Blog du Cinema

The Red Shoes (1948)

2006-08-28T16:29:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: *****

I'd been putting off seeing this since I was seventeen and first heard of it. I guess I was just afraid of not liking it after hearing such praise from the likes of Marty Scorcese. While the film didn't change my life like it did for him, it certainly won me over. The ballet sequence is beyond words--"breathtaking" or "astonishing" are practically downplaying its power. The love story worked wonders for me, too. I didn't know who I wanted to get the girl, and I can't remember ever being so split during a viewing of any other film. And the cinematography; acting; directing--yeah, they were all top notch, too.

A Child Is Waiting (1963)

2006-08-26T13:01:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 2.5

Bed & Board (1970)

2006-08-21T00:20:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

Live Flesh (1997)

2006-08-20T00:21:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

The Da Vinci Code (2006)

2006-08-18T11:00:00.000-04:00

Location: Maxi-Saver
Seen Before: No
Rating: * 1/2

Ron Howard has done an unbelievably good job of taking Dan Brown's pitifully dull prose and turning it into equally pathetic images on the screen. This whole thing is so laughable and hollow that it almost knocked me off of my seat. I found the book contained a fascinating story, but Howard can't pinch an ounce of life into this awful mess; 95% of the time I felt completely uninvolved with what was happening. This is, perhaps, a career low for Tom Hanks and, as for Howard, he already made The Grinch That Stole Christmas, so what was I really expecting?

Big Deal on Madonna Street (1958)

2006-08-16T14:44:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

Harlan County, U.S.A. (1976)

2006-08-15T13:02:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

Rear Window (1954)

2006-08-14T11:29:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

Adam's Rib (1949)

2006-08-09T10:44:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

Clerks II (2006)

2006-08-07T23:24:00.000-04:00

Location: Southside Works
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

I have no problem admitting that I was once, in my juvenile years, a Kevin Smith apostle. Naturally (and thankfully) I shed that skin and now mostly look back on those films simply a part of me growing up. So, as an attempt to relive my "best" years, I headed out to the theater and threw down my Lincoln and grabbed a seat. Did it live up to both the original Clerks and the sensation (all sarcasm there) of my high school days?

Well, not exactly. I laughed a lot and loved seeing my old pals onscreen, but it certainly doesn't hold a candle to the original. And here's the problem: Smith can be vulgar, gross, and cinematically-inept, but he earned that in the original Clerks. They weren't getting paid; the budget rested on their credit cards and sales from comic-book collections; shoots lasted all night after the close of the Quick Mart. This follow-up, however, was handed to Smith on a silver platter by the Weinsteins: Rosario Dawson; a Jackson Five song; CGI effects; digital video over film. He didn't have to work as hard and, in the end, it shows.

A Clockwork Orange (1971)

2006-08-06T02:11:00.000-04:00

Locations: The Oaks Theater
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

Brilliant as always. Kubrick should only be seen on the big screen.

Scoop (2006)

2006-08-04T23:28:00.000-04:00

Location: Manor Theater
Seen Before: No
Rating: 2.0

So here is Woody trying to have the best of both of his worlds: his new found love of Scarlett Johansson and London, and his anxiety-ridden version of himself that he's been playing for almost forty years. You figure the mix could work well--Allen has proven himself a great filmmaker--but it crashes so horribly that it's tough to even sit back and enjoy the picture's silly aspect. The story itself isn't the problem, but instead two God-awful performances by Johansson and Allen. They are so bad that I felt like I was watching one of my classmates' shittiest efforts. No kidding. I got a few laughs, but mostly I just felt sorry for them. Hugh Jackman does a good job of being tall and charming, but, c'mon, is that really so tough for him?

The League of Gentlemen (1960)

2006-07-31T23:27:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

Similar and better than both the 1955 Ladykillers and it's bizarre Coen remake in 2004, The League of Gentlemen is a really funny, enjoyable tale of a British sophisticate gathering a gang to pull off a bank heist. Nothing is taken too seriously, and that works perfectly here. A wonderful 90 minutes.

A Woman Under the Influence (1974)

2006-07-30T23:52:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

Of John Cassavetes' independent produced pictures, A Woman Under the Influence seems to be the most approachable. That isn't to say that it is any less of a film compared to Faces or Shadows, because it is certainly just as good. Gena Rowlands' performance is truely remarkable and I think, perhaps, severely overlooked as it is one of the best ever commited to celluloid.

Night and the City (1950)

2006-07-28T22:31:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

In both this and Pickup on South Street, Richard Widmark looks like, at any moment, he will pull a small blade from his inside pocket and slice you right up, all the while grinning and laughing. He is like the precursor to Alex in A Clockwork Orange--always ready to explode. There's a lot to like about Night and the City, but Widmark makes it devilish fun to watch unfold.

Hoop Dreams (1994)

2006-07-27T23:23:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

Basketball doesn't really mean a damn thing to me, but Hoop Dreams is a monumental achievement. I asked myself why, while watching, I was so mesmerized by the document of two inner-city Chicago youths and their dreams of making it to the NBA. While Arthur and William obviously share a love of the game, the filmmakers share a love for both documentaries and storytelling in general--and it shows. They construct a story that, like the best non-fiction films, could hardly be believed if not for the fact that they are true. Siskel and Ebert called Hoop Dreams the best film of the 1990's, and I don't think they're too far off.

