encountered anything by Tyler Perry and I enjoyed it a good bit, lacking in subtlety though it may be. I CAN DO BAD slips and slides tonally all over the map from slapstick comedy to heartfelt drama to balls-out musical, and while the experience is somewhat jarring, all of the components are well-crafted as individual elements and result in an enjoyable whole. Hope Olaidé, as a troubled teen acting as a surrogate mother to her two younger brothers, and Taraji Henson, in the role of a self-destructive lounge singer and initially unwilling adoptive mother, offer excellent portrayals of women forced down similarly difficult paths in life.
LAW ABIDING CITIZEN (2009)- Despite knowing better, I really hoped that LAW ABIDING CITIZEN would be something more than a dumb revenge-themed cat and mouse procedural given that it was set in Philadelphia and starred that guy from 300 (who has yet to make another good movie). Not only did it fail at that, it outright fell flat at being entertaining or making any sense, for that matter. The only aspect of the film that I even took any note of was director F. Gary Gray's restraint in not showing any of the potentially very gory SAW-like torture scenes, and that is truly not saying much for a film. (Bonus sentence: From visiting links from this picture's IMDB entry, I discovered that they are remaking TOTAL RECALL, which is one of the worst ideas in the history of cinema, followed closely by the idea that this film's writer, Kurt Wimmer , should be in charge of writing its script.)
MOON (2009)- Atmospheric science fiction is a genre that has fallen greatly from grace since it's heyday of the '70's and '80's, aside from a sparse number of recent offerings like Soderbergh's 2002 SOLARIS remake and Danny Boyle's 2007 slow burner, SUNSHINE. MOON continues in the revival as a (briefly) mysterious and gauzily shot tale of space madness and corporate greed. While Sam Rockwell does everything he can with the role of Sam Bell, an astronaut/space miner eager to reunite with his family, the film unveils its secrets far too rapidly and obviously to wring out the full psychological tension that the film could have potentially mined.
THE STEPFATHER (2009)- Not much can be said about THE STEPFATHR that isn't already revealed in the trailer: stepfather guy meets mom, kills elderly neighbor, terrorizes her/her kids. If you go into this expecting dumb entertainment and nothing more, you will come out unscathed. Here is another sentence to meet my quota of three sentences.
TERMINATOR SALVATION (2009)- While many dismissed TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINES as an awful entry into the franchise, I found it's extremely clever writing, novel premise, and willingness to portray John Connor in a negative light as a refreshing change from James Cameron's previous two blunt slugfests (which were both excellent in their own right). SALVATION, on the other hand, lacks both the creative and humorous writing of RISE as well as the visceral brio of the first two installments; were a few details and names changed, this would have been on par with any other generic mid-budget sci-fi movie of the last ten years. Michael Ironside, who has been in some of the best sci-fi pictures of the last ten years, is utterly squandered in the two scenes he appears in, and the rest of the cast is so lacking in charisma that the third act's dramatic finale is easily forgotten by the time the credits roll.
THE THING (1982)- John Carpenter is responsible for several of my favorite childhood movie experiences and what I consider to be the best science fiction picture of all time, so I was hesitant to elevate my expectations for THE THING when I first saw it several years ago. While THE THING is a vast tonal departure from his other output of the era, totally lacking in any comic relief, Carpenter proves his mastery of restraint and tension here, with a story whose shrouded details and loyalties result in a mass of hysteria and suspicion that ends in tragedy on a personal, or possibly global, scale. The atmosphere of THE THING is perfectly realized with both sound and image, making the viewer feel like one of the research team members trapped in a seemingly impossibly fatal situation.
TWILIGHT (2008)- Much like my original viewing of HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE, watching TWILIGHT was inspired not so much by an interest in the subject matter or storytelling but rather gaining a perspective on the cultural discourse that it inspires. While Potter & co. pleasantly surprised me with a tale that would make Joseph Campbell proud, TWILIGHT offered not only low production values and poor characterizations, but also a story that made me feel like an old woman as I asked myself, "What is wrong with kids these days?" since Bella and Edward's relationship is clearly abusive on several levels. The only aspect of the film that I enjoyed was the idea of a vampire family, a concept which was not very thoroughly fleshed out aside from a couple of short asides.
WORLD'S GREATEST DAD (2009)- While Robin Williams has indeed been in a few good movies over the years, his presence in a cast usually means you're going to end up with a JUMANJI or perhaps a BIRD CAGE. He has a history of playing everything atrociously over the top, from gay caricatures to sentimental schmaltz, and DAD is no exception, as he takes on the role of a pathetic go-nowhere high school teacher who uses his son's death by auto-erotic asphyxiation to further his own dreams of becoming a professional writer, a role he inhabits almost freakishly easily with his frumpish physique. Director Bobcat Goldthwait (yes, that guy) takes a bitterly misanthropic view of his subjects without every offering any sympathetic characters or moments of hope, thus rendering the film unpleasant for all but the most hateful of souls, even through the anti-climax of a nude Robin Williams diving into a pool like an oafish, elderly version of Benjamin Braddock.
