To say this was disappointing would be an understatement. After the brilliance of Fury Road I was eager to see what a Furiosa standalone film might offer. I was initially disappointed to hear that Charlize Thero would not be reprising her role but it was going to be a prequel. I went in with an open mind, but felt something that I never felt in any of the other Mad Max films: boredom. None of the previous films have a strong story and it's mostly about the characters and the world they currently inhabit, the struggle to survive or rebuild a stable society. But Furiosa is just a series of action scenes that don't amount to much. Anna-Taylor Joy is not given much to build on the character and it is a lot of references to Fury Road. Chris Hemsworth is without a doubt the most dull villain of the entire series and comes across as a post apocalyptic Jack Sparrow rather than a real character. The CGI effects were terrible. I saw this in an Imax theater and the sound was deafening. I had to plug my ears on several occasions. It didn't enhance the experience with the sound turned up so loudly, which also made dialogue impossible to hear. When all is said and done I just had no interest in the characters. In Fury Road there was a clear objective and we sympathize with them, but in Firiosa I had no clue what was going on at any given moment. It ultimately just devolved into a revenge plot with the dumbest outcome. Don't believe the hype. It's not really that good. Hopefully this will be the last of the Mad Max franchise. It's a shame; it had potential to be great and possibly top its predecessor. I think it will fade away from public attention and not be as highly regarded as Fury Road.
Reviews
68 Reviews
Shortbus
(2006)
Had potential
17 May 2024
"It's like the 60's, but without the hope." This line is spoken by Julian Bond as he guides the new visitor to Shortbus. It perfectly embodies what is wrong with the film. The characters are interesting, especially the dominatrix, but there is little else but surface sensationalism. I saw this in a very crowded theatre and found it amusing that we all watching what is essentially pornography, no simulations. The shock value wears thin after a while and you start to expect something more substantive to kick in, but we just jump from one character to another and their search for some sort of pleasure. They become almost comical after a while. The only character who has any real substance in the aforementioned dominatrix, and is actually quite funny at times. I'm not offended by sexually explicit content in a film but when that's it only appeal it just becomes a curiosity. It has nothing much to say about its generation. In a culture still living in the shadow of the AIDS epidemic this behaviour seems reckless and, as the above quote succinctly states, "without hope."
Black Bart
(1975 TV Movie)
A misguided idea
5 May 2024
Whenever a film is turned into a tv series something gets lost in the translation from the big to little screen, especially when it is derived from an R-rated film like Blazing Saddles. There is a good chance that I caught this on its one and only showing back in the 70's. I have no idea if I had yet seen the actual film beforehand. I was too young to have seen the film when it was initially released and had to wait until the heavily censored version aired on network television. But watching it now it's easy to see why it failed. It's primary problem is that it isn't the least bit funny, although I'll give it credit for not shying away from the racist tone of the film and even drops a couple N bombs. That was shocking to hear. A good cast is wasted. Hearing Steve Landsberg (who is my favourite character on Barney Miller) struggling with a southern accent is cringeworthy. In our current era where canned laughter is a thing of the past it really sticks out awkwardly whenever a "joke" just falls flat. I can only the reaction of Mel Brooks and the rest of the cast thought when they saw this and probably heaved a sigh of relief when it died a quick death. After watching the pilot one gets the impression that those involved with this never actually saw the film and if you didn't know otherwise you'd never guess one spawned the other. The series has none of the inventiveness of the film. This is just curiosity now and how wrongminded tv executives could be.
Threads
(1984 TV Movie)
Deeply disturbing
16 April 2024
I've seen more than my fair share of horror films, from the early 70's to the mid 90's but none of them affected me more than that first (and likely only) viewing of Threads. I've been putting off watching this because I heard how disturbing it is and finally decided to see for myself if it lives up to the hype. In short, yes, yes it did. I actually watched it in increments of three periods. As it gets increasingly more grim I had to step away for a day or so before continuing onward. The last portion was by far the worst as we are thrown into this nightmarish world following the nuclear attacks and we witness as humanity begins to regress into a more primitive state. I vividly remember watching The Day After the evening it aired on American TV. It had its moments but looks tame in comparison to Threads. Whereas The Day After is filled with a cast of familiar actors, Threads have actors who are unknown to most of us on this side of the world and adds to the grim quality. It took days for affects of this film to fade from my mind and resumed some degree of normal thinking. I imagine a second viewing would not be as traumatic but I have no great need to see it again. Hopefully we will never have to experience this cataclysmic events. It won't be a Mad Max scenario.