Etre et Avoir ("To Have and To Hold"; 2002)

2006-07-27T09:46:00.000-04:00

Location: Rachel's
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

An interesting documentary assembled in a way that keeps out interviews or narration, instead letting the viewer simply observe the students and their sole teacher, Mr. Lopez. This lack of traditional documentary style is perhaps missed at the beginning, but soon enough the individual personalities of both the children and Lopez become so engaging that, when it's time for the kids to part ways for the summer, you might find yourself welling up.

Spanking the Monkey (1994)

2006-07-24T01:29:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

I've always really liked David O. Russell's first feature, but, after not having seen it for a number of years, I was thinking that it was nothing more than a funny little indie film. I was shocked but how wrong I was--I totally underestimated what an achievement this picture is. Russell really gets everything right (except, of course, the amazingly lame title).

Poseidon (2006)

2006-07-22T23:39:00.000-04:00

Location: Maxi-Saver
Seen Before: No
Rating: 2.0

A pretty forgettable big budget, disaster-at-sea movie. The only thing keep this movie from completely sinking are an acceptable turn by Richard Dreyfus and some thrilling sequences.

Dark Passage (1947)

2006-07-21T13:46:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

The first 45 minutes or so of this film dares to completely hide the face of star Humphrey Bogart through the use of shadows and--more commonly--showing the viewer his point of view. This technique just about turned me off of a similar film noir [strangely] from the same year, Lady in the Lake. I held on, though, as I knew we'd be seeing Bogie at some point.

And I think it's worth holding on. Despite it's interesting but somewhat anti-climax, the film boasts great lighting and, as previously mentioned, audacious uses of its mega-star leading man, including keeping his face fully bandanged for a lenghty amount of time.

A History of Violence (2005)

2006-07-16T23:08:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

When I saw this in the theater I missed about the first ten minutes, so seeing them here was pretty exciting for me. They perfectly set the tone for the film; I loved it.

I still think some of the son sub-plot doesn't come off as natural, but that is my only concern with this; it's an absolutely spellbinding film.

Sabrina (1954)

2006-07-14T13:06:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

I did a little bit of research after a caught a clip of this on TCM and was immediately fascinated by what I saw. What I read, though, let me down. How could the collaborative forces of Billy Wilder, Humphrey Bogart, Audrey Hepburn, and William Holden make a picture that was being deemed "a stinker?"

I wasn't buying it, and, after watching it, I still don't! I greatly enjoyed this picture and, while it may not be as daring as Wilder's other pictures, it charmed the socks off of me.

Cache (2005)

2006-07-13T15:03:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I started hearing about the last shot of this film and how no resolution is really reached. That sealed the bump to the top of the Netflix queue for me.

As I awaited what was becoming a rather infamous finale, Cache held me tightly in its grasp. Everything worked wonders for me, even the fews things that I thought would throw me: the political tie-in; the film's HDCAM shooting format; the cliff-hanging ending. Also, congrats to Hanake for actually making me jaw drop. No, really, the suicide made it drop and hang for about a minute flat.

I paid extra-special attention to the film when, according to my dvd player, there were only a few minutes left. I did catch the characters in that "Where's Waldo?" shot, and, even though the credits rolling shouldn't have caught me off guard, they did. Going over the shot three more times--as well as watching the Hanake interview--made me feel a little more comfortable with what it. It made me think and form my own opinions. I've always championed that cause.

Shoot the Piano Player (1960)

2006-07-13T11:59:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

I enjoyed this much beloved early film by Truffaut, but need to give it another spin before I rank it with The 400 Blows or Jules and Jim.

JFK (1991)

2006-07-10T19:52:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I don't even know where to begin with this one. Oliver Stone usually makes me feel like he thinks he's soooooo much better and smarter and clever than me, the viewer. In JFK, though, he manages to push all of that bullshit aside and make a film that is so spellbinding that I can barely believe it.

The way this film was approached and executed is practically a marvel. A million cameos and stars that are actually given something to do; a mind-blowing yet not obnoxious editing job; a story too thrilling to ever be cooked up by any writer; Stone's signature nicely applied instead of harshly scribbled all over the place. An astonishing picture; I'll be returning to this over and over again.

Victim (1961)

2006-07-07T01:11:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

Popular cinema tackling the issue of society's view of homosexuality in 1961 is rather bold, let alone doing so in Britian, where being gay was a criminal offense.

Victim, besides being beautifully photographed and well acted, surprisingly never manages to fall off into cheesy, B-movie territory. It's handled so well that it rivals any film made today dealing with the same subject matter. Also interesting is how relevant this film is today, what with Bush's war against gay marriage; guess we haven't gotten too far since this film was released.

The Producers (1968)

2006-07-06T00:31:00.000-04:00

Location: Home (LaserDisc!)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.0

Some funny bits, but mostly just Zero being loud and obnoxious. Brooks has a ton of great ideas, but blows most of them. And the exposition at the opening? Talk about heavy-handed.

I have to note that this is the first film I've watched from my newly acquired 175-strong Laserdisc collection. Long live the cinema, no matter what format.

Dead Reckoning (1947)

2006-07-05T15:39:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

Good film noir with another nice turn by Bogart. I especially liked him throwing grenades around the office he was trapped in toward the end.

