MoveVIZ

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1965)

2009-04-26T20:06:00.003-04:00

I wasn't really sure what to expect from this movie. I knew it was probably going to be a bad "B" movie, but who can resist bodacious babes and vroomy sports cars out on the desert. Little did I realize what a treat Faster, Pussycat! Die! Die! was going to be. It's not for folks who are squeamish about seeing sadistic, conniving females or dirty old cripples who like tasty young females. The violence and lechery borders on shocking for a black & white movie from the 60's. Perhaps the most shocking scene in the film is alluded to in the movie poster included with this post -- where the lead evil wench kills a man with her bare hands. I alternated between the urge to laugh and gasp throughout the film. The audience in the alternative movie house chose laughter for the most part. I have a feeling that this movie very well could have been part of the inspiration for Quentin Tarantino's most recent, "Death Proof." If you like this sort of movie, I urge you to see it.

Zombie Strippers (2008)

2009-04-10T15:12:00.002-04:00

This movie brought back memories of From Dusk Til Dawn with zombies instead of vampires. It is as good, if not better! The plot is well-developed as far as zombie flicks go. For those who like creativity when it comes to gore, zombie strippers is right up there with the best. These special effects are on a smaller scale than "from dusk til..." but what they are is of a superior quality. Not a lot of the CGI BS either! The women are smokin hot and the men, aside from the talking cast, are meatheads, with their brains between their legs.

I must also say that there is a wicked humor throughout that tickles me. Don't expect PC'ism in this film, mostly revolving around gender, but there are a few other jabs thrown in as well. The men exploit the women and the women exploit the men, each in their own way. If you are hypersensitive, or even simply sensitive to such things, either close your eyes and ears, pass this movie by, or try to appreciate the film for what it is -- dark comedy.

Robert Englund, who is probably most famous as "the guy who plays Freddie Kruger", is PERFECT for the role as the strip club owner.

Please check this movie out if you like WELL-DONE zombie movies. I predict the director will go on to more good stuff, just as Robert Rodriguez has done.

Two Lovers (2008)

2009-04-08T21:56:00.005-04:00

Firstly, I'm not Jewish. However, not being Jewish and not knowing many Jewish people (I live in a small town. I get my knowledge of Jewish
folks from movies!), I think this movie is a template for what might happen with many Jewish families. Without saying any more about the plot, I would like to say a few words about the characters and the character development and perhaps a few other things.

Joaquin Phoenix has screen presence and star power and even has acting ability, but I think he was wrong for this role. Not wrong exactly but I'm sure another actor could have done it better. My main issue was wonder- ing if the character was or was not supposed to be a nut case. If the character was supposed to be a little off kilter, then he pulled off the role perfectly. There were a few times when he would suddenly crack a joke but the joke was not funny but more surreal. I liked Joaquin in the very beginning but as the film traveled on the resonance with him was lost.

Gwyneth Paltrow manifests her character with the same finesse she was seen manifesting in The Royal Tenenbaums. Wan. Fragile. There is not the same sense of fixedness here; more a pretty fall leaf that blows into your yard on a cold gray afternoon.

Vinessa Shaw, the "other" female lover Joaquin is torn between, is the demure, trusting, nurturing young woman who knows who she wants and will not be denied says her daddy. Her skin is translucent, the smile that plays around her lips entrances, and her artful use of eyes and head movements is joyful to behold. I would like to see her in more movies!

I about fell over seeing Isabella Rosselini in this movie as Joaquin's mother. She is a damned fine actress and I daresay can master any role that is placed before her. I would love to see Quentin Tarantino do another Jackie Brown-like film and have Isabella in it.

Elias Koteas is another great surprise for this film. Believe it or not, the first film I saw him in was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles in 1990. Since then I've seen him in Look Who's Talking, and a lesser-known film with the name Crash, directed by David Cronenberg, which has a way-different plot than the popular Hollywood piece o'crap! Elias glows in his role here.

This film is a fine piece of work on several levels other than that impressive ensemble who brings it to life. It's a sleeper, where you keep discovering new layers every time you think about it. The relationships between the characters are the stars of the show. Joaquin's relationship with his parents is painfully exquisite.

I like the location of the filming -- where else would it be?! -- and the intimacy of the sets. I'm remembering a soundtrack with at least some classical music but I may be remembering wrong. It must have been seamless. Oh yes there was at least some opera music in it. (Moonstruck flashback alert!)

Whether you are Jewish, not Jewish but can appreciate films about Jewish people, want to learn a little about New York Jewish folks, or who have ever been in love, lost love, then found it again, with a twist, you will be entertained. Thank you to the director, the actors, the screenwriter, the producer, and everyone else in any way responsible for the creation of this work. Thanks also goes to our local independent movie house for bringing another fine piece of cinema to our berg.

YouTube - Let's Go To Prison TV Spot #1

2009-03-01T12:51:00.001-05:00

Let's Go to Prison (2006)

2009-03-01T12:29:00.006-05:00

I saw this movie awhile back and had forgotten about it until recently, when I saw Dax Shepard in another film. I found this movie to be fucking hilarious! If you like gallows humor that is slice-and-dice funny, no pun intended, then you need to take a look at "Let's Go to Prison". Do not expect a formulaic film; you never know what's going to happen next. The cast is top notch all the way. Words escape me in doing a description justice, again no pun intended, so I found a review that does a good job of it. It follows:

The Prison Movie with a Shank, Not an Axe

By NEIL GENZLINGER of The New York Times
Published: November 18, 2006

The movie’s called “Let’s Go to Prison,” and its poster consists of a close-up of a bar of soap in a shower, so of course you’re expecting a crass, brainless film, a frat house behind bars. It takes a while to realize that this is actually a sly, very funny comedy, one that stays admirably deadpan every time you think it’s about to veer into gross-out territory.