2010
(1984)
One of the most pointless sequels ever made
1 January 2024
I've watched 2001 many times over the decades and not once did I think the film needed a sequel. It was complete and whatever questions that were left unanswered was intentional and not because Kubrick just forgot to fill those gaps. He declined the offer to direct the sequel. None of his films are in want for a second part. Kubrick was meticulous when he constructed his films and oftentimes would spend years with various collaborators until.he got the story just right. 2010 feels like a flat action flick and has none of the ambition of its predecessor, content to tell a rather routine story that fizzles out half way through. I saw this in '84 when it was initially released. Morbid curiosity got the better of me when I should know that nothing was going to top the Kubrick film. But even on its own terms its just a bland afternoon's entertainment that will be quickly forgotten. Without spoiling anything the fate of the Star Child of 2001 suggests something much grander than what we got in 2010. It was a little embarrassing to see Kier Dullea back as Dave Bowman. I had tbe opportunity to meet him many years ago when he made an appearance for a Q and A following a screening of 2001. I would have liked to ask him about 2010 but I didn't want to offend him. No actor likes being questioned about a film.they were in, especially when it's spoken about in a negative manner. I stayed silent on the subject. I wonder if Kubrick saw the film and what his reaction was. Either he read tbe script or did see it because he commented that "when you tell all the secrets there's nothing else left." There are no secrets in 2010. Every bit of information is spoon fed to the audience. I've read all of the Arthur C. Clarke Odyssey novels and they're all terrible, especially the last, 3001, which Frank Poole is found floating in space after spending a thousand years in a state of suspended animation and revived. Thankfully no one has adapted any of these novels and hopefully no one ever will. 2001 will remain a classic, however 2010 will slip further and further into obscurity and will be nothing more than a curiosity.
Deliver Us from Evil
(2006)
One viewing is more than enough
9 September 2021
For full disclosure I am an atheist and watch these films with a somewhat tainted perspective. This was a deeply disturbing and infuriating film to sit through, especially watching the testimonial of a mother and father when they learn that their son had been molesting by a priest, subsequently leaving the church upon learning that this priest has done this in other locations and has been protected by the church officials for decades. Even though I do not share their faith I can sympathise with their anger towards the church for betraying them. I believe that this priest has fled the country and serves the Vatican. Whether he has ever been formally charged with these crimes I cannot recall. It is truly heartbreaking to see lives destroyed and a religious organisation actively covering up these crimes, desperately trying to sweep these scandals under the rug.
Jesus Camp
(2006)
Terrifying
9 September 2021
One of the best aspects of the film is that the filmmakers avoid any narration and allows for the images to speak for themselves, neither condemning nor condoning. Whereas most documentaries have an agenda for or against their selected subject, Jesus Camp leaves it open to the individual viewer where they stand on this issue. Some will seethese people as heroes who are standing up for Christian values, while others will see a chilling radicalisation of the religious right to become a terrorist organisation to fight against everything that is contradictory to their beliefs. I've only watched the film once several years ago and still haven't recovered enough to watch it again. It is the effect on the children that disturbs me the deepest,especially the one child featured on most of the posters in such a state of anguish that no child should experience. It is bone chilling to see teachers warping the minds of the students, conditioning them to be warriors for Christ. Perhaps one day I will give it a second viewing. In light on modern times it is a subject that slight plagues us and these warriors are fully prepared to take up arms against its own govertnment in order to install a theocratic dictatorship. I recommend the film highly, but it is not an easy watch.
It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown
(1966 TV Movie)
Essential Halloween viewing
1 September 2021
I very much doubt that a single Halloween has passed without watching It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown. I wish I can recall my reaction to that very first viewing. It must have been some time in the late 60's. I imagine that it was love at first sight. Thankfully this had yet to be expanded into a full-length feature film. It is (as the other tv specials) perfect in their twenty minute run time and require no further embellishments. It packs a lot into this brief span of time. Three stories are being told: the Halloween party, Linus prepares for a visitation from the Great Pumpkin, and Snoopy is off on an adventure as the World War I flying ace lost being enemy lines. Each is given enough time to create its little world. But as I've grown older I cannot help noticing how cruel the girls are to Charlie Brown throughout the short, extending even to the homeowners who give out candy to the kids and Charlie Brown gets a rock. It was amusing at one time but seems excessively mean spirited nowadays. But it does not deflect from the pleasure of watching it. In the days before VHS, DVD,and home streaming services we had to wait for those airings. It made it all the more special.
My Dinner with Andre
(1981)
The compelling art of conversation
31 August 2021
It took me an embarrassingly long time to finally sit down and watch My Dinner with Andre. I had heard nothing but rave reviews about it from critics but for one reason or another the opportunity eluded me or I wasn't quite ready to watch a film about two men talking over dinner. It didn't seem to have much promise for an enthralling viewing. But I finally made that leap and settled down to watch it, knowing nothing other than the basic premise of Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory meeting after a long period apart. It was a wonderful experience, especially when Gregory tells of his adventures. We are like Shawn as he listens. Without any accompanying images to illustrate these stories the images are vivid in our mind. It is an incredibly life affirming encounter that we as the audience are allowed to share. Andre is clearly the more eccentric and bold of the two and we get the sernse as the film progresses that we are in the presence of a shaman, a guru, a seer. To live timidly is to not live at all seems to be the message. I cannot recommend this film highly enough. Once you have conditioned your mind to abandon the traditional style of filmmaking with all of its phoney tricks and allow the words to sweep you away it becomes almost magical.
The Legend of Lizzie Borden
(1975 TV Movie)
More fiction than fact
24 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Despite playing fast and free with the facts of the case of Lizzie Borden it is still a very effective film. Although not exactly in the horror genre it oftentimes has that vibe. It is very creepy. I saw this back in the 70's and it became an immediate favourite. As someone who consumed anything remotely scary or horror related this film fit the bill perfectly. Apart from the nursery rhyme about Lizzie giving forty whacks to her mother (step mother actually), then, seeing what she had done, gave her father forty-one. Not historically accurate but it created the legend which has endured until today. It is among the great unsolved murders. The film goes that extra mile to show that she was the killer, although actual evidence was circumstantial and implicated no one suspect. The director does a nice job recreating that time period and the circumstances which might have led Lizzie to commit these crimes. Her father was not very free with his money and lived in conditions that were out of step with the surrounding town of New Bedford, Massachusetts. Lizzie and her sister Emma stood to inherit a substantial amount of money when her father died, but would have also been split between the sisters and the step mother. But once both were killed there was only the sisters to profit. This might have been the motive behind the crime. As soon as she came into that inheritance Lizzie immediately moved into a more modern house, but she was never welcomed into the town's higher society. She was assumed guilty by some, but a jury acquitted her for any credible evidence. My own theory is that if she not directly involved she was a participant.