The Devil Wears Prada (2006)

2006-07-04T23:30:00.000-04:00

Location: Destinta Bridgeville
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

Sure, I wasn't too thrilled to see what I pegged as another chick-flick, but I really enjoyed The Devil Wears Prada. The filmmakers here were able to dodge a lot of the bullets I came to expect, pulling this film steps above any "chick-flick."

Wordplay (2006)

2006-07-01T09:03:00.000-04:00

Location: Manor Theater
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

I've been really interested in crossword puzzles as of late, so this film got me more excited than any blockbuster has in years. Peter Travers in Rolling Stone said it's filled with a bit much NY Times ass-kissing, and, maybe he's right, but this is so much fun to see. The most exciting new film I've seen all summer.

Fitzcarraldo (1982)

2006-06-29T16:28:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

While watching Burden of Dreams, I noticed that I never saw lights set up for the shoots. In fact, it seemed mostly to just be Herzog, the camera operator, and the actors. It seems pretty unthinkable that he wouldn't light this, but I guess he didn't. That, the locations, and the filmstock/equiptment used really add to the [unintentional] documentary look to this. I liked it; Herzog is a truely fascinating filmmaker.

The Devil and Daniel Johnston (2005)

2006-06-27T21:21:00.000-04:00

Location: Harris Theater
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I continue my unoffical marathon of documentaries concerning tortured artists, this time really hitting the pinnacle. The Devil and Daniel Johnston pulls your emotions every witch way without minipulating you, but instead keeping you on the edge of your seat.

Director Jeff Feuzereig doesn't break any ground in terms of presenting the material like Jessica Yu does with In The Realms of the Unreal, but he doesn't have to, either. Johnston's life has been so well documented through songs, audio letters, interviews, MTV (!), friends, and families that all he needed to do was assemble it all together. Granted, a huge amount of love and admiration is required for the film to really mesh, and that undoubtably shows.

Seeing The Devil and Daniel Johnston isn't just enjoying another documentary about an extroidanary man--it's falling in love with the man.

12 Angry Men (1957)

2006-06-27T00:11:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

12 Angry Men is so remarkable that I think it will consistently blow me away every time I watch it, no matter how many times that may add up to be. Besides being packed with actors that are fun, familar faces, they turn out absolutely spectacular performances. Of course director Sidney Lumet is on fire, as well, but the screenplay deserves extra special attention for being able to so expertly weave the facts of the trial and opinions of the jurors throughout. Who knew being stuck in a hot, cramped room for and hour and a half with 12 angry men could be such a roller coaster ride?

Simple Men (1992)

2006-06-25T21:32:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

Hal Hartley's films are an absolute treat, and perhaps Simple Men is the best of his I've seen thus far.

The performances are spot on here, where you know the actors and Hartley where on the exact same page all the way through. No one quite writes dialogue like him, and, even when they try, it doesn't hold a candle to it.

Hartley maybe let's the film hang on for too long in some spots, but it's oh so worth it.

Brick (2006)

2006-06-24T23:38:00.000-04:00

Location: Squirrel Hill Theater
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

The performances in this film are really impressive, most notably the way the difficult, hard-boiled dialogue is expertly handled. Taking film noir and putting in a modern California high school would be no piece of cake, and first-timer Rian Johnson has done a fine job. The cinematography is perfect, but the pace of the story felt off to me. It felt very, very rushed--scenes often fly by and feel like they never had a chance to arc and develop. Even in the most convoluted of films noir--The Big Sleep, we're lookin' at you--the story and character gradually become warped and twisted. Here, the rocket is prematurely lit and off from the start. It's a fun ride, though, and recommended; I plan on taking it a second time.

In The Realms of the Unreal (2004)

2006-06-24T17:07:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

An extremely fascinating look at the world of reculsive Chicago janitor Henry Darger, whom, upon dying, was found to be the writer and illustrator a 15,000 page fantasy novel. Director Jessica Yu brings the story to life in the best way that she or anyone else could: through the use of Darger's paintings, writings, and journal entries. The interviews with the few people that [just barely] knew him bring a nice outsider's perspective to Darger that aren't found in his own writings.

Burden of Dreams (1982)

2006-06-22T01:32:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

Maybe it is a better idea to see the film this documentary is about first before seeing the doc, but I just couldn't help myself. Crazy Herzog; the jungle; five-year production; 320-ton boat being pulled over a mountain--it all sounded too good to push aside to watch Fitzcarraldo beforehand.

And this documentary is that good. The film is so engrossing that instances of natives shooting arrows at each other and the giant, once-beautiful ship bouncing off of the rivers' shores literally make you jump in your seat. Herzog's journey to bring his beloved story to the screen is so remarkable that you can't help but keep thinking, "Is this guy serious?" Herzog himself becomes Fitzcarraldo--steadfast; unpredictable; passionate. Maybe documentarian Les Blank could delve a bit deeper in spots, but it practically doesn't matter when what he's filmming is truely stranger than fiction.

Lone Star (1996)

2006-06-20T16:38:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

Go go John Sayles. An ensemble film with intertwining storylines that manages to dodge the melodramatic bullet of similar pictures such as last year's beaten to death Crash. Everybody is great and tons of fun to watch, especially the always wonderful Chris Cooper.