Not that it forgoes a shower scene; there are several. But the director, Bob Odenkirk, and the writers — Ben Garant, Thomas Lennon and Michael Patrick Jann — all have plenty of comedy on their résumés, and they seem to have learned that restraint is funnier than excess. The camera operators too: there is much showering but little forbidden flesh.

Dax Shepard, in both his acting and his voice-over, is wonderfully droll as John, a petty criminal who is peeved at the judge who kept putting him away. By way of retaliation, he helps nudge the judge’s son, the tightly wound Nelson Biederman IV (Will Arnett), into prison, then purposely has himself arrested so he can join him there. His plan is to make Nelson’s life miserable, and for a while he does, but of course things ultimately take an unexpected turn. More important, Mr. Shepard and Mr. Arnett, though playing polar opposites and mortal enemies, make a dandy comic duo.

The prize, however, goes to Chi McBride as a large fellow who leads the prison’s black gang and has a taste for Chuck Mangione‘s music and prison-style lovin’. His character’s name is Barry, and if that suggests a certain dim-the-lights soul singer, it’s no accident; this is a jailhouse thug of a decidedly different sort.

In fact, the whole movie is that way: it serves up the characters and situations you’d expect from a prison comedy but then plays them with wry understatement. All such comedies, for instance, must have dining hall humor, usually ending in a food fight, but this one delivers its version in a tidy five words. When Nelson asks an orderly what it is that he’s dishing up, the man says simply: “That’s meat; that ain’t meat.”

“Let’s Go to Prison,” which draws on the book “You Are Going to Prison” by Jim Hogshire, ultimately has to resort to an old and unconvincing gimmick to resolve its story. For most of the way, though, it adheres to the description that the prison warden (Dylan Baker, very amusing in a small role) gives of himself after delivering a scatology-inflected welcoming address to arriving inmates. “I have,” he says, “a notoriously dry sense of humor.”

“Let’s Go to Prison” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian), mostly for language.

Directed by Bob Odenkirk; written by Robert Ben Garant, Thomas Lennon and Michael Patrick Jann, based on the book “You Are Going to Prison” by Jim Hogshire; director of photography, Ramsey Nickell; produced by Marc Abraham, Matt Berenson and Paul Young; released by Universal Pictures. Running time: 84 minutes.

WITH: Dax Shepard (John Lyshitski), Will Arnett (Nelson Biederman IV), Dylan Baker (Warden) and Chi McBride (Barry).

The Frighteners (1996)

2009-02-14T13:38:00.007-05:00

Came across this movie while channel surfing awhile back and was frankly surprised I'd never heard of nor seen it before. Where have they been hiding it??? It has Michael J. Fox in it and is directed by Peter Jackson, so it should have show up SOMEWHERE on the radar before this.

The only thing I don't like about this movie is the title! Whomever came up with it needs to be shot. It sounds like a kids afternoon special! If it would have been given a proper title in the beginning I can say almost with certainty it would have been a hit. I would love to see it re-released with a new, appropriate title.

On now to the film itself. I've included a plot synopsis and one review below that covers quite a bit. Things that most impress me with The Frighteners:

1) Michael J. Fox. TOP-NOTCH PERFORMANCE. You will never see Michael better than him in this movie. He covers all of the bases of emotions and does so with ease.

2) Portrayal of the female characters. They step way outside of the old stereotypical roles of weak window dressing that waits for and on man.

3) The plot rocks.

4) The location rocks.

5) The special effects are friggin outstanding. I think one of the below blurbs talks about "working fx" and I agree. The special effects are spectacular and not there just to be there. They are integrated into the plot and create excitement, horror, and realism. What is tricky with them is how horror and comedy have been mixed. Without the relief of comedy, the special effects might give you nightmares; with the comedy you're able to watch them without being traumatized. To be able to pull this off takes skill.

Thanks go out to the individuals involved in the making of The Frighteners for making a top-notch work that entertains from beginning to end and one that can be watched again and again with delight.

review from nbc website:
In the sleepy little town of Fairwater, a monstrous evil has awakened...an evil so powerful, its reach extends beyond the grave. Director Peter Jackson and Executive Producer Robert Zemeckis unleash a riveting thriller with the most spectacular special effects this side of the hereafter.

For Frank Bannister (Michael J. Fox), death is a great way to make a living: ridding haunted houses of their 'unwelcome' guests'. But he's in cahoots with the very ghosts he promises to evict! It's the perfect scam...until Frank finds himself at the center of a dark mystery. A diabolical spirit is on a murderous rampage, and the whole town believes Frank is behind it.

Boasting music by Danny Elfman and co-starring Trini Alvarado, Jeffrey Combs and John Astin, this supernatural chiller is so fiendishly entertaining, it's scary!

Starring: Michael J. Fox, Trini Alvarado, John Astin, Jeffrey Combs, Peter Dobson, Dee Wallace Stone, Jake Busey, Chi McBride, Jim Fyfe
Directed by: Peter Jackson

--Blurb taken from the nbc website store, at:

http://www.nbcuniversalstore.com/detail.php?p=15602

-----------------------------------------------------

Review from imdb:

I don't know what it is with horror movies, and horror/comedies in particular. Either they are huge, blockbuster hits (GHOSTBUSTERS, SCREAM) or they are virtually ignored by theatergoers and critics (everything except for GHOSTBUSTERS and SCREAM). Unfortunately THE FRIGHTENERS falls into the last category, which is a shame because it's a great, original film.

Others like M.A. Rogers have described the plot in detail here, so I won't go into it. Suffice it to say that Michael J. Fox gives a terrific, believable performance here as the ghostbusting conman who gets more than he bargained for. The supporting cast is a hoot (especially the insane FBI agent). Peter Jackson, a man who has proven he can even make a good movie on a camcorder, was given a decent budget here and it really shows. The special effects are noteworthy and are actually put to good use rather than being eye candy. While the violence/gore factor in THE FRIGHTENERS is toned down in comparison to Jackson's earlier films, the comedy is still spot-on. Jackson can do no wrong it seems.