Fun fact: Elizabeth Montgomery is a distant relative to Lizzie. She found this out while making the film or shortly afterwards. Creepy.
Fun fact: Elizabeth Montgomery is a distant relative to Lizzie. She found this out while making the film or shortly afterwards. Creepy.
The Boys from Brazil
(1978)
Don't think about how silly the premise is and enjoy.
23 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
The idea of Hitler being cloned in modern times is inherently silly and sounds like something you'd find in a film titled They Saved Hitler's Brain. In order for the process to work you'd have to replicate the environment in which the donor was raised. This is impossible and laughably implausible. If you switch off your brainnit is a fun film and you get to see two great actors in their hammy glory. It is what is commonly known as a potboiler story and really stretches the limits of suspension of disbelief. A modern audience might find it too unbelievable and give up early on before the story had a chance to boil. I'm no geneticist but I will bet that even if you could clone a specific human the resemblance would be only skin deep and all the traits that distinguishes that person are not inherited, whether good or evil. They are products of their environment and upbringing. If you ignore all these things it is a compelling drama with a very satisfying conclusion.
The Master
(2012)
A great frustration
20 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I wanted to love this film. I went in hoping to be knocked out. But my enthusiasm began to fade steadily as the story progressed. Instead of a devastating exposé on a cult, its leaders and followers, it was more focused on their obsessive sexual and gluttonous appetites. If integrated into a more compelling story this would have offered valuable insight into these characters but it never goes very deep. I have watched the film several times. It is a very well-made film but it meanders along with no particular goal or purpose, ending abruptly. I was hoping for an Elmer Gantry type film which exposed the crooked methods of this cult. One need only read a couple books on Scientology to know that it was the inspiration for The Cause and Lancaster Dodd being a very thinly veiled portrait of L. Ron Hubbard. There are a couple deleted scenes which make the connection with Scientology clearer, but for one reason or another were ultimately removed from the final cut. Knowing the litigious nature and influence Scientology has in Hollywood it wouldn't surprise me to find out that they applied some pressure on the studio to make that connection to their "faith" a little more ambiguous. But you can watch these scenes in the Special Features section on the DVD.
The story is simple as we follow the main character Freddy Quill as he drifts from one job after another following his release from the military after World War Two. He eventually finds himself under the sway of Lancaster Dodd who is the head of The Cause, a cult which claims to be able to cure people of various illnesses. It is obvious just a scam but Freddy becomes enamoured of Dodd and his methods. They are kindred spirits , whether Dodd likes to admit it or not. His wife remains wary of Freddy but holds out hope that he will change his ways. But soon he becomes disillusioned with Dodd and flees.
I've always wondered how much of this film is actually real and how much is imagined. My own personal interpretation is that Dodd and Freddy are one of the same person. Freddy is the Id that plagues Dodd. His drinking and sexual impulses make him a ridiculous character. Dodd mocks this side of him when he is conducting one of the interviews called the Method (which is clearly a Scientology audit) where Freddy opens all his secrets to Dodd. I think this is Dodd attempting to purge Freddy from himself. He is a slave to these base impulses. He cannot move forward until Freddy has no influence on him. But this is just my own theory. It has made the film somewhat more enjoyable, although I wanted more. It is silly to complain about what a film is not or what it could have been but this is too important a subject to be treated so frivolous. As stated above we just a very superficial glimpse of a much bigger story. Perhaps someone will tackle the subject better. It seems like a waste of a great cast, especially Amy Adams who is the Lady Macbeth of the story, quietly evil and manipulating the events. Philip Seymour Hoffman is outstanding as Dodd. Joaquin Phoenix is very good as Freddy.
The story is simple as we follow the main character Freddy Quill as he drifts from one job after another following his release from the military after World War Two. He eventually finds himself under the sway of Lancaster Dodd who is the head of The Cause, a cult which claims to be able to cure people of various illnesses. It is obvious just a scam but Freddy becomes enamoured of Dodd and his methods. They are kindred spirits , whether Dodd likes to admit it or not. His wife remains wary of Freddy but holds out hope that he will change his ways. But soon he becomes disillusioned with Dodd and flees.
I've always wondered how much of this film is actually real and how much is imagined. My own personal interpretation is that Dodd and Freddy are one of the same person. Freddy is the Id that plagues Dodd. His drinking and sexual impulses make him a ridiculous character. Dodd mocks this side of him when he is conducting one of the interviews called the Method (which is clearly a Scientology audit) where Freddy opens all his secrets to Dodd. I think this is Dodd attempting to purge Freddy from himself. He is a slave to these base impulses. He cannot move forward until Freddy has no influence on him. But this is just my own theory. It has made the film somewhat more enjoyable, although I wanted more. It is silly to complain about what a film is not or what it could have been but this is too important a subject to be treated so frivolous. As stated above we just a very superficial glimpse of a much bigger story. Perhaps someone will tackle the subject better. It seems like a waste of a great cast, especially Amy Adams who is the Lady Macbeth of the story, quietly evil and manipulating the events. Philip Seymour Hoffman is outstanding as Dodd. Joaquin Phoenix is very good as Freddy.
