Mr. Arkadin (Corinth Version; 1955)

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.0

Orson Welles' beautiful, fascinating mess.

I started talking to a customer at work a few weeks ago and I brought up this film, in which he said "it's good, but you really see where it lulls and where it shines--where a great film really could have been made." Now, this kid was a little obnoxious and annoying, so I really wanted to brush off his Arkadin opinion.

Unfortunately, I really can't agree with him more. There are so many great moments and simply amazing uses of photography that ultimately doesn't add up to a great film. It is certainly worth watching as it is interesting and enjoyable--and, come on, it's Welles--but I have to hope the other versions are stronger.

Dr. Strangelove (1964)

Location: Regent Square
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

Any film is fun to see in the theater, especially those that you could not see during its original release. Not all films, however, require the theatrical viewing as they don't bring anything more to the big screen other than size. Dr. Strangelove, on the other hand, is an absolute must to experience this way.

Strangelove explodes on the silver screen in a way that it can't quite on a television. While this sounds critical of the film, it really isn't--it's complementary. This is a film always worthy of astonishment, and yet it manages to reach new heights not only in the theater atmosphere, but with each subsequent viewing.

Sunset Boulevard (1950)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

So this marks the first film this year that I've watched twice, and what a film it is I have chosen.

This time around I was really taken with Gloria Swanson's performance. It's easy to forget that she wasn't Norma Desmond, despite their similarities. Swanson is said to have been a pleasant, hard-working individual--unlike the actress she portrays onscreen; it makes the performance that much more enjoyable and awe-inducing.

A Love Song for Bobby Long (2004)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 2.5

I've teetered between a 2.5 and a 3.0 for Bobby Long, but, in all honesty, the 3.0 would simply be out of pity.

The best parts of this film are Johansson, Gabriel Macht (my dude from Sebastian Cole) and the locations; otherwise, it all feels pretty forced and unauthentic. Travolta's Bobby Long is absolutely unlikeable for the first two-thirds of the film and, call me unforgiving, but if I've disliked him that long I'm going to continue to. Sure, I understand that characters are always changing as films progress, but this was just handled poorly. Royal Tenenbaum, Billy Brown, Humbert Humbert, and Phil Conners are all essentially pricks, but the filmmakers backing them knew how to present them to the audience. This fellow behind Bobby Long hasn't got such a tight handle on things. And another Travolta gripe: was he just gunning for that Academy nomination or what? I've always liked him, but give Tarantino a call or something, man.

I could feel A Love Song for Bobby Long trying so hard to pull at my heartstrings and, in my book, when you try with such a blatant lack of subtlety, you fail.

Crash (R-Rated; 1996)

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 2.5

It's really my fault. I know it's my fault that I gave David Cronenberg's Crash such a low rating. You know why? Because I don't "get it." It's me that's missing something, not David or the movie. It's me, not you, David.

Yep, this film just isn't working for me. I want to love it, but it's not happening. Perhaps the NC-17 version works better, but I imagine it'd have to be quite different for that to be the case.

Akeelah and the Bee (2006)

Location: Southside Works
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

I had a good time watching this movie. For the type of film this is--and the audience it aims for--it succeeds in what it tries to do. I always enjoy watching Laurence Fishburne and Keke Palmer as Akeelah gave a wonderful turn. The bees had me in suspense; the final one even managed to throw a curveball. An enjoyable little film.

Inside Man (2006)

Location: Maxi-Saver
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

When first seeing the previews for this months ago, I immediately brushed it off as "every other film Denzel has made in the past ten years." When the raves came in, though, I figured everyone couldn't be getting it wrong.

Granted, I haven't seen a ton of 2006 releases, because, for the most part, they look worthless. Inside Man, however, really surprised me and I can safely and enthusiastically rank it as one of this years best (so far). Spike Lee keeps his film from falling into the territory of other crummy hostage thrillers by making sure Denzel's character isn't at the top of his game--he's not an all-star coming into the situation like he's king.