Detour (1945)

2006-06-20T00:44:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.0

People with the most general awareness of the term "Film Noir" imagine the detectives and the black and white and the hard boiled dialogue. Of course there's nothing wrong with that, but almost all films noir contain another aspect that can't be said of all romantic comedies or all thrillers--innovation.

Detour isn't a great film noir, but it is necessary for the connoisseur and it has those moments of innovation and experiment. Here it's evident in a shot where Al has to drag Charles through the mud and rain from the roadside to beneath a bush. The closeup on Al, with it's framing and lighting, was practically non-existant in filmmaking at the time.

Unfortunately, the film misses the boat by blowing a handful of opportunites where it could have been both a great picture and great film noir.

The Scar (aka Hollow Triumph; 1948)

2006-06-19T13:35:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

A Prarie Home Companion (2006)

2006-06-17T23:43:00.000-04:00

Location: Southside Works
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

Robert Altman's films don't always work with me--I don't dismiss him or them, in fact I just think there's something wrong with me when I don't like them. Prarie Home Companion, though, goes down as easy and smooth as Garrisons Keillor's voice comes across the radio dial.

It's a perfect mix of concert film and story as Altman never lets one story get more interesting than the other. I of course loved the film noir-injected subplot and way in which the ending of the show doesn't seem to be so dramatically weighing down the characters. Everyone always talks about the Altman ensembles and, really, he again lets them shine here. From actors not often given much to bite into (Woody Harrelson; Lindsay Lohan; Lily Tomlin [as of late]) to those with just recent flops under their belt (Kevin Kline in The Pink Panther--ew, dude!) they're just so much fun to watch, and you know they had fun doing it.

There's suicide, an angel of death, and the loss of beloved jobs, but Altman still manages to make the [artfully-told] feel good hit of the year.

What Ever Happened To Baby Jane? (1962)

2006-06-16T11:49:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

Any list of top 10 cinema monsters would likely include King Kong or Freddy Krueger, but the once-foxy Bette Davis, with her melting, overly-made-up face, easily deserves the top spot.

Despite the film really hinging on the horrific actions of Davis and the somewhat repetitive nature of suspense set-ups, it packs brave, wonderful performances and more than enough chills. I love that it was directed by Kiss Me Deadly's Robert Aldrich, even if I think he could have done a bit more in terms of pushing suspense.

Elevator to the Gallows (1958)

2006-06-15T14:02:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

Louis Malle's debut film is an interesting work and certainly an impressive first effort, but not one that I found overly exciting. It's a shame, but Jeanne Moreau isn't given all that much to do except look worried. Elevator to the Gallows is by no means bad and is certainly worth viewing, if not only for the improvised Miles Davis score.

Dial M For Murder (1954)

2006-06-13T10:32:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

Peter Bogdanovich, Robert Osbourne, and other Turner Classic Movie MVP's regard this Hitchcock thriller as one of his best while noting that Hitch himself would consider it as one of his minor works. I'm going to have to side with the Master of Suspense on this one as all he did was take a really good, tight play and film it (he said himself that's what he did!). It's got the Hitch touches and no one could have probably pulled it off so well, but it does lack a lot of the visual excitment of his other works. Really nice performances, though, and--this credit goes to the play--an interesting, exciting story.

D. O. A. (1949)

2006-06-12T00:11:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

This mid-period film noir, while boasting an interesting story, a decent lead performance, and exciting, then unheard of uses of photography, is ultimately hindered by instances of cheap, expository dialogue and unnecessary musical cues. It's still fun to experience, however, with its complicated, practically Big Sleep-style entangled mystery.

Fists in the Pocket (1965)

2006-06-11T00:34:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

Like an early Italian cross between Harold and Maude and The Royal Tenenbaums, Marco Bellocchio's Fists in the Pocket is an absolute joy to behold. Featuring eccentric characters and a dark sense of humor far before such things were commonplace in cinema, Bellocchio crafts a film that feels fresh and groundbreaking; a film paving the way.

The Naked Kiss (1964)

2006-06-08T01:24:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

Samuel Fuller, the notorious cigar-chomping pulp director and ex-journalist, brings murderers, pimps, prostitues, and pedophiles to the front row with The Naked Kiss--pretty racy stuff for American cinema in 1964.

Fuller introduces us to our heroine as she wickedly attacks the camera (substituting for a pimp's POV) with a shoe. It's a raging, bizarre, unsettling scene fueled even further by a romping jazz selection that, perhaps needless to say, locks your attention and doesn't let go. From there, however, the film dips up and down between inspired filmmaking and puzzling, blatantly B-movie tendencies.

These tendencies, however, go a long way. In the hands of a craftsman such as Fuller, who is a good filmmaker, they become fascinating--why were such choices made? It is a reflection of the attitudes and views of the man behind the camera as, after all, he was an autuer.

That leaves The Naked Kiss as an exemplary Fuller film (alongside Pickup on South Street and Shock Corridor) in its mix of style, pulp, lowlifes, eccentrics and a dash of curious, B-movie form.

Metropolitan (1990)

2006-06-06T23:52:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

What really drew me to and interested me while watching Whit Stillman's first feature is that while his independent contemporaries Kevin Smith, Quentin Tarantino, and Richard Linklator were busy drafting up screenplays glorifying the slacker lifestyle, Stillman aimed for the complete antithesis. His characters are stuck-up, upper class, opinionated Manhattan young men and women who turn out to be a lot of fun to watch.