Even if you're not a total horror fan, there should still be something here for you to latch on to and enjoy. Heck, there's almost nothing missing from this movie--romance, comedy, scares, action... it's all there. What's not to like? But don't take my word for it, go rent it and see for yourself.

-- Author: obiwan-27 (obiwan@ghosts.org) from New England

The Wrestler

2009-01-24T19:58:00.005-05:00

Saw it today. This is more than acting, folks. This is a story of Mickey Rourke in Hollywood formatting.

I can't imagine ANYONE else playing the role of The Wrestler.

Marisa Tomei is sizzling hot as a stripper and is a damned fine actress too.

The film is an excellent parallell study on Rourke and Tomei's characters. I liked the concise and cohesive nature of the plot. I'd like to see the director taking a non-linear approach in future endeavors.

I love this movie. Hoping to see more Mickey Rourke in films. Directors and Producers, open your eyes people! He has more talent in his scars than most folks have in an entire acting career.

The photographer of the second photo needs to be kissed.

"Let the Right One In" (2008)

2009-01-18T13:01:00.003-05:00

Click on the title to take you to a very well done commentary by a New York Times writer. It sets the tone for what is what I consider one of the best vampire movies ever made. It is also an exceptionally well-made piece of moviemaking. The meticulous attention to detail strikes me. The matter-of-fact way the horrors are carried out is characterized as humorous by the Times writer, but to me the ordinariness of the horrific acts chill me beyond that characteristic, and into a more ethereal realm. Is it the fear that such things do indeed go bump in the night and are not just studied whimsy from fertile imaginations?

The picture included here appears almost too colorful for the starkness of the winter environment in Sweden, where the film is made. The color of filth and blood seem almost welcome.

It's too bad that the adult subject matter make it very improbable that too many children of the age bracket of the children in the film will see how well bullying is portrayed. Just the portrayal and having others witness what bullied children are subjected to could help them.

There are so many layers to this movie that it would take a long long time to explore them all. It would be fun, educational?, and spiritually satisfying to try. The author of the book has me intrigued about how much better the book might be. I can't imagine how it could be better.

If you have enough fortitude to watch some spectacularly graphic scenes of horror, you must see this film. Thanks go to our local alternative movie house, The Harbor Theater, for bringing it to a local big screen.

The Last Supper (1995)

2008-11-15T22:26:00.004-05:00

The Last Supper is a film I had read the plot synopsis on in a few locations while browsing for something to watch that would not be too fomulaic and a choice that would be something out of the ordinary for my usual choice of watching. The synopsis has always been intriguing and I've almost watched it more than a few times. Well tonight my usual viewing partner lately fell asleep on the couch after dinner and was snoring loudly so I thought why not. I'm so glad I did! Wow.

What I can tell you right off is that you may be slightly mislead when you read the synopsis. This movie is about way more than what I thought it was going to be about -- which is about a group of friends who begin killing people who have political views radically different than their own. Without saying more without treading into the realm of spoilerdom, the movie is about friendship, human nature, understated elegance, and is damned funny in more than a few places.

I was delighted by The Last Supper because it purposely keeps things ambiguous when it counts. It does not spoon feed anything to the audience. No matter where you fall in your political views your platform is able to be heard without injecting the political views of the creator of the film. What I think delights me most about the whole movie is that it makes you think. I could see a professor showing this for a film class or a political science class and then discussing it or having the students write an essay on their feelings about it. It is what you might call a catalytic piece of art.

Speaking of art, there is plenty of it throughout, from human character study of the friends; the location, including landscaping and interior design (who knew Iowa was such a pretty place); artwork that is here and there; cinematography (good work on the film that takes place almost entirely at the house and in the yard); and excellent soundtrack selections.

The movie is highly recommended from this viewer. If you want to talk about it, or want to add your own review here, please do.

Year of the Dog (2007)

2008-09-21T10:44:00.005-04:00

I watched this movie last night, not really knowing what to expect beyond the blurb on the back of the netflix jacket. It sounded somewhat like a romantic comedy with a little depth to it. Good watching fare for a Saturday night. I just looked at imdb.com and see they offer you a chance to look at trailers for movies now. I hate movie trailers! They either mislead you on the plot or give away too much of it -- or both. The trailer I watched was both. Don't determine whether or not to watch it based on the trailers at imdb! I advise you to skip them and go straight for the film.

I will say that this is not a movie for everyone. It has some emotionally intense scenes in it. It also has a strong political agenda, which I won't go into because it will give away part of the plot.

The movie was somewhat confusing, as if it couldn't make up its mind what it wanted to be. I guess you could say it is a black comedy with an agenda. And that is perfectly OK. I wish we had more of these kinds of movies to choose from when we go looking to pick one out! It's a movie with balls, or should I say teeth, as, you can see from the title, dogs feature prominently in Year of the Dog.

I would also like to say that the film has much deeper veins exposed in it. If you have seen "Ordinary People", there is a similar feel to it. Whereas Ordinary People is focused more on the past and the now, Year of the Dog is focused more on the now and the future.

The writer and director of this film has/have a lot of courage in fearlessly treading where few dare to go with the politics. Besides having courage, the presentation is effective in that the vehicles are painfully real. There is no schmoozing or stylizing the characters you see.

The film is confusing, courageous, ambitious, humorous, and inspiring. Please have an open mind going into it, hang in there until the end, and you will feel the magic of this sleeper.