YOU DON'T MESS WITH THE ZOHAN (2008)- Quite a different beast from FUNNY PEOPLE, ZOHAN is much closer to the films parodied to hilarious effect in the above-reviewed Apatow picture (the idea behind MERMAN was genius). The vigor with which Sandler inhabits the role of an Isreali secret agent-cum-NYC hairstylist is hard to not enjoy, and the message of peace between Jews and Palestinians is admirable, though quite confusingly staged. I consider this to be the A SERIOUS MAN of the "sex with old lady jokes" genre of comedy films.
19 February 2010
Exhaustive list of three-sentence reviews, Volume II
DISTRICT 9 (2009)- While it is a rather gimmick-driven picture, DISTRICT 9 pulses with a raw and rough energy that is rarely found in wide-release science fiction films. The gradual and measured set-up for the protagonist's story arc is brilliantly executed despite the fact that the viewer needs to suspend disbelief as far as any sci-fi picture can expect its audience to. DISTRICT 9 combines subtle racism, an anti-racism subtext, exploding heads, and giant robot exoskeletons as well as any film since ALIENS, and I am genuinely looking forward to DISTRICT 10.
EXTRACT (2009)- Mike Judge's previous two features were extremely hilarious, but both films suffered from a distinctly misanthropic viewpoint that felt somewhat coldhearted. EXTRACT is a welcome departure from that vibe; while Judge certainly still does occasionally spotlight the negative, distinctly human traits of his characters, the conclusion of the film is thankfully sympathetic to his suffering creations, allowing a dignified resolution to what could have been a hateful tale. The increasingly complex relationships Judge draws out, even between characters bordering on outright caricature such as a grindcore doofus and a dopey bro cassanova, bode well for his future efforts. GILLY ALERT!
THE GODFATHER (1972)- This was only the second time that I had seen THE GODFATHER in its entirety and it was amazing how much of it was already vividly inscribed on my mind. The naturalistic touch that Coppola brings to the picture, notably in the sequence of Michael's exile in Italy and the garden death of Vito, adds another dimension to an already effective piece of cinema. The visual impact of both the christening sequence and the final, dark confrontation between Michael and Kate has rarely been paralleled since. Bonus sentence: the death shot of Moe Green gives this movie the record for worst-fake-blood-to-best-film ratio.
HALLOWEEN (2007)- In his last feature, THE DEVIL'S REJECTS, Rob Zombie proved that he was capable of crafting an excellent horror film, with the touch of an auteur as well as moments of truly frightening human malevolence. In HALLOWEEN, he swings again for the fences, attempting to give Michael Myers a compelling psychological backstory and a justification, if minor, for his later-life murderous rampages. Zombie falls short, due to an unbelievable, over-the-top set-up and a half-baked relationship between Myers and his hippie-dippy psychologist, but the third act of typical Myers terrorizing is well-crafted if uninspired.
IN BRUGES (2008)- Categorizing IN BRUGES simply as a story about hitmen exiled to Belgium after a botched killing not only does it a great disservice, but also pigeonholes one of the best cinematic character studies of the last ten years. Unlike most films about hitmen, Martin McDonagh's debut feature doesn't focus so much on his characters' profession as how they interact as individuals cast into a fantastic scenario. Mr. McDonaugh subtly and skillfully changes the tone throughout the film, from outright comedy to violent tragedy, and Colin Farrell expertly brings life to his sympathetic yet pathetic failed assassin.
THE RUNNING MAN (1987)- Despite being one of the lesser works in the Schwarzenegger cannon of the '80's, THE RUNNING MAN is still a very fun ride, one that packs a completely unsubtle anti-corporation message. THE RUNNING MAN contains one of the best Arnold quotes of all time: "All I've seen is a bunch of low foreheads who think they can change the world with dreams and big talk. It's too late for that! If you're not ready to act, give me a break and shut up!" I also really enjoy the distinctly 1987 aesthetic perspective of 2019 technology and the prolo look of the antagonists.
SURROGATES (2009)- SURROGATES takes an extremely strong premise (the entire Western world uses ubermench android doubles, controlled remotely, to live their daily lives) and makes a forgettable experience of the tale, which is sort of a letdown given that both of Jonathan Mostow's previous two pictures were both effectively spartan yet enjoyable. While there are some exciting action sequences and the robot duplicates do look as creepy as they rightly should, the whole film seems milquetoast, even though I did enjoy the gracefully ambiguous conclusion. Why is it that James Cromwell always plays the supposedly benevolent authority figure who ends up being a conspiracy puppetmaster?