A weak sequel to the weak first film
19 August 2021
The sole reason for watching the film is for the very creepy performance of Julian Beck. Everything else is very silly, especially the scene when the young son is attacked by his braces and wrap around his head. I was not much of a fan of the original and thought it was mostly just a showcase for special effects and not much more. It certainly picks up whenever Julian Beck is on screen. I believe his scenes were not totally finished before passing away from cancer. His expressive, skeletal face is more effective all the manufactured effects in the film. Some of the demonic creatures were designed by H. R. Giger but than modified during the actual filming. The production sketches suggested something weirder than what ended up in the film.
The Kentucky Fried Movie
(1977)
Very hit and miss
19 August 2021
As with any other anthology film there are strong, weak, and some passable. The best segment is Fistful of Yen with Evan Kim doing a spot on impersonation of Bruce Lee in a very funny parody of Enter the Dragon. Everything else pales by comparison. Even the underwhelming segments are mildly amusing and are usually brief enough that they are over before they get annoying. We can see here the beginnings of Airplane, The Naked Gun series, and Top Secret! The jokes come fast and furious with no time to register them before the next one hits. John Landis was a good choice for director and he keeps the humour from sinking too deeply in the mud. It's a goofy film that's a lot of fun, flaws and all.
Blade Runner
(1982)
Style over substance
19 August 2021
The similarities between the film and the Philip K. Dick novel are coincidental. If you read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep you are bound to be disappointed that it is nothing like the film and you cannot imagine Harrison Ford as Rick Deckard.
I admire the film more for its technical aspects and stunning visuals. I never had the opportunity to see this on a big screen. I imagine that it was something to behold. But the story itself is more or less just a routine cops and robbers scenario with some sci-fi dressings. When I first saw it it still had the much disliked voiceover narration by Harrison Ford. Many years later I saw one of the numerous alternate cuts which abandoned the narration. I found the film even more dull without it, but removing it from the final moments with Rutger Hauer was absolutely correct and gives the scene a deeper emotional impact as we project our own thoughts at what was happening. It is by far the best scene in the entire film.
I am by no means the first person to suggest that the film would have been vastly improved had Rutger Hauer's Batty and the escaped androids been the central characters and Rick Deckard given slightly less screen time, especially the flat romance between him and Rachel (played by Sean Young). It takes up too much screen time and adds nothing of greater interest to the overall story. Both look like they are sleepwalking through their performances. The truly interesting characters are those androids in search of their creator in order to extend their limited lifespan. It is a theme se can all relate to. Just when we've gotten to understand our lives it's over, and all our memories are, as Batty so poignantly states, are lost in time like "tears in the rain". But these characters are far from noble or heroic and places us in a moral grey area and suggest the idea: How far would you go to extend your life. Batty, being an android, does not have these moral obstacles and will get to his objective by any means necessary. This could have been a truly thought-provoking film but if not for that final confrontation between Batty and Deckard it would be just an over produced police procedural. The music by Vangelis is quite haunting and adds to the otherworldly quality. The film visually arresting but emotionally empty. It was the first blu-ray I bought on account of those visuals, especially being the age before CGI effects. The miniature work is awesome.
I admire the film more for its technical aspects and stunning visuals. I never had the opportunity to see this on a big screen. I imagine that it was something to behold. But the story itself is more or less just a routine cops and robbers scenario with some sci-fi dressings. When I first saw it it still had the much disliked voiceover narration by Harrison Ford. Many years later I saw one of the numerous alternate cuts which abandoned the narration. I found the film even more dull without it, but removing it from the final moments with Rutger Hauer was absolutely correct and gives the scene a deeper emotional impact as we project our own thoughts at what was happening. It is by far the best scene in the entire film.
I am by no means the first person to suggest that the film would have been vastly improved had Rutger Hauer's Batty and the escaped androids been the central characters and Rick Deckard given slightly less screen time, especially the flat romance between him and Rachel (played by Sean Young). It takes up too much screen time and adds nothing of greater interest to the overall story. Both look like they are sleepwalking through their performances. The truly interesting characters are those androids in search of their creator in order to extend their limited lifespan. It is a theme se can all relate to. Just when we've gotten to understand our lives it's over, and all our memories are, as Batty so poignantly states, are lost in time like "tears in the rain". But these characters are far from noble or heroic and places us in a moral grey area and suggest the idea: How far would you go to extend your life. Batty, being an android, does not have these moral obstacles and will get to his objective by any means necessary. This could have been a truly thought-provoking film but if not for that final confrontation between Batty and Deckard it would be just an over produced police procedural. The music by Vangelis is quite haunting and adds to the otherworldly quality. The film visually arresting but emotionally empty. It was the first blu-ray I bought on account of those visuals, especially being the age before CGI effects. The miniature work is awesome.