P.S. Speaking from a social work student perspective, this film would be an EXCELLENT film for a psychology class to watch and analyze. There is a lot more going on in this movie than what is mentioned above. The relationships between the characters is worthy of analysis.

Roman Polanski subject of Documentary

2008-06-27T23:05:00.008-04:00

HBO Documentaries: Documentary Films Series: Roman Polanski: Synopsis

The term documentary implies something based on documents. Facts. The truth. Isn't it funny how often documentaries show documents alright, but just not all of the documents, or maybe purposefully selected documents. Just imagine a documentary about the criminal justice system and its own brand of documentary and your head just might start training for the Olympic swim team and have a shot at a medal. Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired is a film that HBO bought the rights to and I believe broadcast starting this month (June 2008). I just finished watching it with my younger son. Throughout the viewing, he and I drew very different conclusions, not only from the events that were documented but how we felt about what we were seeing. It is no surprise at all, as a person's biopsychosocial context throws prismatic paint onto our perspectual lenses. Do I want to climb up on the soapbox and proclaim what I saw is the right way to see it? Maybe the urge is there. Will I curb the urge? Probably. What transpired for Mr. Polanski over the media and court coverage of an incident in 1977 of, at minimum, statutory criminal sexual conduct by a 43 year-old Roman and a 13 year-old child whose mother aspired to stardom and whose daughter was OK with posing in nude photos, is carefully constructed by the creator of the documentary. Just as the artist chooses brushes and colors for their painting; just as the perceiver filters databytes into a pattern that makes sense, so too does the documentarian in this work. Is it the case with every documentary? We will save that discussion for another day. I will leave it to the viewer to draw their own conclusions. Whatever you see, please watch this rendering of history. It's worth your time.

Nim's Island

2008-04-06T09:28:00.002-04:00

A friend and I went to see Nim's Island last night. When I read the plot synopsis a few days ago, I thought the plot sounded pretty good. I wasn't disappointed. What strikes me most about this film are a couple of things. One is that it is 100% wholesome! There's no sex, gratuitous violence or nudity, and significantly there isn't a mean bone in the body of this film. How can this be!? The closest thing to ill-will was the portrayal of the passengers on a cruise ship, but even then, was it a slam or an accurate portrayal. I would like to think it was good-natured fun and an attempt at throwing more humor into the film.

Not that there isn't light-heartedness galore in the first part. The critters are several, and they are not anthropomorphized as much as they are given distinct personalities that include empathy.

The little girl in the film runs the show as far as screen presence. When she's around, your eyes are on her. Abigail Breslin was the girl in the film, "Little Miss Sunshine", and she's as cute now as she was then. It's something to see how well she covers a wide range of emotions. The thing I think I like best about her is her competence.

The dad/hero in the movie, Gerard Butler, looked familiar throughout the film, but I couldn't quite place him. Boy was I surprised when I looked him up on imdb.com and discovered that he was the dude with the big white teeth in "300"! He is more life-like in "Nim's Island", but still larger than life in my view. What really impresses me about his character is that he's an outstanding parent and that he is a MacGuyver kinda guy. Anybody who likes to see what good modeling for a parent looks like and who is into gadgets will LOVE this movie. Don't worry, neither is over the top.

Now we come to Jodi Foster. She isn't the little girl in Taxi Driver anymore, but she continues to give solid performance. It's good to see her up on the screen again.

The messages in the film are that girls can be competent, fears can be overcome, and curiosity is a good thing. There are lots of other, more subtle messages as well.

This is a film that many adults will enjoy, and I can't think of any kid over the age of 6 that wouldn't enjoy it. Check it out.

Dom durakov or House of Fools (2002)

2008-02-09T08:47:00.001-05:00

Russian film, in Russian, with English subtitles.

From the blurb on the netflix jacket cover:
"A true story about the patients of a Russian psychiatric asylum (In Caucasus, on the Chechnyan border) who become involved with the Chechen War after their doctors, nurses and attendants abandon them. Amidst the turmoil, a young woman, Janna, falls in love with a Chechen soldier. Canadian pop singer Bryan Adams (playing himself) appears to Janna as a hallucination singing his hit, "Have You Ever Really Loved a Woman?"

Now if that plot doesn't pique your interest I don't know what would. The abandonment really isn't an abandonment, and the love story isn't what you might think. Bryan Adams is magic. All will be revealed once you take a look at this endearing portrayal of human behavior in "unusual" circumstances.

From Roger Ebert's take: "A film that succeeds not by arguing that the world is crazier than the asylum, but by arriving at the melancholy possibility that both are equally insane."

I don't know how melancholy the movie is. Despite the grim circumstances the human spirit shines. Leave out the word melancholy from Ebert's assessment and call it good.

Solaris 1972 Version

2008-01-27T00:15:00.001-05:00

I just finished watching this netflix arrival. Thinking I was choosing the more recent version with George Clooney, it was with uncertainty that the play button was pushed. The Clooney version is one older son really likes, but the time I watched it a few years back, it didn't make a huge amount of sense or much impact on me. This viewing was to see if it did more in both arenas this time around.

After sitting there enraptured for 169 minutes -- yes 169 minutes -- without serious consideration of a bathroom break, you may have some idea that this version may be a tad more substantial than the maudlin sap I remember from from the later version.

What can I say without giving away too much? The movie begins out in the country, with some of the most stunning nature shots I've ever seen in a film that didn't involve stuff taken from planes or helicopters. Woodlands and water shots exquisite enough to make you cry. Any one of the freeze frames could be framed and hung on a wall. These scenes alone are worth seeing the movie for. Seriously!

The man walking through the woods is leaving the next morning for outer space, to a space station in orbit around a planet that I think must be called Solaris. The focus of the planet is its ocean. The man is not an astronaut. He's a psychologist. He is investigating the few men remaining on the space station and the phenomenon described by one of the astronauts who came back from the place years ago.