They never come off as superior to the viewer, as Whitman knows his film would fail if he portrayed them in such a manner. They're ridiculous and a blast to laugh at. Kudos to the screenplay for letting the romance (or lack there of) between Audrey and Tom unfold in a way that dodges all of the bullets. It's never in your face, but instead just peeking from around the corner. Perhaps my single gripe are some of the scenes that hardly have time to get off of the ground before they end--just getting in a joke.

A wonderful little film that Baumbach was trying to make for years until he finally got out Squid and the Whale.

The Bigamist (1953)

2006-06-05T00:12:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

I reiterate: expectiations are dangerous.

For some reason I had it carved into my mind that this was a film noir, but it isn't at all. I'd have to rewatch it down the line to fully give it a fair breakdown, though I did find it fascinating this first time around. I'd never seen an Ida Lupino film and it is interesting to see the world through her eyes via cinema, especially considering she was the only female director of her time.

The transfer of this film to dvd is just heinous, which explains why it retails for about six bucks. Perhaps we should instead be thankful that that distributor has dug up this old flicks and at least transfered them, but, seriously, can't we clean it up a bit first?

Touch of Evil (1958)

2006-06-01T23:32:00.000-04:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

In discussing Touch of Evil, my Film Noir teacher said he always appreciates Welles' films because of their technical achievements, but fails to be completely drawn in by the characters and therefore the films never fully work for him. Perhaps needless to say, I scoffed at this notion. Welles wasn't capable of making that mistake, was he?

I have to tread against my principles here--shamefully, or course--and say that I have to agree with Fred on this one. Maybe I was just expecting too much from the infamous final classic noir, but I always felt pretty distanced from Vargas and Quinlin. There is no doubt that Quinlin especially is a really fascinating character, but I feel like I wanted to know more about him; why is he so evil and crooked? Hints are certainly dropped along the way, but that didn't completely cut it for me. Similarly, the Vargas backstory of him putting away drug dealers (?) and their boys coming back to get him wasn't explained enough for me. As much as I love Orson both in front of and behind the camera, his performance as Quinlin doesn't always work for me (all of the mumbling).

That being said, however, this film must be one of the most visually stunning ever produced. Welles uses angles and lenses and editing techniques that are not only far before their time, but are wildly experimental. It's so much fun for the eyes that it requires continuous study.

Mr. Arkadin (Corinth Version; 1955)

2006-05-30T01:34:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-28T22:02:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-24T01:02:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-21T02:02:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-20T14:15:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-18T23:04:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-16T23:11:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-15T23:57:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-11T23:40:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-09T02:02:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-09T00:27:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-08T22:31:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-04T22:15:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-03T19:32:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-02T23:58:00.000-04:00

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)

2006-05-01T13:20:00.000-04:00

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.

Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room (2005)

2006-04-26T15:54:00.000-04:00

Location: Home (DVD)
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

This documentary kept me interested and wanting to know what would unfold next in the story, but the only problem I had was that so much of the terminology and what was being discussed was [sadly] over my head; more of a fault of mine than the filmmakers.

I am certainly aware of the disgusting greed and dealing of the business world, but this film puts a whole new spin on it. Really, it is enough to make you sick and not want to ever look at another dollar bill.

Trainspotting (1996)

2006-04-26T12:45:00.000-04:00

Location: University Center 212
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

Trainspotting is an explosively wonderful and exciting film. I feel like at a time that was becoming really hammered down with Tarantino rip-offs and Gen-X slackers, this movie came to the US and reminded us what it takes to make an audience laugh and feel horror in a truely original way.
It's a testament to the filmmakers and actors that, in the way that this story is constructed (feeling very much like a novel--rightly so, of course), the film always keeps your attention and never lags.
Every viewing of this is a repeated fresh breath of air.

Mikey & Nicky (1976)

2006-04-23T21:45:00.000-04:00

Location: Regent Square Theater
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang (1932)

2006-04-18T16:05:00.000-04:00

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

This recently released DVD peaked my interest with its title, excellent cover design, and--mostly--inclusion in the Controversial Classics box set. At 70-some years old, would I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang resonate as just that--controversial?

I think it does if you can understand both where cinema and America where at the time of its release. Paul Muni's honest performance never creeps into stilted territory like some of the other portrayls of the early to golden Hollywood days. Even when the film fell a little flat in the middle as it tries a bit too hard to establish James's reinvented life and then again at the end where I didn't feel it really wrapped up the story, I was completely interested and continually surprised throughout. But, that ending--how can I really complain? What a brave, shocking conclusion. Maybe it doesn't wrap it all up, but it certainly stops you in your tracks. It's on my list of favorite film conclusions.

Final Destination 3 (2006)

2006-04-17T19:10:00.000-04:00

Location: Maxi-Saver
Seen Before: No
Rating: 1.5

The reason this latest installment of the FD series even gets the pleasure of 1.5 stars is the sheer absurdity of the film--and the fact that it has the sense to not take itself seriously for one moment. At least this one is fun to watch with some friends; now The Fog remake, on the other hand...