The only problem I had was with Jodie Foster's character and her under-development; her coming in with not only the know-it-all 'tude, but the fact that she actually knows it all is more or less a screenwriter's cop-out. That aside, the film provides enough interesting twists, turns, and layers that it deserves at least one or two revisits.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 4.5

I had a little bit of a grudge with Fear & Loathing after I first saw it about five years or so ago. The thing was, I just didn't love it. At the time I wasn't sure why, but I've got it now: The Duke and Dr. Gonzo really don't want anything, and their drug-induced antics sometimes loose my interest. Granted, I realize putting these two in a strict narrative would perhaps seem contrived, but I can't help but have this gripe.

That being said, I do find this film very interesting and a visual blast. Similarly to Faces (but not quite on the same level), Depp and Del Toro entirely embrace their characters and all ideas of them as actors dissapear. In the hands of any other director than Gilliam, this film would have lost so much. He brings his unique vision (the guy himself is such a character) that, in a film capable of being so over the top, never once overreaches.

Faces (1968)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

I find getting through a Cassavetes film for the first time to be a trying, but never not worthwhile experience. You know you're observing something very special and entirely unique--that alone is usually what pulls me all the way through.

So with this second round of Faces, as I was able to completely take in just how stunning the performances are and--my favorite aspect of Cassavetes work--the remarkable passion behind his work. Lots of wonderful things have been said of the man and his work, and I think it all boils down to this enthusiasm that is constantly at the forefront of his art.

Faces may be one of the best acted films I have ever seen. One of the aspects I look for in terms of judging a performance is completely forgetting that you're watching one--everything seems so natural that you never once think about the performer, but only see them as the character they're portraying. Faces is one of the best examples of this.

Looking over the notes I made after first seeing this about eight months ago, I was pretty confused by the whole thing. I appreciated it, but hadn't yet fallen in love. Now I've got a big crush on Faces, and it's only going to get worse.

Ernest Hemingway's The Killers (1964)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

Watching this film, I kept thinking to myself, "Why does this look so familiar? What does it remind me of?" At some point it hit me--the television movies and shows I constantly saw my grandfather watching.

Apparently the strategy of TV movies then was to make them as bright as possible, as the screens were small. On one hand, this hinders the experience for me as it really handicaps the visual style, but on the other hand--that of a nostalgic one--I enjoy the way it captures that TV tough guy, Saturday afternoon feeling that my grandfather always seemed to appreciate.

The stripped-bare dialogue between hitmen Lee Marvin and the wonderfully sadistic Clu Gulager is fun to listen to and natural without ever being anywhere close to boring. The story proper--Cassavetes meeting girl and later wrapped up in scandle--begins a bit shakey as we sense the filmmakers trying too hard to show us a romance evolving. Once we're past that though, the film really takes off and becomes an enjoyable ride.

Ernest Hemingway's The Killers (1946)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

There hasn't been a film noir that I've watched and haven't thoroughly enjoyed, but there are films noir that I've seen and that've left me completely floored--Double Indemnity; Sunset Boulevard; Kiss Me Deadly; The Big Heat. Experiencing the opening moments of Robert Siodmak's 1946 adaptation of Ernest Hemingway's short story, I knew The Killers was destined to proudly sit alongside my favorites of this captivating style.

The opening sequence belongs in a time capsul--two ominous hitmen walk into a smalltown lunch counter and begin bossing a few locals around. The tense, dark mood created clearly paved the way for later progenitors of the threatening--Mr Tarantino and Mr Cronenberg, you've been found out. Congratulation, Killers, you may have introduced me to my favorite opening of all time.

While we have a film that is chock full of great performances and writing, director Siodmak is clearly the film's indispensible asset. His absolutely spellbinding use of lighting, shadows, and contrast--as well as scenes dripping with his background in German Expressionism--create a noir stamp that is of the best I've seen.

Bad Day At Black Rock (1955)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.0

Bad Day At Black Rock isn't a bad or poor film by any means, but one that misses the mark on too many occassions. The biggest problem--one so large that makes the film difficult to get through--is the almost complete lack of close-ups, or even medium close-ups! This makes getting to know, understand, and feel the characters extremely taxing and, in fact, keeps even the plot at a distance. Perhaps this was create an of suspense or mystery, but that is already inherent of the story. I feel like maybe this approach was an experiment that backfired.