EXTRACT (2009)- Mike Judge's previous two features were extremely hilarious, but both films suffered from a distinctly misanthropic viewpoint that felt somewhat coldhearted. EXTRACT is a welcome departure from that vibe; while Judge certainly still does occasionally spotlight the negative, distinctly human traits of his characters, the conclusion of the film is thankfully sympathetic to his suffering creations, allowing a dignified resolution to what could have been a hateful tale. The increasingly complex relationships Judge draws out, even between characters bordering on outright caricature such as a grindcore doofus and a dopey bro cassanova, bode well for his future efforts. GILLY ALERT!
THE GODFATHER (1972)- This was only the second time that I had seen THE GODFATHER in its entirety and it was amazing how much of it was already vividly inscribed on my mind. The naturalistic touch that Coppola brings to the picture, notably in the sequence of Michael's exile in Italy and the garden death of Vito, adds another dimension to an already effective piece of cinema. The visual impact of both the christening sequence and the final, dark confrontation between Michael and Kate has rarely been paralleled since. Bonus sentence: the death shot of Moe Green gives this movie the record for worst-fake-blood-to-best-film ratio.
HALLOWEEN (2007)- In his last feature, THE DEVIL'S REJECTS, Rob Zombie proved that he was capable of crafting an excellent horror film, with the touch of an auteur as well as moments of truly frightening human malevolence. In HALLOWEEN, he swings again for the fences, attempting to give Michael Myers a compelling psychological backstory and a justification, if minor, for his later-life murderous rampages. Zombie falls short, due to an unbelievable, over-the-top set-up and a half-baked relationship between Myers and his hippie-dippy psychologist, but the third act of typical Myers terrorizing is well-crafted if uninspired.
IN BRUGES (2008)- Categorizing IN BRUGES simply as a story about hitmen exiled to Belgium after a botched killing not only does it a great disservice, but also pigeonholes one of the best cinematic character studies of the last ten years. Unlike most films about hitmen, Martin McDonagh's debut feature doesn't focus so much on his characters' profession as how they interact as individuals cast into a fantastic scenario. Mr. McDonaugh subtly and skillfully changes the tone throughout the film, from outright comedy to violent tragedy, and Colin Farrell expertly brings life to his sympathetic yet pathetic failed assassin.
THE RUNNING MAN (1987)- Despite being one of the lesser works in the Schwarzenegger cannon of the '80's, THE RUNNING MAN is still a very fun ride, one that packs a completely unsubtle anti-corporation message. THE RUNNING MAN contains one of the best Arnold quotes of all time: "All I've seen is a bunch of low foreheads who think they can change the world with dreams and big talk. It's too late for that! If you're not ready to act, give me a break and shut up!" I also really enjoy the distinctly 1987 aesthetic perspective of 2019 technology and the prolo look of the antagonists.
SURROGATES (2009)- SURROGATES takes an extremely strong premise (the entire Western world uses ubermench android doubles, controlled remotely, to live their daily lives) and makes a forgettable experience of the tale, which is sort of a letdown given that both of Jonathan Mostow's previous two pictures were both effectively spartan yet enjoyable. While there are some exciting action sequences and the robot duplicates do look as creepy as they rightly should, the whole film seems milquetoast, even though I did enjoy the gracefully ambiguous conclusion. Why is it that James Cromwell always plays the supposedly benevolent authority figure who ends up being a conspiracy puppetmaster?
17 February 2010
Exhaustive list of three-sentence reviews, Volume I
I have been idle on blog for a bit, so I decided to start posting a bunch of three sentence long reviews of almost every movie that I have seen since my last update (though I am surely forgetting some of the worse ones) until I am all caught up. Here we go with VOLUME ONE!
AVATAR (2009)- Despite the fact that he is an historically immense asshole, James Cameron is nonetheless a very smart man, a man capable of crafting very effective cinematic entertainment. While AVATAR suffers from many problems, among them profound racism and a script with about a third of the wit of PUNISHER: WAR ZONE, it uses some of the most rudimentary storytelling techniques to rehash a familiar trope to great effect. To deny the technical mastery of AVATAR is foolish, even though it is still okay to laugh at the fact that that guy from GRANDMA'S BOY was cast as one of the scientists.
THE EMPEROR'S NEW GROOVE (2000)- This film is a sparkling example of the right way to make an animated feature as well as sad reminder of how horribly Disney's traditionally animated films have gone wrong in the last ten years. NEW GROOVE features a unique and perfectly executed visual style, a hilarious script full of excellent jokes, and a slapstick tone that is greatly benefited by the epic proportions and gestures of its characters. The brilliantly cast voice acting and the fact that Sting was supposedly enraged that the songs he wrote that were originally supposed to be incorporated into the less comedic first draft of the script are both sweet icings on the cake.
THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (2009)- Ti West's THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL starts out very promisingly with a slick, speedy first half that sets up a potentially potent third act. Regrettably, both the final narrative push and its meager set-up feel rushed and uninspired. While the visual aesthetic of the film is pitch perfect, it lacks the soul and profoundness which elevated the cannon of films that it is so desperately trying to imitate.
THE HURT LOCKER (2008)- While the vignettes in THE HURT LOCKER are tingling with tension and effectively transport the audience to the sand swirled plains of Iraq, they are nothing more than fragments that never cohere into a whole story. The leads, most notably Jeremy Renner as a reckless team leader, attempt to bring as much vitality to their characters as the disparate sequences allow, but none of them ever gain enough traction to make them seem like real people rather than wartime caricatures. THE HURT LOCKER functions best as a series of kinetic shorts, particularly the electric and visceral desert sniper assault, but feels too disjointed to function as a true character study of the men on the ground in the war on terror.
JAWS (1975)- It's stunning how clearly JAWS adheres to the Spielberg aesthetic that is still present in every film he does today despite the technical and financial restrictions he was under in his debut feature. The nighttime dive scene was brilliantly shot and utterly beautiful. Fun fact: the Blockbuster nearest my house does not have JAWS, but they do have JAWS 2 as well as JAWS 3-D (surprisingly starring Dennis Quaid).
PINOCCHIO (1940)- I have been rewatching a lot of the older Disney library as it is always fun to compare the impression you have of a film as a child versus your opinion on it as an adult. PINOCCHIO struck me as a particularly odd experience, largely due to the creepy and dark sequence where Pinocchio is brought to Pleasure island, where errant little boys are transformed into donkeys (?) and sold to salt mines as slave labor. Some of the narrative leaps were also very jarring, such as when Pinocchio is seated on a step, believing that his adoptive father is dead only to have a shimmering dove drop him a note explaining that Geppetto is in the belly of a whale named Monstro.
SHERLOCK HOLMES (2009)- Guy Ritchie has never struck me as more than a hyperkinetic one-trick pony, but SHERLOCK HOLMES is a welcome departure from his previous oeuvre. The saving grace of the film is not the storytelling or the story, however, so much as the charisma of Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. as the (what I thought were very obviously overtly homosexual) leads. It's a wonder what a divorce from Madonna will do for a fellow, and I suggest another separation before he helms the inevitable sequel.
WHIP IT (2009)- I do understand what rookie director Drew Barrymore was trying to accomplish with WHIP IT: creating a film with strong female leads and a story that empowers them. A flimsy script written by Shauna Cross, who has seemingly never had a conversation with another real human, and recklessly amateurish direction and editing prevent WHIP IT from rising above direct-to-video quality. Worse still, it seems as though the actors were all given the script two days before filming and just told to have fun with it, as even reliable character actors like Kristen Wiig (GILLY ALERT!) seem cardboardish and robotic.
AVATAR (2009)- Despite the fact that he is an historically immense asshole, James Cameron is nonetheless a very smart man, a man capable of crafting very effective cinematic entertainment. While AVATAR suffers from many problems, among them profound racism and a script with about a third of the wit of PUNISHER: WAR ZONE, it uses some of the most rudimentary storytelling techniques to rehash a familiar trope to great effect. To deny the technical mastery of AVATAR is foolish, even though it is still okay to laugh at the fact that that guy from GRANDMA'S BOY was cast as one of the scientists.
THE EMPEROR'S NEW GROOVE (2000)- This film is a sparkling example of the right way to make an animated feature as well as sad reminder of how horribly Disney's traditionally animated films have gone wrong in the last ten years. NEW GROOVE features a unique and perfectly executed visual style, a hilarious script full of excellent jokes, and a slapstick tone that is greatly benefited by the epic proportions and gestures of its characters. The brilliantly cast voice acting and the fact that Sting was supposedly enraged that the songs he wrote that were originally supposed to be incorporated into the less comedic first draft of the script are both sweet icings on the cake.
THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (2009)- Ti West's THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL starts out very promisingly with a slick, speedy first half that sets up a potentially potent third act. Regrettably, both the final narrative push and its meager set-up feel rushed and uninspired. While the visual aesthetic of the film is pitch perfect, it lacks the soul and profoundness which elevated the cannon of films that it is so desperately trying to imitate.
THE HURT LOCKER (2008)- While the vignettes in THE HURT LOCKER are tingling with tension and effectively transport the audience to the sand swirled plains of Iraq, they are nothing more than fragments that never cohere into a whole story. The leads, most notably Jeremy Renner as a reckless team leader, attempt to bring as much vitality to their characters as the disparate sequences allow, but none of them ever gain enough traction to make them seem like real people rather than wartime caricatures. THE HURT LOCKER functions best as a series of kinetic shorts, particularly the electric and visceral desert sniper assault, but feels too disjointed to function as a true character study of the men on the ground in the war on terror.
