deng43 Reviews

Common Wealth (2000)

ham-fisted

[5/10 · 31 October 2009]

if the comments were more evenly matched, fabulous vs. junk, i wouldn't bother, but there seems to be close to a consensus that this is a wonderful movie. not! the balancing pov is that this movie lacks any subtlety, has no nuance, keeps slapping you in the face when a little hint might have served to whet your appetite.

i confess that i came to this film to see maura; her work with almodovar is grand, this is not. i can only blame the director here. he belongs to some school of heavy-handed slapstickish comedy. three stooges fans might enjoy it. i did not.

the film's basic premise is well-used, but doesn't mean a fine movie couldn't be made from it. the screenwriter needed to calm down and stop shouting out what was going on. the director needed to stop directing the actors, asking for a bit more emphasis. the man needs to learn the meaning of nuance. don e.

Faith (1994)

another solid entertainment from bbc

[8/10 · 18 February 2009]

i came to this seeking more susannah harker after seeing her in 'heat of the sun' and 'prime minister' and finding her captivating. almost all her work is for t.v.; this may be a blessing as if the movies discover her things might go south - movies can have that effect.

the entire cast is very good. gambon never lets us down and hannah is quite believable. i daresay none of the roles are badly cast. the script is written for real people, not mumbling wooden dummies - my main problem with most film is the lack of an intelligent and fun script. this one hits on all counts.

the plot is fairly standard but quite well done and this film comes up as very worthwhile viewing. a solid 8 out of 10; it won't change your life but will please you for a bit of time. bbc is simply the standard by which all else should be judged.

very odd how thinly seen and reviewed this piece is. don e.

I Went To (2000)

hammett-san, is that you behind the mask?

[7/10 · 13 July 2008]

someone calls this a detective story, and that is apt. the film reminds me very much of an American detective tale, something hammett might have written, but it is effortlessly translated into another world, one of swords and sake.

there is one point, a night shot, when the magistrate has first entered the corrupt town he is to clean up, and the camera catches faces that reek of depravity, hopelessness, vacancy; these are the seedy, misbegotten, down-and-out characters of a low rent street of burst dreams; it is an almost noir shot of the underbelly. for a moment you are in some other movie, a bleaker seemingly more modern place where concrete hems the characters in and no escape exists. it is a very western shot in the value judgments it makes for the viewer. the shot is jarring and you never have to ask again why this place needs to be cleaned up.

the main characters come off with a western outlook quite often. the geisha who tracks the magistrate is a regular hell-on-wheels girl who knows about life and has the bit in her teeth - maybe almost a harlow part. the magistrate really lacks the veneration and gravity you will find in any similar Japanese movie that features clans, a hierarchy, bushido, men of status and the formality normally associated with samurai society. the protagonist is a trickster and an irreverent scoffer. it is nearly sam spade looking for lew archer's killer.

i found the flic to be a really nice mix of western attitudes and samurai story in a comedic melange that was not in the least bit overdone or offsetting.

i give it a seven because i didn't "love" the movie, but i did like it a lot and will watch it again.

The Furies (1950)

over-hyped, over-blown, and scholcky

[5/10 · 2 July 2008]

just have to add some leavening to the loaf of praise this film is getting on IMDb. the film is difficult to sit thru; you don't quite know where it is going - which should be a plus, except you don't really care. each performer seems to enter the set with the avowed intention of being larger and hammier than anyone else in the take. these are performers i like, usually, but their bloated excesses are pretty boring here. i suppose the film wanted to show the swaggering folk who tamed a raw land, but the result is ridiculous.

the one performance i found convincing and liked was anderson's; her scenes with stanwyck bring out the best in them both, at least until stanwyck's fling with the scissors.

if you liked lust in the dust, aka 'duel in the sun' the sprawling sort of movie with elbows and egos flying then this might actually be your cup of tea.

Dreams (1990)

OK , all together now....

[8/10 · 11 April 2008]

this is not particularly my type of film. i prefer entire stories to vignettes. that said i would comment that most of these 'dreams' would serve as a very strong presence in a larger film. in their own right they are compelling. what comes out strongly in these episodes is an aspect of Japanese culture that westerners are liable to cringe from, laugh at, or just not get at all. i am certainly in that category as i can look at Japanese culture, and as much as i love Japanese cinema, scoff at the ant-like antics. what kind of people are these, i ask? where is there independence? individuality? of course, this line of questioning misses the point that Japanese culture has a strong flavor of social cohesion that we in the west are taken aback by. my point here is that in some of these 'dreams' kurosawa captures this ritualistic social effort with telling beauty. it is impossible not to be quite taken with the fox's wedding procession, the platoon of the dead, and the funeral march. wonderful scenes whether we quite grasp their significance or not. if you like busby berkeley then you should see this film; it offers busby taken to a much higher level.