A Merry War
(1997)
An admirable adaptation
18 August 2021
Adapting Orwell into a purely visual medium is tricky since a lot of the characters have an internal life that is difficult to properly capture on film, oftentimes trying voiceover narration to accomplish this. It can be handled well but only for short periods of time. A novel has the luxury of not having to keep the attention of their readers with interesting images before they start to get bored. Too much dialogue and exposition is very tiresome. But Orwell wrote in a very visual style which makes adapting his books somewhat easier and still remain interesting, losing a small percentage of their context.
The story of The Merry Ware (aka Keep the Aspidistras Flying) is about Gordon Comstock and his personal war with the "money god" which brings many men to their knees. He is determined to defeat it by quitting his job at an advertising agency and devoting himself to his pursuit as a poet. Despite the misgivings of his sister and girlfriend Gordon is undeterred and settles into a less comfortable existence and finding employment at a used book shop.
I cannot recall if I saw the film first or read the novel first. Despite Orwell's dislike for the novel it is among my favourite among his works and thoroughly relate to Gordon Comstock. But the there are difference between his literary and cinematic incarnations. The film Gordon is a bit rude and unlikable, whereas the Gordon of the novel is a little more likeable. Richard E. Grant is excellent as Gordon and Helena Bonham Carter is underused as his suffering and patient girlfriend, but Orwell never had a great need for female characters in his novels and wrote them very superficially and without much importance to the overall plot. It is a minor quibble. I quite enjoy the film. It doesn't have he weight and substance of 1984 but the story of Gordon Comstock is very inspiring.
The story of The Merry Ware (aka Keep the Aspidistras Flying) is about Gordon Comstock and his personal war with the "money god" which brings many men to their knees. He is determined to defeat it by quitting his job at an advertising agency and devoting himself to his pursuit as a poet. Despite the misgivings of his sister and girlfriend Gordon is undeterred and settles into a less comfortable existence and finding employment at a used book shop.
I cannot recall if I saw the film first or read the novel first. Despite Orwell's dislike for the novel it is among my favourite among his works and thoroughly relate to Gordon Comstock. But the there are difference between his literary and cinematic incarnations. The film Gordon is a bit rude and unlikable, whereas the Gordon of the novel is a little more likeable. Richard E. Grant is excellent as Gordon and Helena Bonham Carter is underused as his suffering and patient girlfriend, but Orwell never had a great need for female characters in his novels and wrote them very superficially and without much importance to the overall plot. It is a minor quibble. I quite enjoy the film. It doesn't have he weight and substance of 1984 but the story of Gordon Comstock is very inspiring.
Fast Times at Ridgemont High
(1982)
Among the great films about the high school years
18 August 2021
I didn't get the chance to see Fast Times at Ridgemont High unti it aired on a cable movie channel. It became an instant favourite, despite never having gone to high school myself (I dropped out in the 9th grade). This is a film that I can watch repeatedly and get the same amount of amusement. It is like revisiting old friends. Not long after seeing it I found the the source novel by Cameron Crowe. Apart from the elimation of a few minor characters the film is a very faithful adaptation, but embellished due to the actors cast in those respective roles. There is not a bad performance to be found, from the central characters to the minor ones. Director Amy Heckerling does a sensational job capturing the experiences of youth, both good and bad.
We enter the world of Ridgemont High and introduced to our ensemble cast. There are no cliche bullies but each character is in the midst of their own little dramas, sometimes they overlap one another . Everyone is given there fair share of screen time, whether it be Stacy looking for a boyfriend, her brother Brad adrift after losing his girlfriend, Mark struggles with his shyness to ask a girl out, his friend Damone who scalps concert tickets to make extra cash, Stacy's friend Barbara who thinks she is more mature than actually is, and Jeff Spicoli who dreams of nothing greater than a "tasty wave". Adults are mostly absent from the film and the only prominent one is Mr. Hand the history teacher played by the great Ray Walston. He is the only thinking close to a "villain" in the story, but he's not and is actually very funny.
I could go on in greater detail of the film but why spoil anyone's enjoyment if they are watching it for the first time. Even after forty years it still seems very freash. The dialogue is not of the 80's valley girl variety, which would have really dated the film and thankfully Amy Heckerling made these characters very relatable, even if you not in their world. We are voyeurs in their lives.
We enter the world of Ridgemont High and introduced to our ensemble cast. There are no cliche bullies but each character is in the midst of their own little dramas, sometimes they overlap one another . Everyone is given there fair share of screen time, whether it be Stacy looking for a boyfriend, her brother Brad adrift after losing his girlfriend, Mark struggles with his shyness to ask a girl out, his friend Damone who scalps concert tickets to make extra cash, Stacy's friend Barbara who thinks she is more mature than actually is, and Jeff Spicoli who dreams of nothing greater than a "tasty wave". Adults are mostly absent from the film and the only prominent one is Mr. Hand the history teacher played by the great Ray Walston. He is the only thinking close to a "villain" in the story, but he's not and is actually very funny.
I could go on in greater detail of the film but why spoil anyone's enjoyment if they are watching it for the first time. Even after forty years it still seems very freash. The dialogue is not of the 80's valley girl variety, which would have really dated the film and thankfully Amy Heckerling made these characters very relatable, even if you not in their world. We are voyeurs in their lives.