Despite the good performances, fascinating but ultimately lacking story, and otherwise wonderful cinematography, this was unfortunately misses the boat.

The Picture of Dorian Gray (1945)

Location: Home (VHS)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.0

I hate to be one of the "book was better than the film" types, but what can you do when it's true?

The problem with this adaptation of Oscar Wilde's novel (which I finished the other week) is that it tries too hard to spell it all out for the audience--it doesn't trust us enough. Wilde's novel sees no reason for an explination of why Dorian Gray is able to remain youthful while his portrait grow grotesque, but the film feels it necessary (and it isn't!) to invent one. At the same time, the filmmakers show a true lack of creativity in their adaptation, opting to only add to the novel in an attempt to undercut our intelligence as viewers. The single time that I felt shocked and moved by the film--and there plenty of these moments in the text--came by way of the deformed Gray portrait. "Finally," I thought, "someone has decided to take a chance with this." In the hands of a young Kubrick, for which this material seems almost tailor-made, we would be left with a film as classic as its source material.

United 93 (2006)

Location: AMC Loews Waterfront
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I wasn't sure if seeing this actually interested me, due to two concerns: would this be too difficult to watch and would the filmmakers be able to make a film both true to what happened and satisfactory in terms of a good piece of cinema?

A big "yes" to them both. Paul Greengrass and company have crafted a film completely terrifying and honest, managing to concentrate 110% on what matters most--the story. The acting, through use of no-names (or individuals playing themselves) working with completely life-like and unpolished dialogue, practically manages to break down the cinema facade by making you feel like these events are unfolding before your eyes--and it's almost too real. Consisting of almost soley handheld camerawork, Greengrass pushes it too far in the first act by applying zooms and shakes where they are completely unmotivated, but, of course, these soon come in handy when all Hell breaks loose.

No one involved is there to be showy or preachy--no stars, no big musical crescendos or hyper scores, no pretentions--I can't believe this came out of Hollywood. I never thought I'd say this, but Flight 93 is one of the best films I've seen this year.

Blackboard Jungle (1955)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

I have to imagine that this film is--or at least one of the first--in the "classroom drama" sub-genre that has emerged over the years. So, how does it fare alongside its comrades in battling the evil youth of inner-city schools? Pretty well. In fact, I think it is the best of the genre--it feels the freshest (possibly because of its age) and, often, toughest. As a film on its own, however, I think it falls a bit short.

As much as I like Glenn Ford in this, I feel like his character is often a bit too much with his crusade to educate. More so, the kids aren't necessarily corny, but rather stereotypical. The worst of the bunch is also the best in some ways--Sydney Poitier. As fun as he is to watch, his character--to me--suddenly changes his ways on the drop of a dime. The surrender of the two boys at the climax, as well, comes off as a bit unrealistic.

This film does deserve applause for its often shocking violence because it dared to go places that others didn't--it often took me by surprise.

Wages of Fear (1953)

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

My favorite H. G. Clouzot film after Diabolique, this film, to me, as an epic that doesn't deal with epic issues (the anti-epic?). I love to hate Jo and find it interesting how his character, along with Mario (Montand rules even if the folks on the Clouzot documentary said he wasn't so hot as an actor in these early years), not only change, but as the viewer you begin to see them totally differently. Vera Clouzot is wonderfully beautiful in this film, even if she was only cast because she and H. G. were hitched.

Speaking of H. G.--what a director; the French Hitchcock. The back of the dvd claims this is one of the most tension-filled pieces ever commited to celluloid and, after seeing this the first time and thinking about that comment, I thought it to be a little much. While watching this second time, however, I realized just how tense my arms and fists became as Clouzot presented me with such tense moments and sequences. That pressure in this film sneaks up on you so you don't know it's happening until the characters have barely survived--then you exhale when you didn't even know you were holding your breath. Despite the unnecessarily gloomy ending, this is a masterpiece.