Ran (1985)

not really Shakespeare

[7/10 · 6 April 2008]

a peerless cinematic/visual experience. i can name very few films that have even a couple of scenes to compare; lawrence of arabia does, but the list is tiny. and this film just keeps them coming and coming.

my reason for a seven is that the film is a failure as Shakespeare. being sadly monolingual i cannot speak to the stunning beauty that other languages probably offer when crafted in the right hands, and maybe the Japanese language version of this sings as sweetly as william does in English... toward the end when the fool rails against the gods i heard my wife mutter: 'as flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; they kill us for sport.' now that hits an English speaker full on. the fools rant, though meant to express the same thought is comparatively empty.

this brings me to another reviewer's point: Shakespeare's very language evokes the images needed to bring life to the ideas right inside your mind with a sort of 'uhuh!' flash. he pours into your ear his gold and the empty stage comes alive. kurosawa is trying to do this with the images foremost. they are beautiful beyond words. it is stunning. but it isn't Shakespeare. we have the ideas like vanity and treachery, we have the wonderful visuals framing them, and we have the actors coming across in maxed-out melodrama mode. This is not madness, not a soul seething with demons. it is histrionic flailing.

i think perhaps the Japanese cultural approach to the very idea of madness is not accessible to us in our usual western terms. it may be that an appearance of high melodrama is as close as we can come on this issue. the cultures simply don't see the same thing when they look. the film makes me glad bette davis never did Shakespeare.

sorry, kurosawa fans, i love him, too, but this one misses as badly on the verbal level as it transcends on the visual.

Lemon Sky (1988)

a jaundiced view of family life

[9/10 · 4 April 2008]

to start, this is one terrific film. i have always held that the 'happy childhood' is a shuck sold by hypocrites and blind midgets to folk afraid to disagree with their betters.

i recognize this family absolutely, and i am betting many others will as well, because the people in it are not all that unusual or rare. i was a bit put off by the netflix description: "a troubled young man trying to come to terms with his abusive hardscrabble upbringing." what a load of bunk; i truly think this comes damn close to how many of us were raised, and it wasn't hardscrabble - it was middle class.

the viewpoint shifts in and out as the audience gets talked to directly some of the time, but i didn't find there to be any confusion. it is masterfully presented, smooth as the proverbial baby's butt. all the actors realize their roles with aplomb. they are the parts they play.

get it and see it. you may not like it at all, but give it a chance. there is a lot of pain in the truth here. don e.

The Warrior (2001)

fine piece of film making - give it a ten

[10/10 · 18 March 2008]

this does seem to be a polarizing experience; reviews are largely either vehemently condemning or fervidly favorable. add me the the latter list. an exceptionally beautiful work that held me riveted in place.

complaints arise of the 'thin plot'. no, it is not a winding, twisted and tortured trip - all of which can make for a really great movie, but then it is not based on sophisticated dialogue and witty surprises. there is a very small mystical-overlay moment; it should not get in anyone's way; the film is not preaching to us, admonishing us, or trying to enlighten us. it is a very simple narrative presentation. the violence is brief but - well, violent.

there is one central idea: the protagonist is, or believes/hopes himself to be, finished with his erstwhile brutal and thoughtless life. the story of his decision and trip home follows; there are consequences for him. he meets, helps, and is helped by various folk along the way. maybe the film offers a hint of redemption; i'm not really sure. you don't get hit over the head here with "big" ideas.

which brings me to the point of the film's simplicity. what you find in it as 'message' may have more to do with your own expectations and views of life than anything the film is trying to feed to you.

it is a marvelous film in large part because of the actors who must carry loads of emotion with few words. the faces, the nuanced looks, even the blank looks, all captivated me. the absolutely human element, communication at its most basic, quite grabbed my attention. this is not a culture most of us will understand too well. while the faces are assuredly human and are conveying emotions we understand we cannot always be sure just why. that context, the culture behind their actions, is elusive.

not to outdo myself, but the photography is superb. this is a far better movie than many would have you believe. boring??? not! slow? like a heartbeat.

have to add a note: many are the disappointed cultural, geographical and historical purists who become inflamed at factual inaccuracies. they feel that these malaprops are pure sloppiness and so detract from the film's worth. if you are this ilk try looking at this as all made-up, a blending of times and periods meant to convey no specific place or era but one that sets a mood. the mood is make-believe, a place in the artists head, not a botched history lesson. seen more fictionally it might set better with those who tend to view more with the intellect than the imagination. don't let what was, or is, get in the way of what can be imagined. you lose if you do.

Becket (1964)

has some deficits

[7/10 · 23 February 2008]

i scanned thru all the comments again after seeing the movie tonight, wondering if anyone at all saw the same film i did; the only one i found who had goes by irish23. i watched the film for two reasons: IMDb's stunning reviews, and my own wish to see an earlier henry from o'toole. just a few nights ago i had watched lion in winter.

the comparison was not kind to becket; this film disappoints. after all the sterling reviews posted here i hesitate to swim against the river, but this is a movie that had it all coming out of the gate and missed its mark. i'm not advising anyone to not see it; just be prepared for a more mediocre film than you might have been expecting.

both of these leads are capable of really superb performances, none better, and neither were given leeway in this movie to show that talent. i think maybe the direction is the main problem, but the writing in lion in winter is very superior. where lion in winter just cuts, jars, shakes and amazes you constantly with great dialogue and memorable scenes this movie comes off as jumpy, incomplete, sometimes stilted and occasionally rather histrionic. i am a great fan of both these actors and it is a disappointment to me to say all this. by all means watch it, but do so in fair proximity to lion in winter and see what you think of the comparison. don e.