JAWS (1975)- It's stunning how clearly JAWS adheres to the Spielberg aesthetic that is still present in every film he does today despite the technical and financial restrictions he was under in his debut feature. The nighttime dive scene was brilliantly shot and utterly beautiful. Fun fact: the Blockbuster nearest my house does not have JAWS, but they do have JAWS 2 as well as JAWS 3-D (surprisingly starring Dennis Quaid).
PINOCCHIO (1940)- I have been rewatching a lot of the older Disney library as it is always fun to compare the impression you have of a film as a child versus your opinion on it as an adult. PINOCCHIO struck me as a particularly odd experience, largely due to the creepy and dark sequence where Pinocchio is brought to Pleasure island, where errant little boys are transformed into donkeys (?) and sold to salt mines as slave labor. Some of the narrative leaps were also very jarring, such as when Pinocchio is seated on a step, believing that his adoptive father is dead only to have a shimmering dove drop him a note explaining that Geppetto is in the belly of a whale named Monstro.
SHERLOCK HOLMES (2009)- Guy Ritchie has never struck me as more than a hyperkinetic one-trick pony, but SHERLOCK HOLMES is a welcome departure from his previous oeuvre. The saving grace of the film is not the storytelling or the story, however, so much as the charisma of Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. as the (what I thought were very obviously overtly homosexual) leads. It's a wonder what a divorce from Madonna will do for a fellow, and I suggest another separation before he helms the inevitable sequel.
WHIP IT (2009)- I do understand what rookie director Drew Barrymore was trying to accomplish with WHIP IT: creating a film with strong female leads and a story that empowers them. A flimsy script written by Shauna Cross, who has seemingly never had a conversation with another real human, and recklessly amateurish direction and editing prevent WHIP IT from rising above direct-to-video quality. Worse still, it seems as though the actors were all given the script two days before filming and just told to have fun with it, as even reliable character actors like Kristen Wiig (GILLY ALERT!) seem cardboardish and robotic.
08 January 2010
Just a few notes here.
Expect new reviews for "Avatar", "Sherlock Holmes", and perhaps "Extract", which was surprisingly good, soon. Do not anticipate reviews for "G-Force", "Date Movie", or "Meet the Spartans".
New this upcoming TUE on DVD: The Hurt Locker, a film atop many critics' year's best lists, and Moon, which I am excited about despite the presence of Kevin Spacey. We are getting a new hi-def digital projector next week, and I am already looking forward to checking out each and every one of Jeremy Renner's pores.
"Legion", which is dropping at the end of JAN, appears to be an unironic take on Planet Terror but with angry angels instead of zombies. I HIGHLY recommend checking out the red band trailer for it on YouTube if you enjoy '80's-brand sci-fi/action.
To the video store!
New this upcoming TUE on DVD: The Hurt Locker, a film atop many critics' year's best lists, and Moon, which I am excited about despite the presence of Kevin Spacey. We are getting a new hi-def digital projector next week, and I am already looking forward to checking out each and every one of Jeremy Renner's pores.
"Legion", which is dropping at the end of JAN, appears to be an unironic take on Planet Terror but with angry angels instead of zombies. I HIGHLY recommend checking out the red band trailer for it on YouTube if you enjoy '80's-brand sci-fi/action.
To the video store!
23 December 2009
PAPER HEART (2009)
If one were to assign a crack team of sociologists, professional actors, and expert filmmakers to make the most cloying, insulting and twee love story that they could, they still couldn't match the level of irritation created by "Paper Heart". The film, which purports to be a documentary about finding the true meaning of love, is instead a pointless and extremely creepy narrative about the feeble, imagined romance flowering between Charlene Yi and Michael Cera, as recorded by "documentary filmmaker" Nicholas Jasenovec(Jake Johnson, playing the film's actual director).
The problems start at the get-go, as "Jasenovec" immediately begins taking a disturbingly profound interest in Yi's social life (or lack thereof), as established at an opening sequence set at a depressing, acoustic guitar-drenched LA house party. "Jasenovec" coerces Yi, who is collaborating with him on the aforementioned love documentary, into letting him document all the interactions between the prudish, spineless Yi and the puppydog-like, personality-free Cera. Between brief interludes of couples explaining their perceptions of what true love is and cutesy paper figure sequences, "Jasenovec" begins adopting increasingly stalker-inspired means of capturing of every tedious moment between Cera and Yi, whose concept of courtship apparently extends to eating pizza together whilst perhaps (*gasp*)...dare I say it? ... holding hands. Potential for cooties? High. High indeed.