The Exorcist III
(1990)
Pretentious and silly
17 August 2021
I had no real interest in seeing this film but a friend suggested watching it. My initial reaction was just boredom. But I try to give a film a second chance and rewatched it years later. My opinion actually worsened as I started to actually listen to the horrible dialogue and examine more closely the absolutely silly performances, with exception of George C. Scott who tries to retain some degree of dignity. Forget all the other Exorcist films and just allow this to work on its own merits. It fails on all levels. It is a horror film with no horror and a thriller with no thrills. It was only until recently that I heard that there were reshoots when the studio was disappointed with the cut director William Peter Blatty delivered and ordered that an exorcism be thrown in. It is among the laugh out loud moments throughout the film and had me rolling my eyes on the first viewing, especially the dream sequence. Blatty is a poor director and equally bad at writing dialogue. It is meant to sound clever and witty but it is actually unnatural and obnoxious. The scenes between Scott's Kinderman and Brad Dourif's Gemini Killer could have been quite interesting had they been written and acting better. Whenever I see Brad Dourif I cannot help but see Billy Bibbitt from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. He is not the least bit scary or intimidating. But he is made to read some pretty cringe-worthy dialogue. The bum that Karras sees in the subway in The Exorcist is far more creepy than Dourif. Everyone q dialed up to eleven and seem to be having a competition to see who can eat the most scenery.
The story, such as it is, has an evil force stalking the streets and churches of Georgetown. A young boy is killed and bears the mark of the supposedly long dead Gemini Killer. It is around the anniversary of the events of the original film, where Damian Karras sacrificed himself to save young Regan McNeil from the clutches of a demonic force. In the course of his investigation Kinderman is confronted by a man known only as Patient X who claims to be the Gemini Killer, but also Karras is among the damned. More killings occur but it all adds up to very little. The final exorcism comes out of nowhere and is laughably staged. I enjoy the original film but believe it is far from the "scariest film ever made" but you coyld tell that an experienced director was behind the camera. Blatty made only one film previous to this titled The Final Conflagration . It was unwatchable. I tried twice to get through it but failed to make it even an hour in before turning it off. The dialogue and performances were excruciating. In interviews Blatty comes across as a bombastic twit who thinks that he reinvented the wheel with The Exorcist. It's good but far from great. After the embarrassment that was The Heretic he felt obliged to save his creation. Perhaps a more talented director might have saved this.
The story, such as it is, has an evil force stalking the streets and churches of Georgetown. A young boy is killed and bears the mark of the supposedly long dead Gemini Killer. It is around the anniversary of the events of the original film, where Damian Karras sacrificed himself to save young Regan McNeil from the clutches of a demonic force. In the course of his investigation Kinderman is confronted by a man known only as Patient X who claims to be the Gemini Killer, but also Karras is among the damned. More killings occur but it all adds up to very little. The final exorcism comes out of nowhere and is laughably staged. I enjoy the original film but believe it is far from the "scariest film ever made" but you coyld tell that an experienced director was behind the camera. Blatty made only one film previous to this titled The Final Conflagration . It was unwatchable. I tried twice to get through it but failed to make it even an hour in before turning it off. The dialogue and performances were excruciating. In interviews Blatty comes across as a bombastic twit who thinks that he reinvented the wheel with The Exorcist. It's good but far from great. After the embarrassment that was The Heretic he felt obliged to save his creation. Perhaps a more talented director might have saved this.
Miracle on 34th Street
(1947)
A timeless Christmas classic
13 August 2021
The scene where Kris speaks to the little Dutch girl in her native language while Natalie Wood watches on in amazement can still bring tears to my eyes. I hope that I never become so hard or cynical that this film will never lose its charm. Some may see it as old fashioned and sugary sweet, lacking in the pessimism of the modern times but, like the other Christmas classic It's a Wonderful Life, it captures a more innocent time that must seem so foreign to a modern audience. Even if it is only a film and reflects none of the troubles of their respective eras they remain sweet artefacts of a bygone age. I think of something as mean-spirited as the Bill Murray film Scrooged and think that someone who loves something like that is going to hate Miracle on 34th Street.
It has been remade several times over the decades but I just cannot imagine watching any other version. The cast is fantastic, especially little Natalie Wood. Her scenes with Edmund Gwynne are among the best in the film and she holds her own against the veteran actor, as well as the others. Her arc is truly the most endearing aspect of the story and will evoke fond memories of that period in our lives when we did believe in Santa Claus. I cannot think of anything bad to say about the film. The story moves along at s brisk pace, there are humorous moments and a few sad ones, and it never wears out its welcome. It's among those holiday films I watch every year when they aired on tv but with dvd, blu-ray, streaming services, etc. You can watch it any time. It does take the specialness out of waiting for that time of the season.
It has been remade several times over the decades but I just cannot imagine watching any other version. The cast is fantastic, especially little Natalie Wood. Her scenes with Edmund Gwynne are among the best in the film and she holds her own against the veteran actor, as well as the others. Her arc is truly the most endearing aspect of the story and will evoke fond memories of that period in our lives when we did believe in Santa Claus. I cannot think of anything bad to say about the film. The story moves along at s brisk pace, there are humorous moments and a few sad ones, and it never wears out its welcome. It's among those holiday films I watch every year when they aired on tv but with dvd, blu-ray, streaming services, etc. You can watch it any time. It does take the specialness out of waiting for that time of the season.