This is where any more of the plot being revealed ends. Hopefully it's enough to pique your interest. OK one more thing. This film will appeal to thinking and philosophizing minds, and the questions asked will get you to doing critical thinking right along with the characters.

That said, Solaris rates up there in the must see at least once and probably more category.

No Country for Old Men

2008-01-05T01:37:00.001-05:00

I wasn't sure what to expect with this movie. All I heard was it had Tommy Lee Jones in it and was about a cowboy. When a friend mentioned she wanted to see it I took a quick gander at a plot summary that didn't give away any secrets. I had seen no trailers. You'd be better off not doing either either.

Tommy Lee Jones plays a small but powerful role. Woody Harrelson is exceptional. There are two real stars in this movie, but they aren't the two illustrious names above. I refuse to give away any of the plot, but Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem each have stage presence that unequivocally portend their presence upon many more screens in the future. Mark my words!

If you've seen any Coen brothers' directed movies you know that they can be ...... intense. This one is no exception. The plot twists and turns like a dragonfly on a hot day, and it is with delicious anticipation that one sits in their seat wondering what's going to happen next. Stay away from this movie if you're not into graphic violence.

There is a philosophical aspect to the movie that I chose not to explore on my first viewing of it. It is a film I hope to see at least a few more times.

Sweeney Todd

2007-12-23T22:23:00.001-05:00

I won't go into the details of the plot of Sweeney Todd. You can find that anywhere out on the 'net and probably already know it without even googling.

A few words about Tim Burton's production of what has been performed as live theatrical performance up until now (as far as I know there hasn't been a movie made of it previously). Fans of Burton's admirable ability to capture a tragic hero's quest for finding a niche in a cruel world -- a world that has no understanding, and less tolerance, for misfits -- will not be disappointed in Sweeney Todd.

Where there is a possibility that live performers have captured the torment of Sweeney, it is certain that Johnny Depp succeeds. He exudes torment. He is a man driven. Obsessed even. He brings Sweeney, a man who is, in all spiritual respects a walking corpse, to life. He's a man who has been driven to madness by the cruelty of human nature turned against him, yet manages to keep enough wits about himself to wreak a considerable amount of payback.

The rest of the cast shows no flaw. A short but sweet cameo by Sasha Baron Cohen, is the only splash of color other than red in the dreariness of the geographical and human landscape. The young lad who gets drawn into the madness looks like he will have an acting career ahead of him. Helena Bonham Carter, Tim Burton's long-term partner, has nailed her role as the consummately common baker of meat pies, expert roach smasher, and unrequited lover. Alan Rickman plays the perverse villain with his usual flair. I like the closeups of his face, which is gathering even more character, believe it or not, as he ages. His loyal, sneering manservant (sorry his name escapes me, but he plays a similar minion in Enchanted) adds his talents to the mix. The naives playing the roles of sailor and ward are sweet and innocent pawns unwittingly drawn in as well.

Expect lots of blood and some rather graphic violence as the bodies hit the floor.

Expect to be surprised by the pleasant sounds of Depp and Bonham-Carter's voices.

The Man Who Would Be King

2007-12-20T20:15:00.001-05:00

Click on the title to take you to the rest of the following introduction to the movie's plot:

The film begins with author Rudyard Kipling (Christopher Plummer) working in his office, his privacy is broken by the arrival of a dishevelled old acquaintance and fellow Freemason, Peachy Carnahan (Michael Caine), Peachy begins to recount the incredible adventures of himself and fellow scoundrel Daniel Dravot (Sean Connery). The film then flashes back to an earlier meeting between Kipling, Peachy and Daniel, Kipling is asked to witness a document testifying to what they have told him of their plans.

The two rogue adventurers were British soldiers stationed in India, but were expelled from the country due to their criminal activities. Together they decide to travel to the remote city of Kafiristan in the hills of eastern Afghanistan to set themselves up as rulers. The two endure all the hardships of mountain trekking and severe weather before reaching the glorious valley and it’s remote city.

This is where things really begin to get interesting. The movie was made in 1975. It's something to see Michael Caine and Sean Connery, two consummate actors who exude masculine animal magnetism even at old men today, as young, virile men in their prime. Ooh la la. And the chemistry made between these two as they play off of each other leads me to believe that they should have made a lot more movies together. They click like Robert Redford and Paul Newman clicked in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and The Sting.

The story is an intriguing one, where you can sense a great adventure getting ready to begin. It's based upon a short story by Rudyard Kipling. According to one reviewer at http://imdb.com, the mythical kingdom is not mythical at all. Doesn't that make it even more intriguing.

Having John Huston (Anjelica's dad) as director, how can one go wrong?

Go to: http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0073341/trivia for some interesting trivia on the movie.

2007-08-19T17:57:00.000-04:00

Horror Movie A Day

2007-08-15T13:42:00.000-04:00

Horror Movie A Day

eXistenZ

2007-07-04T10:25:00.001-04:00

I watched a movie the other night that was more than a little disturbing but at the same time intriguing. It’s a movie that I found out was released in the same year as The Matrix, but it got a lot less press. Canadian director David Cronenberg’s creation is called eXistenZ. Remember the port on the back of Neo’s (and the rest of the crew’s) necks? They plugged into The Matrix and fought the bad guys like it was a video game. eXistenZ has a similar “port”. Read what wikipedia has to say about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EXistenZ :

The story is based on the confusion between reality and virtual reality as the characters move in and out of a quasi-organic role-playing computer game called eXistenZ, the aim of which is unknown. The players are linked to the virtual world of the game by a console that resembles a living lump of animal tissue which is connected to the player's nervous system through a 'bio-port' drilled in the player's lower back; however, near the end of the film the gamers seem to be connected to the virtual world by electronic devices connected to their heads and wrists. The ending, immediately following that switch into what appears to be a real world in which gamers were merely playing virtual reality, with electronic devices on their hands and wrists, leaves open the question of how many layers of virtual reality are still left between characters and the real world.