Lolita (1962)

2006-04-17T00:40:00.000-04:00

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

For my money, Stanley Kubrick has one of (if not the) greatest, most consistently masterpiece-laden track record in film history; those are strong words, but his body of work holds right up to it. Lolita is no exception with its wickedly funny and daring situations, photography on par with the other installments of the director's work, and spellbinding turns by James Mason, Sue Lyon, Shelly Winters, and Peter Sellers. A practically flawless work.

A Simple Plan (1998)

2006-04-12T13:02:00.000-04:00

Location: University Center 212
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 2.5

The first two times I watched this Sam Raimi-directed drama/thriller, I thought it was fine but it really left me feeling uneasy for some reason (not unlike Hudsucker). Watching it this time around, I realized just how stereotypical the characters are, how clumsily the plot is handeled, and how John Steinbeck is tossing in his grave due to the pitiful way in which this film makes a mockery of his wonderful Of Mice and Men in its competely unrealistic final moments. What we have here is the poor-man's Fargo.

Number 17 (1932)

2006-04-11T15:39:00.000-04:00

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

I'd never heard of this old Hitchcock before and found it interesting if only because of its director. The film itself plays out like a play (rightly so, I suppose, as it is based on one) but is fascinating due to the little Hitchcock touches that are evident throughout--dark humour, inventive cinematography, and clever ways of building tension. The back of the dvd box says "You won't want to miss the classic train sequence..." which is somewhat misleading as it is more odd than suspenseful--models are extensively used for it. Probably for die-hard Hitch fans only.

Goodfellas (1990)

2006-04-07T12:45:00.000-04:00

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

I have an almost prejudice against this film as it seems to have really climbed in popularity in terms of people ranking it almost obscenely high on lists of the best films ever made. In fact, a British magazine a few months back declared it the greatest film of all time--a bit much in my opinion. But, after not seeing it for quite some time, this viewing really opened my eyes a bit more to just how much of a tour-de-force and amazing cinematic achievement it truely is. That other mob movie (The Godfather, naturally) really seems to be the only great predecessor to this famous Scorcese work--in between these two pictures I can't recall anything great in terms of a gangster flick. The wonderful thing about that, as well, is that these two films, while both involving gangsters, couldn't be more different! The violence in this is so real, scary, and off-putting that it tends to keep me away for a while after a viewing, but what a film it is.

The Hudsucker Proxy (1994)

2006-04-05T12:30:00.000-04:00

Location: University Center 212
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 3.5

I wasn't too thrilled to have to watch this again since I just did a couple of weeks ago; my feelings are the same as they were then.

Young Mr. Lincoln (1939)

2006-04-01T15:48:00.000-05:00

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

Am I again guilty of building a film up, only to be dissapointed with the outcome having watched it?

No, I don't think so. I think John Ford does an okay job by way of Young Mr. Lincoln, but hasn't produced anything outstanding. The way he and the screenwriter structure their story is really problematic for me; the first third (or act, really) of the film tries so blatantly hard to get the viewer to love, respect, and root for Lincoln that it almost made me want to say out loud, "are you serious?" The first thirty-odd minutes are simply Honest Abe-propaganda. Not until the murder (where the photography and compositions really shines) does the film pick up a bit and the story really start. Even after that, though, so much doesn't feel right: in the court room, Lincoln comes off as pompous as he cracks jokes met with truely strange, uproarious laughter--how uncivilized was the judicial system of the mid 1800s!

The thread holding this all together, however, is Henry Fonda's turn at Abe. Even if the choices made for the character by the filmmakers came off as ostentatious, Fonda is able to channel that and bring a more modest tone to him.

The Squid and the Whale (2005)

2006-03-30T01:18:00.000-05:00

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

Upon first seeing this at the theater last December, I found it practically side-splittingly funny, but felt the structure of the film was just awful. This second time around, however, I just gave in to the sheer hilarity of the film and the power of the performances and found that I really, really appreciate and enjoy this--easily the best of Baumbach's efforts. I feel like I now understand why he approached the story the way he did, and, I'm even glad he chose this route--it is a truely unique, individual film.

My Cousin Vinny (1992)

2006-03-21T14:47:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

It's simple, formulaic, from the early 1990's--and ridiculously funny and enjoyable. Maybe it is simply a nostalgia pick of mine, but I think dearly of this movie. Too true is it that movies like this are not made anymore; it's all Anchorman or Just Friends or Waiting or some other forgetable waste of 90 minutes with that guy from that tv show about his friends and pizza. Movies used to be able to just be nothing special and still remain enjoyable. How rare these days.

Rushmore (1998)

2006-03-19T23:45:00.000-05:00

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

Oh boy, my favorite film. I hope Wes will one day be able to top himself (so much for the sophomore slump, eh?), but he's kind of hard pressed with this one. Ditto for Schwartzman and Murray.

Marnie (1964)

2006-03-19T20:08:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 2.5

I absolutely hate to give a Hitch film such a low rating, but Marnie is certainly misplaced in the recently released Masterpiece Collection. Starting out very promisingly with a truely subtle and wonderful performance by Tippi Hedren that had me from her first moment on screen, the film spirals downwardly with the marriage between her and Sean Connery (whose sometimes-British, sometimes-American accent completely took me out of the picture with roughly every word he spoke). After this point, I started thinking that Marnie was a bipolar schizophrenic with her wails and outbursts and coldsweats. The script is so all over the place with its juggling routine of one two many subplots that the main plot isn't given enough room to fully develope and breathe and by the time its climax peaks I felt like I didn't know what film I was watching. This point in the film is sadly rather embarrassing with Connery suddenly recalling moments that supposedly happened in the film (I couldn't remember them!) and Hedren doing her best with poorly handled material. How'd you go so wrong, Hitch?