The World's Greatest Lover
(1977)
An unfortunate dud from Gene Wilder
11 August 2021
Gene Wilder was a great comedic actor but unfortunately he was not a very good director. The film is chock full of funny people, with the exception of the always obnoxious Dom Deluise, and by the end you wonder why you didn't laugh more. Gene Wilder did not a very subtle touch when it came to film comedy and tended to beat the audience over the head rather than allowing the comedy to come naturally. The sole reason for watching the film is Carole Kane. Her performance is absolutely enchanting,especially once she goes off on her own adventure.
The film is a virtual remake of the Federico Fellini film The White Shiek but adds the "world's greatest lover" contest, but it does have the female character go off in search of the silent movie star who is inspired by Rudolph Valentino, who is actually a character in this remake.
The story follows Wilder as he loses job after job for a nervous tic that involves him sticking out his tongue whenever he is stressed. He and Carole Kane head out to Hollywood to enter this contest designed by a studio to boost its sagging ticket sales. Everything involving the Wilder character falls flat and never gets much more than chuckle. I cannot contain my gushing praise over Carole Kane. She plays her role in direct opposition to the manic style of her co-star. She is genuinely sweet and she has a face that feels straight out of that period of the 1920's. I probably found the film funny when I saw it in '77 but upon watching it in recent years it just does not work. It is not on account of the year of its release as proven by Young Frankenstein released in '74 and still funny. When a film tries too hard to be funny it oftentimes comes across as desperate and fails at its objective. It's worth watching but don't go in thinking it's going to be another Young Frankenstein or Blazing Saddles.
The film is a virtual remake of the Federico Fellini film The White Shiek but adds the "world's greatest lover" contest, but it does have the female character go off in search of the silent movie star who is inspired by Rudolph Valentino, who is actually a character in this remake.
The story follows Wilder as he loses job after job for a nervous tic that involves him sticking out his tongue whenever he is stressed. He and Carole Kane head out to Hollywood to enter this contest designed by a studio to boost its sagging ticket sales. Everything involving the Wilder character falls flat and never gets much more than chuckle. I cannot contain my gushing praise over Carole Kane. She plays her role in direct opposition to the manic style of her co-star. She is genuinely sweet and she has a face that feels straight out of that period of the 1920's. I probably found the film funny when I saw it in '77 but upon watching it in recent years it just does not work. It is not on account of the year of its release as proven by Young Frankenstein released in '74 and still funny. When a film tries too hard to be funny it oftentimes comes across as desperate and fails at its objective. It's worth watching but don't go in thinking it's going to be another Young Frankenstein or Blazing Saddles.
Frenzy
(1972)
"Mr. Rusk, you're not wearing your tie."
11 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Shadow of a Doubt is my favourite Hitchcock film but Frenzy is a very close second. Censorship must have been a bit of a frustrating obstacle for a director who enjoyed exploring the darker aspects of the human mind, namely murder. Frenzy is the result of those fetters being removed and he was able to get a little more graphic and show some nudity (the only film I believe this happens) that was not obscured or blurred as in Psycho.
The story is a thriller where we are told early on who is the "necktie strangler" but the "twist" is that he is actually the most likeable character and the "hero" is quite an unpleasant person. Hitchcock was never interested in those types of stories that hinge upon a single plot twist or a mystery wherein everything is neatly resolved by the resident detective. We are introduced to our two main characters Bob Rusk and Blaine and set into motion the circumstances that drive the story and a conclusion that might feel disappointing to some. The film is filled with Hitchcock's trademark macabre humour,especially one scene where the killer must retrieve an incriminating piece of evidence which might end his career as a strangler. It is both macabre and very funny. This is his most British film in a long time and is in sharp contrast to his Hollywood films. Sadly, his final film Family Plot does not follow this newfound freedom and feels very old fashioned and dated.
The story is a thriller where we are told early on who is the "necktie strangler" but the "twist" is that he is actually the most likeable character and the "hero" is quite an unpleasant person. Hitchcock was never interested in those types of stories that hinge upon a single plot twist or a mystery wherein everything is neatly resolved by the resident detective. We are introduced to our two main characters Bob Rusk and Blaine and set into motion the circumstances that drive the story and a conclusion that might feel disappointing to some. The film is filled with Hitchcock's trademark macabre humour,especially one scene where the killer must retrieve an incriminating piece of evidence which might end his career as a strangler. It is both macabre and very funny. This is his most British film in a long time and is in sharp contrast to his Hollywood films. Sadly, his final film Family Plot does not follow this newfound freedom and feels very old fashioned and dated.
And the Band Played On
(1993 TV Movie)
A heartbreaking film
11 August 2021
I have watched And the Band Played On several times and it never fails to draw me into the drama, the characters, and the failure of the government to see the tragic events that were about to explode.
The film is essentially a detective story wherein we follow the woefully under staffed and under budgeted doctors at the CDC trying to understand the nature of this new and deadly virus. In its early days it was dismissed as a "gay disease" and little attention was paid to those had contracted it. Being a conservative administration gay issues were way off their radar or concern. But then the virus was getting into the blood supply and affecting hæmophelliacs which would cause another uproar from thd blood banks for not wanting to spend money on a test that was only 40% accurate in detecting the disease. It also triggered widespread panic over the idea that homosexuals were donating blood that might or might not be tainted by the virus. The CDC had to fight all these fires while trying to find funding for their studies and necessary profiles in order to track down patient Zero. It is a devastating story, but I highly recommend reading the book which goes into details, some very disturbiing. The esamble ensemble cast is great, headed by Mathew Modine, Lily Tomlin, and Richard Geer just to name a few. The film ends with a montage of celebrities who lost their lives to the virus. No matter how many times I have seen it I still tear up, not for those celebrities but anyone who fell victim. There is a documentary about the making of the AIDS quilt which should be watched. It is a very depressing subject but it needs to be revisited, especially in light of current events as another conservative administration fails to see the suffering of those they were elected to protect.