The narrative nadir arrives when "Jasenovec" purchases tickets for Yi and an increasingly uncomfortable Cera to make a trip to Paris on the film's dime, with an aim of generating some kind of limp-dick coda francais. How he paid for the tickets (much less the reels and reels of film he purchased to capture the couple dramatically traversing every single aisle of the grocery store) is never fully explained and thus it is at the audience's discretion to guess whether it was: a large withdrawal from a trust fund; the hefty settlement resultant from "Jasenovec"'s lucrative tort against the doctor who left him mentally handicapped; or, quite simply, a grant from his wealthy father. The just-totally-sick-of-it-man! Cera finally bolts on the production, perhaps worried about the damage it would do his cred with alt-comedy or Year One fans. I would be hard-pressed to imagine a more self-congratulatory ending than Yi and "Jasenovec" travelling to Cera's native Toronto to invade his parents' home, with "Jasenovec" smugly patting himself on the back for not invading with camera and microphone on the pair's reunion.
There are so many things wrong with this movie that it's simply not worth cataloging any but the most heinously offensive of them, that being: why did ANYONE think that this story should be told as a pseudo-documentary? Did the real Jasenovec think he was one-upping Charlie Kaufman by creating an irritating, obsessively self-important character like "Jasenovec" in order to tell a trifling tale that says absolutely nothing novel about a well-worn subject, a subject which has been cinematically examined in much more interesting ways by the likes of Jon Favreau and Jennifer Aniston?
Sadly, this movie probably has enough box office (largely thanks to the inchoate Cera performance) that this maroon is going to be able to toot out another offensive, wretched pellet of a film. The true tragedy of "Paper Heart" is that while the real Jasenovec surely believes himself to be standing on the shoulders of giants, he is actually swimming through the sewage from Rob Reiner and Steeve Coogan's pipes.
The problems start at the get-go, as "Jasenovec" immediately begins taking a disturbingly profound interest in Yi's social life (or lack thereof), as established at an opening sequence set at a depressing, acoustic guitar-drenched LA house party. "Jasenovec" coerces Yi, who is collaborating with him on the aforementioned love documentary, into letting him document all the interactions between the prudish, spineless Yi and the puppydog-like, personality-free Cera. Between brief interludes of couples explaining their perceptions of what true love is and cutesy paper figure sequences, "Jasenovec" begins adopting increasingly stalker-inspired means of capturing of every tedious moment between Cera and Yi, whose concept of courtship apparently extends to eating pizza together whilst perhaps (*gasp*)...dare I say it? ... holding hands. Potential for cooties? High. High indeed.
The narrative nadir arrives when "Jasenovec" purchases tickets for Yi and an increasingly uncomfortable Cera to make a trip to Paris on the film's dime, with an aim of generating some kind of limp-dick coda francais. How he paid for the tickets (much less the reels and reels of film he purchased to capture the couple dramatically traversing every single aisle of the grocery store) is never fully explained and thus it is at the audience's discretion to guess whether it was: a large withdrawal from a trust fund; the hefty settlement resultant from "Jasenovec"'s lucrative tort against the doctor who left him mentally handicapped; or, quite simply, a grant from his wealthy father. The just-totally-sick-of-it-man! Cera finally bolts on the production, perhaps worried about the damage it would do his cred with alt-comedy or Year One fans. I would be hard-pressed to imagine a more self-congratulatory ending than Yi and "Jasenovec" travelling to Cera's native Toronto to invade his parents' home, with "Jasenovec" smugly patting himself on the back for not invading with camera and microphone on the pair's reunion.
There are so many things wrong with this movie that it's simply not worth cataloging any but the most heinously offensive of them, that being: why did ANYONE think that this story should be told as a pseudo-documentary? Did the real Jasenovec think he was one-upping Charlie Kaufman by creating an irritating, obsessively self-important character like "Jasenovec" in order to tell a trifling tale that says absolutely nothing novel about a well-worn subject, a subject which has been cinematically examined in much more interesting ways by the likes of Jon Favreau and Jennifer Aniston?
Sadly, this movie probably has enough box office (largely thanks to the inchoate Cera performance) that this maroon is going to be able to toot out another offensive, wretched pellet of a film. The true tragedy of "Paper Heart" is that while the real Jasenovec surely believes himself to be standing on the shoulders of giants, he is actually swimming through the sewage from Rob Reiner and Steeve Coogan's pipes.
22 December 2009
Proto gonist.
This series of seven videos, in which this dude deconstructs both why The Phantom Menace is so utterly awful as well as what makes the original trilogy great and runs a total of almost 70 minutes, is excellently edited, well written and genuinely entertaining. The voice of the narrator is unnecessary, as is the whole kidnapping motif, but the series more than redeems itself by the halfway point.
Parts six and seven are the highlights, and I do recommend watching the whole thing. While this guy isn't exactly Joseph Campbell, he clearly knows what he is talking about.