The virtual world of the game features many aspects of traditional video games, particularly graphical adventure games of the 1980s and early 1990s. Some of these are explicit, such as the repetitive "loops" of actions that minor characters perform, or the need to provide certain trigger phrases to make progress possible. There are many other references that are more subtle, for example the sparsely populated nature of the game world and the physical proximity of certain locations for no sensible reason (e.g., a Chinese restaurant next to a fish processing factory in thick forest). Another trait repeatedly used is the tendency of characters within the game to perform certain actions to quickly establish their personality which, presented in a more real world, would be nonsensical, such as the soldier firing a weapon, apparently randomly, in the middle of a conversation. Clothing in the film is primarily blank colours without patterns, as with games of the time.

There is a tension throughout the film between what appear to be rival game companies (Antenna Research and Cortical Systematics) that want to gain the services of a famous game designer, or kill the game designer if they cannot gain cooperation, while a third party known as the Realist Underground tries to subvert both game companies.

The plot involves existentialist themes, similar to The Matrix. Both films were released in the same year, but The Matrix received far more attention.

Then, last month, in the local newspaper, they ran an article on something called Augmented Reality (AR). This is where you are in the game but you use an external device that projects holograms (my understanding).

Check out these sites for workgroups that have designed Augmented Reality (AR) “games”

http://www.gvu.gatech.edu/arfacade/links.html

and

http://www.hitlabnz.org/

Back to Matrix/eXistenZ type interface. It’s called a neural interface. I did a google on it and found that there is a society devoted to the development of it, called The Society for Neural Interfacing (SNI). Check out their website: http://www.ifi.uzh.ch/groups/ailab/sni/

I just had a flash. Have you seen Futurama, the Matt Groening show where the brains of famous people are kept alive, in jars, in museums? Can you see a future where our bodies may wear out but our brains could be kept alive, neurally interfacing with a virtual reality? Freaky eh?

Pan's Labyrinth

2007-02-11T10:31:00.000-05:00

We went to see it last night, late showing. The theater was sparsely populated, and we had the best seats in the house with no effort. We'd snuck bottles of pop in. I had a coupon for a medium bag of popcorn, and Bob got another bag, as well as some Reese's pieces.

We were all set to be entertained and perhaps frightened a little. Our local paper and a few online synopses characterized the film as horror rather than fantasy, but Pan's Labyrinth can easily fit into either/both genre(s).

The film is set in 1944 Spain, and was written and produced by a Spaniard, Guillermo del Toro. The language is Spanish, with English subtitles. The scenery, including magical sunlight, is distinctly southern European.

The cast of PL is impressive! The actors are unknowns to me, but I haven't seen many Spanish films, so it's no surprise. The character development for several of the characters is also impressive.

The plot follows that of a classic fairy tale. The special effects have been meticulously manifested, and you'll believe them when you see them. The sets are likewise impressive. You should not wait to see this film as a video rental. It cannot be fully appreciated unless seen on the big screen.

I'm not going to give away too much of the plot. Suffice it to say that there are heroes, villains, magic, and politics in Pan's Labyrinth. Excellent piece of filmmaking!

I went onto imdb.com when I got home. I wanted to see where it was filmed (Mexico, Spain, and the U.S.) and ended up finding an interesting bit of trivia. The director Guillermo del Toro had been making sketches for PL for years prior to making the movie. He lost them in a cab one day. When the cab driver found the sketchbook, he went to great trouble to reunite Mr. del Toro with his sketchbook. To del Toro, this was a sign that the movie needed to go forward and be created. I'm glad for that decision. See it and you'll see what I mean.

Curse of the Golden Flower / review by Jeremy C. Fox

2007-01-25T20:12:00.000-05:00

Douglas Sirk Rises from Dead, Directs Wuxia

Curse of the Golden Flower / Jeremy C. Fox

Set in 928 A.D., at the tail-end of the Tang Dynasty, Zhang Yimou’s Curse of the Golden Flower takes place largely inside the imperial palace, where all conduct is strictly regulated by the court’s elaborate system of rules and customs. The empress cannot walk from one room to another without a phalanx of attendants, nor must she ever open or close a door for herself, and even her own sons must bow and greet her as “your majesty.” Human nature being what it is, though, this strict adherence to ceremony and deference to authority is no more than a façade; when they think no one is looking, both the imperial family and some of the cheekier members of the court engage in the sort of behavior that would make your grandmother choke on her ribbon candy.

The film’s plot is based on the incendiary 1934 play Thunderstorm by Cao Yu, one of the founders of modern Chinese theater, but Zhang’s transposition of the action seeks to give the film a grand, mythic resonance, with echoes of Hamlet, King Lear, and Sophocles. Zhang has said that his central theme derives from the old Chinese saying “Gold and jade on the outside, rot and decay on the inside” — the beauty of the court is only a mask for its treachery and dissolution. As the film opens, the empress (Gong Li, working with Zhang for the first time in over a decade, following the breakup of their personal relationship) is awaiting the return of the emperor (Chow Yun-Fat) from a military campaign. Things haven’t been quiet in the palace during his absence; the empress’ lover and stepson, Crown Prince Wan (Liu Ye) has ended their liaison, to her disappointment, and has taken up with the daughter of the imperial doctor, Chan (Li Man). He longs to flee the palace for a quiet, provincial life with his lover, though both his obligations and his family’s hidden secrets will inevitably make his dream impossible. The empress, aware that she’s being slowly poisoned by the imperial doctor (Ni Dahong), has begun plotting a way out of her situation, and she calls upon her older son, Prince Jai (popular Taiwanese singer Jay Chou), for help. Prince Jai exemplifies the Chinese value called xiao — unconditional love, loyalty, and respect for a parent — but his xiao applies only to his mother. His relationship with his father is contentious — the emperor declares that he will give Jai many things, but what he doesn’t give must never be taken by force, but Jai is not a man to wait meekly for his father’s beneficence. And his younger brother, Prince Yu (Qin Junjie), still a few years shy of shaving, is precociously power-hungry, while the imperial doctor’s wife (Chen Jin) is interested in undermining the emperor for secret reasons of her own.