The film is essentially a detective story wherein we follow the woefully under staffed and under budgeted doctors at the CDC trying to understand the nature of this new and deadly virus. In its early days it was dismissed as a "gay disease" and little attention was paid to those had contracted it. Being a conservative administration gay issues were way off their radar or concern. But then the virus was getting into the blood supply and affecting hæmophelliacs which would cause another uproar from thd blood banks for not wanting to spend money on a test that was only 40% accurate in detecting the disease. It also triggered widespread panic over the idea that homosexuals were donating blood that might or might not be tainted by the virus. The CDC had to fight all these fires while trying to find funding for their studies and necessary profiles in order to track down patient Zero. It is a devastating story, but I highly recommend reading the book which goes into details, some very disturbiing. The esamble ensemble cast is great, headed by Mathew Modine, Lily Tomlin, and Richard Geer just to name a few. The film ends with a montage of celebrities who lost their lives to the virus. No matter how many times I have seen it I still tear up, not for those celebrities but anyone who fell victim. There is a documentary about the making of the AIDS quilt which should be watched. It is a very depressing subject but it needs to be revisited, especially in light of current events as another conservative administration fails to see the suffering of those they were elected to protect.
Tourist Trap
(1979)
A neglected horror gem
10 August 2021
The moment I caught this on HBO in the early 80's I knew that I had stumbled onto a gem. As a fan of all things horror related this came as a refreshing change from the rest of the trash that was being mass produced during this period. When I first saw it I knew nothing about its history or that it was cut to be a PG-rated film and angered the director. An "uncut" version has recently been released which I have yet to watch and to compare the two. What distinguishes it from the gore saturated slasher flicks is that it is almost devoid of any on screen blood, but there is a little.
The story is very simple as there are group of friends travelling and car troubles strands them at a rundown museum of wax figures run by Chuck Connors. Apart from Connors the only two recognisable actors are Jocelyn Jones and Tanya Roberts (aka Midge from That 70's Show). For the most part the acting by the cast is above average and avoids the typical horror cliches and is quite creepy. There is a disorienting blend of effective scares and goofy humour but neither sabotaged the other and it gives the film a very uncomfortable quality. But this no ordinary roadside attraction. No spoils here. It's time to rediscover this film and place it among the other classics of the genre.
The story is very simple as there are group of friends travelling and car troubles strands them at a rundown museum of wax figures run by Chuck Connors. Apart from Connors the only two recognisable actors are Jocelyn Jones and Tanya Roberts (aka Midge from That 70's Show). For the most part the acting by the cast is above average and avoids the typical horror cliches and is quite creepy. There is a disorienting blend of effective scares and goofy humour but neither sabotaged the other and it gives the film a very uncomfortable quality. But this no ordinary roadside attraction. No spoils here. It's time to rediscover this film and place it among the other classics of the genre.
Re-Animator
(1985)
Frightening and funny
8 August 2021
Although I hesitant to call Re-Animator a horror/comedy but there are many moments that are very funny, but they never sabotage the scarier aspects of the story. As an adaptation of the H. P. Lovecraft story it is reasonably faithful but the story is even more gruesome and lacking the comical touches. The film is excessively gory as Herbert West experiments on various cadavers to find the right dosage necessary to resurrect it back to life. Many mishaps occur during this period, one especially disturbing one involves a dead cat, but the macabre humour softens the horrific tone. The early 80's were a good era for horror films and had several that were a cut above, made by directors who had a fondness for the genre and were not out to make a quick buck. But the era also had an overabundance of trash. I missed seeing Re-Animator when it was initially released and caught it when it aired on a cable movie channel. I sat there in silent awe at what I was watching. I knew this was going to be a classic horror film. A lesser director would have downplayed the comical aspects and made it a straight horror film. It might have been just as successful but nothing particularly special. There a few scenes that are genuinely perverse, but also very funny. If you have a sick sense of humour you will laughing from beginning to end. This is a classic of the horror genre.
The Boy Friend
(1971)
Old fashioned.....but in the best sense
6 August 2021
After the demented excesses of The Devils this comes as a sharp contrast, lacking in the sexual and bombast that mark his other films. This is a unique film that will probably not find many modern viewers. Telling the duel story of a production of The Boyfriend and stage manager Polly, these two threads will occasionally intersect in the mind of a director named De Thrill who sits and watches from a box seat, imagining how it might look on the silver screen with a bigger budget. It sets off a series of sequences that gets us away from the low-rent stage performance. It is a charming film with a wonderful cast. The chemistry between Twiggy and Christopher Gable is very sweet. For the casual Ken Russell fan it might seem very light and superficial but he was a director one always expect the unexpected. He defied any attempt at being pigeonholed as many other directors, finding a comfortable niche to crank out a repetitive series of films. The Boyfriend is that curve ball that catches you off guard. It's a among a handful of musicals I can tolerate and the songs actually add something of value to either the story or characters.
Tell Your Friends