Parts six and seven are the highlights, and I do recommend watching the whole thing. While this guy isn't exactly Joseph Campbell, he clearly knows what he is talking about.
18 December 2009
INGLORIOUS BASTERDS (2009)
Have you ever finished watching a movie on DVD and immediately regretted not having seen it in the theatre? Quentin Tarantino returns to form after the pitiful DEATH PROOF in this straightforward action narrative, most certainly intended to be experienced in a movie house, powered by spartan yet effective performances and a lean script. It struck me how different this movie would have turned out had brad Pitt not been cast as the figurehead of the titular band of guerrillas; aside from Mr. Pitt, the cast has zero name actors (unless you count Eli Roth). Knowing that Mr. Pitt was having a blast as the inexplicably effective ignoramus Aldo Raine made the movie much more enjoyable. While Mr. Pitt shines, it's Christoph Waltz, playing Col. Hans Landa, who is the driving force of the events in the film.
The opening sequence, in which Landa first crosses paths with with his future foil, Shoshanna Dreyfuss, vividly debuts the most cerebral and conniving villain of recent cinema. The nigh-monologue in which Landa convinces a seemingly sympathetic French farmer to give up the renegade Dreyfuss family hiding beneath his home is as effective a dialogue as Mr. Tarantio has ever written. Midway through the second act, we are treated to another scalpel-sharp sequence during a rendez-vous set in a subterranean bar, where cultural and class interactions along with flaring egos and short tempers cause a slow boiling atmosphere of discomfort to erupt into an inferno. Rare is the scene that is difficult to watch simply because of the fear of seeing an inevitable disaster unfurl before your eyes. The epic (in action rather than duration) third act, which whips along briskly despite a few unanticipated snags, gels so smoothly that it feels annotated when you realize that the end credits are rolling down the screen.
INGLORIOUS BASTERDS is a welcome departure from the recent output of Mr. Tarantino for numerous reasons, the most notable being the straightforward yet nimble approach to storytelling, showcasing an almost entirely linear sequence of events that immensely benefits the tempo of the film. While BASTERDS clearly exhibits some of the traits of other Tarantino projects, I hope that the narrative restraint shown here is a bellwether for his future projects. While not a single character here is one-half as well-developed as The Bride of KILL BILL, the experience as a whole is more enjoyable than almost any previous Tarantino venture. Keep up the good work, Mr. Tarantino, especially the not-casting-yourself part.
The opening sequence, in which Landa first crosses paths with with his future foil, Shoshanna Dreyfuss, vividly debuts the most cerebral and conniving villain of recent cinema. The nigh-monologue in which Landa convinces a seemingly sympathetic French farmer to give up the renegade Dreyfuss family hiding beneath his home is as effective a dialogue as Mr. Tarantio has ever written. Midway through the second act, we are treated to another scalpel-sharp sequence during a rendez-vous set in a subterranean bar, where cultural and class interactions along with flaring egos and short tempers cause a slow boiling atmosphere of discomfort to erupt into an inferno. Rare is the scene that is difficult to watch simply because of the fear of seeing an inevitable disaster unfurl before your eyes. The epic (in action rather than duration) third act, which whips along briskly despite a few unanticipated snags, gels so smoothly that it feels annotated when you realize that the end credits are rolling down the screen.
INGLORIOUS BASTERDS is a welcome departure from the recent output of Mr. Tarantino for numerous reasons, the most notable being the straightforward yet nimble approach to storytelling, showcasing an almost entirely linear sequence of events that immensely benefits the tempo of the film. While BASTERDS clearly exhibits some of the traits of other Tarantino projects, I hope that the narrative restraint shown here is a bellwether for his future projects. While not a single character here is one-half as well-developed as The Bride of KILL BILL, the experience as a whole is more enjoyable than almost any previous Tarantino venture. Keep up the good work, Mr. Tarantino, especially the not-casting-yourself part.
03 December 2009
This is the worst cereal on the market.
I like Rice Krispies (occasionally). "Multigrain" food products are (occasionally) better for you than the original version of that product. These airy puffturds masquerading as health food, however, took two occasionally not-awful things and forged them into the well-honed Hanzo steel of a poisonous, tooth-ruining, milk-souring mess of a grain product. I would feed the remainder of my box to the birds, but I like birds.
PS The only honey present in this product was produced by bees whose ancestors stung the honorable Ulysses S. Grant's first wife to death.
01 December 2009
HIGH NOON (1952)
High Noon was made in 1952. It was directed by Fred Zinnemann, written by Carl Foreman and stars Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly (who I just discovered was from Philadelphia; who knew!).
This was sitting on our DVD shelf for literally three or so months and I don't know why we never watched it until just last night. Get bent, Netflix. High Noon is on its way back to you now.