**Now, I watched this over a span of three days--could that have something to do with my negative reaction? Maybe, but I feel it's somewhat unlikely.

V for Vendetta (2006)

2006-03-19T00:12:00.000-05:00

Location: AMC Loews Waterfront Theater
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.5

I found this story extremely intriguing but ended up feeling the script needed much more work; the Matrix Bros. try to cram far too much into the film to the point where it feels bogged down and muddled. Often, as scenes unfolded, I found myself completely bewildered as to why they were constructed in the fashion that they were (poory worded, I know)--the overbearing score crescendoing as a character gives us expository dialogue and the editor is cross-cutting between action taking place--pacing, people, pacing! At the same time I never felt truely invested in the story's outcome, instead feeling like I was just watching colors flash in front of me on a giant screen. For the most part, it seemed rather predictable (why put Natalie Portman in a jail cell and threaten her with death when we know there's no way in cinematic Hell that she is going to be killed off?) and so often just remarkably convenient (Stephen Rea popping out behind the subway car toward the end was laughable).
So why the at least respectable 3.5? Solid performances; nice camerawork; fascinating storyline; an entertaining two hours. It hurts when it could have been a lot more, though. These fellows should have looked at recent blockbusters like Batman Begins and War of the Worlds, spectacles that got it right, before commiting V to celluloid.

The Hudsucker Proxy (1994)

2006-03-17T15:00:00.000-05:00

Location: University Center Cinema Offices
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 3.5

In the number of times that I've seen this now (about four) I am still unable to put my finger on exactly why this never sits quite right with me. Every time I find the performances enjoyable, the cinematography and lightly breathtaking, the production design remarkable, and story interesting.

So what is it that always leaves me not wanting to return to this; leaves me feeling uneasy?

Short Cuts (1993)

2006-03-14T15:41:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I have seen Altman's The Long Goodbye, The Player, and have tried to get through Gosford Park twice, but the gentleman can just not fully win me over. I've equated him to Guided by Voices--it is something that comes with time and age. Well, GBV happened for me but Altman yet to, until I saw Short Cuts. Despite its three-hour run-time, I grew to enjoy the film more and more as it progressed. I rather like how it is anti-climactic in not bringing all of the stories and characters to a head; doing this is truer to the way in which we are thrust into these lives as the film opens and then just as quickly pushed out as it closes. Seeing the wide range of talents is a treat, especially Tom Waits, as catching him on the screen is a rarity. Maybe this is Altman's most accessible film, but that's okay, because with him that is exactly where I have to start out.

The Most Dangerous Game (1932)

2006-03-11T01:17:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 3.0

For some reason, this film is not as compelling as it needs to be, or perhaps it simply has not completely withstood the test of time. There is some nice photography and it is fun to see a pre-Kong Fay Wray practically auditioning for that famous role to soon follow, but ultimately this comes off as mostly standard fare. Maybe the short story is better (did I read it in high school?), but I think more could have been done with the adaptation. There's certainly enough story for a feature--why only an hour long, fellows?

The Devil & Daniel Webster (1941)

2006-03-09T16:33:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.5

William Dieterle's The Devil and Daniel Webster is a truely striking (and must have been ground-breaking) film; his use of elegant lighting, quick editing, and innovative camera movement remind one of Citizen Kane or Night of the Hunter. This tale of greed and temptation is constantly interesting if not usually predictable, but the real joy here is seeing how Dieterle lets his tale unfold--through graceful compositions and wonderful performances and fascinating uses of sound. Sadly, the screenplay doesn't let the audience piece together elements for themselves (Jabez comes off as over the top and completely lacking subtlety), instead opting to have characters outrightly professing their intentions and inner dialogue. These flaws mostly don't matter, though, as the film as a whole wins you over with its bold look and feel.

My Own Private Idaho (1991)

2006-03-07T04:19:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

I find this film to be really, really exciting; I feel like Van Sant has so many ideas here and is so ready to try anything and it all fits together so snuggly. Even Reeves, who, for the most part I find does a pretty poor job in just about anything, works just fine. River is completely perfect and, as I already touched upon, Van Sant is at the complete top of his game. The only thing that doesn't sit all the way well with me is the episode with Bob and Shakespeare toward the front--it feels only the slightest bit out of place and I really just find myself a little uninterested here (amazingly, Reeves does really well here--who would have thought?). I can't blame Van Sant though, because even that section still works within the whole of the film. My Own Private Idaho is a modern-day classic.

The Lost Weekend (1945)

2006-03-03T01:48:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I'd been familiar with the story of this film, but just hadn't gotten around to check it out until I caught a scene of it on TCM a few weeks back. What I saw completely sucked me in--a New Yorker in his early 30's sweating over the fact that he does not have enough money to pay his tab in a fancy bar. He resorts to stealing the purse next to him and is soon caught and embarrased in front of the whole joint--even the piano player gets in on it and leads the crowd in cheering "he stole the purse!" I thought there was something really magical in these images and character; I wanted to keep watching but I held off, knowing I had to see it all the way though.
Last night when I was able to do just that, I found that the magic of that scene runs throughout the whole picture. I never felt Ray Milland was overacting or exaggerating, but I am curious as to how people who've worked with alcoholics (and alcoholics themselves) would judge this portrayal--fair? spot-on? over the top?
It all worked for me and further solidifies why I've been so in awe lately as I discover Billy Wilder.

Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story (2005)

2006-02-26T00:40:00.000-05:00

Location: Manor Theater
Seen Before: No
Rating: 4.0

I thought this film was rather funny and well made, but the part that didn't work most for me was that I never felt close to any of these characters; I was just watching flickers on the screen and not invested in the outcome. The performances were great and I give this a 4.0 as it made me laugh and I admired how the whole idea of how to tell a story and have it unfold is twisted about. It seems that the film could have been greatly improved if we didn't have to wait so long (at least 30 or 40 minutes) for [what seemed like] the actual story of the making of the movie to kick in. Enjoyable, though, and recommended.

Bubble

2006-02-22T04:24:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I knew this film deserved a high rating in Blog du Cinema, but I couldn't decide between a four and a five. When I popped in the dvd and looked through a couple of scenes to grab a screenshot for the entry, just seeing the images of the film (or video, rather) again immediately settled the score at a solid five. Digital video has never done it for me in terms of how it appears on screen, but Bubble really turns that around. The simply pristine quality coupled with how masterfully Steven Soderbergh frames these images truely lets you take in every aspect of what is unfolding in front of you. Take this style, mix it with the performances and top it off with the writing and you feel like you're in the midst of a documentary. Any audience member will be able to tell that they are watching non-professional actors, but what they have to keep in mind is how true (and heartbreakingly monotonous) the way these characters talk is. How many times have you worked with someone like this? I felt a genuine excitement while watching this as I never knew exactly where Soderbergh was going to take me; I just knew I wanted to go.
I did think about whether I felt unsatisfied by the conclusion of the film and, I suppose I do to a degree, but isn't Soderbergh being so much more truthfull to the types of characters and the enviorment encapsulating the story by not trying to twist and turn you in a classic Hitchcock or Clouzot way? Wouldn't that be copping-out in a sense; taking what has perhaps become the "expected unexpected route" (i.e. Million Dollar Baby)?
Soderbergh further solidifies that he is possibly the most diverse and interesting of contemporary filmmakers with Bubble, so sign me up for the five counterpart films he's following this up with--I don't want to wait.

Sleepy Hollow (1999)

2006-02-21T05:23:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 2.5

It seems like Tim Burton would be one of the few filmmakers in Hollywood today to make this film work, but the mirror opposite of that is true--it's Burton's helm that ultimately makes this film fail. Him finally being able to make an R-rated, full-blown horror flick gives him too much room to put everything out there; the subtlety and imagination of Edward Scissorhands and the biting wit of Ed Wood are completely lost on this film. In fact, the only part left over of the two aforementioned Burton heyday works--Johnny Depp--is the only thing that holds together this overall unsatisfying attempt. He's spot-on and fun to watch and the art direction and cinematography are impressive as well, but this is truely only worth a viewing for the uber-curious.

L'Age D'Or (1930)

2006-02-19T02:29:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

One Flew Over The Cukoo's Nest

2006-02-15T16:11:00.000-05:00

Location: University Center 212
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

It's interesting how this film is so flawless and memorable that every other mental institution-concerned effort since is measured up against it (and always falls short). One of the classic '70s Nicholson performances and perhaps the best of that bunch.

The Big Heat

2006-02-10T02:49:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

Double Indemnity

2006-02-08T16:03:00.000-05:00

Location: University Center 212
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

The epitome of film noir. I think watching these Billy Wilder films lately have helped me to start to understand the Auteur Theory a bit more...

Sunset Boulevard

2006-02-07T02:49:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: No
Rating: 5.0

I really, really loved this; it completely shocked me. The writing, director, acting, cinematography, editing--everything--is at the top of its game. I'll write some more notes about this after I watch it a few more times. This is the type of film that, even while watching it, you can feel how many layers there are for peeling back and revealing more.

Drugstore Cowboy (1989)

2006-02-03T02:59:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 5.0

Air Force One

2006-02-01T16:13:00.000-05:00

Location: University Center 212
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 1.0

I was looking forward to watching this as I'd only seen it once before upon its initial release and remember, to a degree, thinking it not that bad. Mere moments into this film, however, my illusion of accepting this as being one of the better big-budget Hollywood action flicks (like Die Hard, for example) was completely shattered. This film is so abominable and trite that it turned into the funniest movie I've seen in quite some time. My classmates and I laughed out loud and in unison as people were thoughtlessly maimed by director Wolfgang Petersen via Russian gunmen. The single, solitary star that this cinematic stain earned is due completely to Gary Oldman's portrayal of the evil leader--you can tell he had fun taking him over the top. Get together with a theater of people, pop in AFO, and watch the cheese drip from the screen.

Au Hasard Balthazar

2006-02-01T00:23:00.000-05:00

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

I don't think I can fairly rate this because I feel like there is just too much happening this film to pin down after simply one viewing.

Repo Man (1984)

2006-01-29T21:45:00.000-05:00

Location: Home
Seen Before: Yes
Rating: 4.5