Zhang takes his time laying out these relationships and allowing the conflicts to bubble to the top, and the first half of the film is almost devoid of action scenes. What we get instead are sumptuously gorgeous visuals, as both the characters and the palace are tarted up in the most extravagant finery. With a budget of $45 million, Curse of the Golden Flower is the most expensive Chinese film to date, and the money is all onscreen — in the palace, a reproduction of the Forbidden City adapted to Tang Dynasty architectural style, which is the largest set in Chinese film history, and in Yee Chung Man’s decadently elaborate costumes, a combination of Tang Dynasty and French Empire. Those familiar with Zhang’s use of color in his earlier films will not be surprised by its richness here, yet it’s impossible not to be impressed by extravagant lengths his crew has gone to, creating decorative glass pillars that radiate multicolored light and filling the palace’s courtyard with close to a million flowers for the film’s climactic chrysanthemum festival. Everything about it is gorgeously over the top, much like the family melodrama that occasions it.

The problem is that the melodrama never quite reaches the necessary boiling point. Zhang takes so long to establish the complexities of the court and gives us so few characters to care about — essentially just the empress and Prince Jai — that much of the film seems like unnecessary time spent with characters we’d just as soon not get to know so well. The performances are uniformly strong — though certainly Gong and Chow outshine their younger co-stars — but how many times can we see the emperor demonstrate his absolute power without it getting tired? And the shakeup we come to expect doesn’t quite work out as we’d hoped.

There’s a lot in Curse that does work — the familial conflict, the complex layers of hidden truths, and certainly the beautiful cinematography by Zhao Xiaoding — but it never comes together in a way that’s fully satisfying. We see what Zhang is saying about the way lies and secrets can tear a family apart and how expedient choices can come back to haunt us, but the film’s action never quite justifies its scale, so that we’re left with a presumptive epic that is ultimately too narratively limited to qualify for the form. Zhang is reaching for Shakespeare but getting no further than Douglas Sirk.

Jeremy C. Fox is the managing editor of Pajiba and a member of the Online Film Critics Society. You may email him at jeremycfox[at]gmail.com.

Don't let the fact that the movie has a less than "perfect!" assessment by this critic stop you from going to see it. It's well worth seeing on the big screen.

Apocalypto

2007-01-02T11:16:00.000-05:00

A world is created in Apocalypto. A world that is, on the one hand intimate and naturalistic, and haunting and monstrous on the other. The experts can argue about authenticity all they want. As you watch your heart will pump and your flesh will crawl.

Be aware that this is not a movie for youngsters or anyone close to being a youngster.

Watch this movie and examine it sooner or later for its metaphorical similarity to the USA in the now.

my summer of love

2006-08-13T10:30:00.000-04:00

WINNER OF THE 2004 BRITISH ACADEMY AWARD FOR BEST FILM

This movie is mature, intelligent, and provocative. The characters are uncontrived. The plot seems simple at first glance -- I decided to watch it after reading a description of chick on chick action -- but it's about more. The women in this movie are breathtakingly beautiful (as evidenced by the picture I've chosen). You won't be able to take your eyes off of the screen once you start watching.

Intermission

2006-08-06T14:21:00.000-04:00

IRISH MOVIEMAKING by first-time director, John Crowley.

One of the advantages of having enough cable channels to be able to see films that may not have made it to your local movie theaters is that you get to watch movies like Intermission. Don't ask me what intermission means for the plot. You won't want to take one while watching it, that's for sure. A lot happens and the plot jumps. What a pleasant change to watch someone on the screen who is not a humongoid ego crazed nutjob.

Its very strength could also be construed as a shadow weakness in that it's almost too Americanized for comfort in the way its presented. Just watch it and see if you understand what I mean.

I will give it KUDOS for presenting the actors as speaking the native tongue with enough clarity to be understood by Americans but with enough of the native brogue to keep it interesting. None of this sanitizing of the slang to the point of nausea business.

When I read the description in the movie preview guide I was thinking it was another bumbling criminals bumble yet again and in the process you get a few yuks. Wrong. Intermission is more about the absurdity of human relationships that you can either laugh at or cry at.

The movie's hopscotching plot is quaint and endearing and downright bold. There is more than a fair amount of hilarity to it. You'll laugh your ass off if the type of humor is your type of humor.

The director is talented. Amazing that this is his first movie.

Intermission is an entertaining and heartwarming piece of work from across the Atlantic.

Steve Colbert speaks at Bush Dinner

2006-08-02T23:09:00.000-04:00

you abso friggn lootly will not believe what you will see when you click on the title of the post. I'm still trying to figure out who managed to get him on the speaker's list, but bless them. Watching the audience -- and the guest of honor -- is almost as fun as watching the speech. But perhaps fun isn't the word. Spiritual ecstasy is more like it. Please pass it along if it speaks to you. The media mysteriously (?) has tried to quash it, but I found it at google videos.

To Steve Colbert
and those who helped him:
YOU ARE MY HEROES.