High Noon is the tale of the marshal of a small town, Will Kane (Cooper) who, on the day of both his retirement as a lawman and his wedding to a 30-years-his-junior Quaker pacifist/porcelain doll Amy (Kelly), is forced into a confrontation with the murderous marauder Frank Miller (Ian MacDonald) that he put away five years prior. Upon hearing his decision to return to his position as marshal until Miller is dealt with, Amy threatens to leave on the noon train out of town, and after a series of various personal confrontations, so does Kane's former lover (or as they call her in the picture, "friend"), Helen Ramirez (Katy Jurado). Kane spends most of the movie searching for people to populate his posse, an exercise in futility, and caps with a showdown with Miller and his gang of cutthroats at some particular time in the afternoon, a particular time which currently escapes my memory.
The film is quite a departure from what I consider the de rigeur story arc of a Western, and perhaps that is why I liked it as much as I did; it eluded my expectations quite deftly. I normally have a hard time understanding the purported charms of Gary Cooper, but he felt perfect as the wooden, stalwart straw man that he is called on to play in this. While he evokes the viewer's sympathy, it's also easy to see why all the townsfolk could care less if he gets blasted to bits by that guy who wrote Sin City. Kelly is an utter cipher in the bride role, as almost no background for the couple is provided. Their relationship, in fact, seems almost entirely manufactured to provide grist for the many moral conflicts that the movie whirs through. The unexplored yet seemingly more passion-filled relationship between Kane and his friend Ramirez, whose mahoganywood window-souls are as wide-set as those of the wisest owl, is much more intriguing. That so much of their past is obscured by the events of the day makes Ramirez' deep empathy for Kane a compelling component of the tale.
A lot of controversy followed this movie upon its release, and it was called "the most un-American movie [he'd] ever seen" by none other than the human incarnation of a star-spangled nutsack, John Wayne. The man-against-the-cowardly-world trope was supposedly a jab at both the fate of those persecuted by HUAC and those blacklisted during the high tide of the Red Scare. What's curious is that over time, the movie has come to be perceived rather as a one-against-the-world tale, showing that a single man with the spine of a Cooper can overcome almost all odds (with the aid of a [SPOILER ALERT] Quaker wife-turned-back blaster, of course). It is now one of the most historically loved movies by US presidents, most notably William Jefferson Clinton, who screened it a record 17 times over his tenure as prez.
This was sitting on our DVD shelf for literally three or so months and I don't know why we never watched it until just last night. Get bent, Netflix. High Noon is on its way back to you now.
High Noon is the tale of the marshal of a small town, Will Kane (Cooper) who, on the day of both his retirement as a lawman and his wedding to a 30-years-his-junior Quaker pacifist/porcelain doll Amy (Kelly), is forced into a confrontation with the murderous marauder Frank Miller (Ian MacDonald) that he put away five years prior. Upon hearing his decision to return to his position as marshal until Miller is dealt with, Amy threatens to leave on the noon train out of town, and after a series of various personal confrontations, so does Kane's former lover (or as they call her in the picture, "friend"), Helen Ramirez (Katy Jurado). Kane spends most of the movie searching for people to populate his posse, an exercise in futility, and caps with a showdown with Miller and his gang of cutthroats at some particular time in the afternoon, a particular time which currently escapes my memory.
The film is quite a departure from what I consider the de rigeur story arc of a Western, and perhaps that is why I liked it as much as I did; it eluded my expectations quite deftly. I normally have a hard time understanding the purported charms of Gary Cooper, but he felt perfect as the wooden, stalwart straw man that he is called on to play in this. While he evokes the viewer's sympathy, it's also easy to see why all the townsfolk could care less if he gets blasted to bits by that guy who wrote Sin City. Kelly is an utter cipher in the bride role, as almost no background for the couple is provided. Their relationship, in fact, seems almost entirely manufactured to provide grist for the many moral conflicts that the movie whirs through. The unexplored yet seemingly more passion-filled relationship between Kane and his friend Ramirez, whose mahoganywood window-souls are as wide-set as those of the wisest owl, is much more intriguing. That so much of their past is obscured by the events of the day makes Ramirez' deep empathy for Kane a compelling component of the tale.
A lot of controversy followed this movie upon its release, and it was called "the most un-American movie [he'd] ever seen" by none other than the human incarnation of a star-spangled nutsack, John Wayne. The man-against-the-cowardly-world trope was supposedly a jab at both the fate of those persecuted by HUAC and those blacklisted during the high tide of the Red Scare. What's curious is that over time, the movie has come to be perceived rather as a one-against-the-world tale, showing that a single man with the spine of a Cooper can overcome almost all odds (with the aid of a [SPOILER ALERT] Quaker wife-turned-back blaster, of course). It is now one of the most historically loved movies by US presidents, most notably William Jefferson Clinton, who screened it a record 17 times over his tenure as prez.
30 November 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