LET FREEDOM (OF SPEECH) RING

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/106bg.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.usc.edu/schools/annenberg/asc/projects/comm544/library/images/106.html&amp;h=441&w=560&sz=42&hl=en&start=9&tbnid=B5zwER_uRUauJM:&amp;tbnh=105&tbnw=133&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsteve%2Bcolbert%2Bbush%2Bdinner%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN

Clay Pigeons

2006-07-17T13:25:00.000-04:00

Think disjointed black comedy. Think out loud funny alternating with gut-grabbing suspense. Think Joaquin Phoenix as a small town guy who has some fucking rotten luck. Think Vince Vaughn as looking damned striking in cowboy gear and a clean shave.

The name of the director escapes me, but the director did a fine job on the movie. It's more than the actors and the plot that makes it worth seeing. The small town atmosphere is admirably captured without going overboard.

The humor is Coen-y.
The first 10 minutes grabs you quickly and doesn't let you go until the very end. I gave it an 8 at imdb. Entertaining piece of work. The soundtrack is pretty good too. The first song sounds almost identical to a 500 miles from memphis tune.

Jackie Brown

2006-06-15T13:58:00.000-04:00

follow the link to take you to a site about the soundtrack for the movie

Jackie Brown -- the character and the movie -- RULE.

I'd seen several of the Tarantino movies and liked almost all of them and love at least a few. For some reason I'd never seen JB. Discussing the merits and demerits of Kill Bill (I say 2 yeahs and guy at work sez 1 sucks and 2 is better) and the guy asks me if I've seen it. I say no. He sez I should. It's taken me 2-3 years to do it, but DAYUM, I'm glad I did.

Jackie the character has it all: looks, brains, charm, sass, and a survival instinct that makes all women want to stand up and say yes! Pam Grier has been SERIOUSLY UNDERUTILIZED in the acting world. WHY?

Tarantino does an extraordinary job of directing JB. I'd like to give the man a great big kiss for the way he has portrayed Jackie. No slack for her. No apologies. No exaggerations. She is what most women are or could be if only men would just leave us alone. But men don't leave us alone. They own everything and control everything -- except the pussy -- so we are forced to deal with them. I applaud Tarantino for having the balls to acknowlege what's beautiful about women.

The cast of JB is extraordinarily kickass. It's a nice change to see DeNiro play something other than a leading role! Don't get me wrong though, he's awesome in what he does. Samuel L Jackson blows me away in this movie. It's hard to describe how he captures the essence of the character he portrays, but he has subtantial acting skills. Jackson's little blond surfer girl -- Bridgette Fonda -- is perfect for her role. Michael Keaton has only a bit part and seems like a weak link in an otherwise titanic strength chain. Maybe it was him or maybe it was his slimy character though...

The real star of this movie, however, has to be Robert Forster, who plays a bail bondsman who gets drawn into the plot of the movie. What the hell? I never would have thought he was capable of doing what he does in this movie. Kudos to Mr. Forster and to Mr. Tarantino for his abililty to see what Forster can do and giving him a chance to do it.

Is there anything left to say? I don't know. Oh yeah .................. SEE THIS MOVIE!

The Matador

2006-05-11T21:55:00.000-04:00

There's a reason why Pierce Brosnan has a screen life Beyond Bond, and it's the same reason Sean Connery has one -- when Pierce is on the screen you can't take your eyes off of him.

From Dr. Angelo in the cult classic Lawnmower Man, to the surprising role of SOB Andy Osnard in The Tailor of Panama, Pierce takes yet another entertaining turn as crude hitman Julian Noble in The Matador.

No matter what, we're used to that smooth lilt of the voice. Julian Noble is anything but smooth -- unless you were to ask a married woman who is looking for a little on the side -- or an "illiterate teenager who likes to suck and fuck" of course.

Watching Pierce play a crude, at times laughable brute, has some small part in the back of your mind rebelling, but the rest saying hell yeah, I like this! The too-tight clothes, the tattoo of "Mother", the messy hair, all fit the character this movie is about. Your mind keeps asking am I seeing what I think I'm seeing? In a way it lends a surrealistic atmosphere to the film.

Greg Kinnear is given an opportunity to show a little depth to his work as the sorta-sidekick-sorta-not. No more shall be said of the plot or the relationship.

Having just gotten back from the theater, there may be more to add later. I will repeat the word entertaining here and suggest you take a look at it and expect to be pleasantly surprised.

elizabeth (1998)

2006-05-05T13:10:00.000-04:00

I went into this movie with the idea it would be another period piece with gorgeous costuming, locations, olde-time language, and much court intrigue.

Elizabeth has all of these things. They act as a framework to an impressive cinematic work of art.

Cate Blanchette is one of the best, if not *the* best young actress on the screen today. I've seen her play different types of characters (A pregnant journalist in The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou, playing Katharine Hepburn in the DeCaprio movie about Howard Hughes, and now this, as Queen Elizabeth I) and she has nailed each role perfectly. In this movie you empathize with her and for everything she's going through. It takes immense talent to evoke empathy in your audience.

The supportive cast is friggin outstanding as well, particularly first class actor Geoffrey Rush (Casanova Frankenstein in Mystery Men, the tailor in The Tailor of Panama, as Peter Sellars in the HBO movie). Joseph Fiennes is fairly good as the "weak" lover. I'm guessing he is what's-his-name's brother. Christopher Eccleston (an unknown to me) plays the Duke of Norfolk with grace and power. The "new James Bond" has an important role in the movie as well, but I don't want to give away too much. Others add flavorful spice to the mix.

Back to Cate. What beauty! What ability! What an ambitious role to take on at her age and to flawlessly capture.

A word of warning: there are some fairly graphic scenes of violence.

The politicalicity of the movie is probably what impresses me most about it. It's a progressive view of old news.

Watch this movie! You will be impressed -- gahrawnteed.

Big Bad Love

2006-04-14T11:45:00.000-04:00

http://www.bigbadlove.net/

more about this film later, but for now,
check out imdb.com comments on it
it has an excellent soundtrack
the movie rulz!