The General Died at Dawn (1936)

a heavy handed let-down

[4/10 · 2 February 2008]

i sat down with good expectations - what wasn't to like? the mysterious orient, a fine cast, a capable director, odets at work on the script...

let's start with the script: the lines he had to mouth over and over made cooper sound like an automated propaganda-doll getting its string pulled till it frayed. he was absolutely tiresome in his protestations of good intentions against a backdrop of evil times; i think it must be a feat to write lines that cooper couldn't make seem fresh, lines that he could dust with a laconic wit. i can only imagine that the agenda beneath all this was to lay bare the evils of the rapacious, fascist warlords for folks at home too depressed to much care about how someone else was also having troubles getting dinner on the table; the script certainly was making a wooden effort to go beyond mere entertainment and to politically educate. no subtlety, no finesse, no nuance was wasted on this script. where some dry wit, as in casablanca, might have told the tale we are treated to lectures.

so, that is my complaint. i liked the actors. they certainly did their best with the material, but this ain't no 'for whom the bells toll' - and maybe it could have been.... don e.

A Railway Station for Two (1983)

nicely done

[8/10 · 27 September 2007]

i watch the actors, lyudmila as vera in particular, and i wish they could make more films that i could access. meryl streep, whom i like very much, hasn't got a thing on lyudmila; this is one vibrant and vivid actress with a face the camera loves to love.

the movie seemed very french to me; my wife thought Italian. at any rate it is not an American film. the sensibility is far more oblique and understated. i recall a stephen rea film about the ussr where he is a detective tracking down a serial killer; i think that movie really tries to portray what life must be like in Russia, but finally it is really just a cliché when compared to this film. this movie breathes 'other' and we must switch gears to attempt to see who these folk are and what they are about. a very fine bit of film making that satisfies all the way thru.

Gorky 1: The Childhood of Maxim Gorky (1938)

a tough time to come of age

[7/10 · 6 August 2007]

another viewer commented on the lack of propaganda; that caught my eye, too, because this is a soviet film about czarist Russia. the soviets were surprisingly even-handed on this one. the only overtly political comment i picked up was when the police arrived at the house asking after a former boarder who was known to be against the czar. this does bring up an interesting point though, for the characters in the family are admittedly and obviously guilty of assaults, torture, murder and arson, but the only time the police appear is when seeking the anti-czarist boarder. it would appear that in this time just about anything went and none were responsible for their acts, unless it was failing to feed oneself when the punishment was beggary. very little in the way of human sympathy existed, and when it surfaced it was repaid thrice over with malice. a mean time. but it is beautifully photographed and the acting is wonderful. there isn't that much of a plot, per se, just vignettes of growing up, but that doesn't detract. it is fascinating to see a time like this preserved. i imagine the ussr in 1938 was actually materially very close to the czarist time it represented. change must have been very slow, as it had been for millenia. i have to say i just love the final shot. it seems the very essence of a soviet statement: the child marches off, leaving his friends behind cheering him on, into a vast flat nothingness - mother Russia unending. he is confidence personified.

Incident at Blood Pass (1970)

Japanese take on sergio?

[7/10 · 18 June 2007]

firstly, i did enjoy this film and would recommend it. that said i find it to be a peculiar blend. it reminds me of a spaghetti western in many ways. this isn't necessarily bad, just odd. since leone's westerns owe something to the samurai genre maybe we just see some reverse leakage. we don't get the very long peering-into-the-sweating-pores close ups, and the unusual music isn't up to morricone's standards, though it is headed that way, but there is a bridge somewhere in here that the genres have met upon more than once. a further point is that i simply find samurai films done in color to be on the edge of lurid; my own limitation i suppose. lurid can be fun.

the other oddness is that i felt part of the time as if i were watching a samurai adaptation of Agatha Christie's poirot working out the personal machinations of another sundry lot bent on the quotidian as some crime or other worked its way toward the surface of the social pool. this, too, is fine, as we seem to like the tried and true plot devices that have satisfied us previously.

as i said, i did enjoy the film; it is fun, and i don't want to put anyone off. it will get watched again at this house.

Black and White in Color (1976)

a journey into darkness

[7/10 · 4 October 2006]

i've read thru the other comments twice now and think perhaps most did not see the same film i did. this doesn't quite click in my head as just an anti-war film; it is something else, a darker thing that aims at a soft rot inside us all.

the development of the character of the geographer, fresnoy, was like a rusty nail hidden in the pudding. he was in the beginning so likeably idealistic; we hoped for him.

out of date papers arrive and "war" is discovered in an old issue. in a sudden fervor of nationalistic spirit the colonials are senselessly eager to march into conflict; they are a barely controlled mob. all but one; fresnoy stands apart and counsels talk rather in lieu of instant bloodshed. he is the human voice, his the ignored pleas.

after the 'defeat' the fresnoy gets another hearing and with forceful initiative takes charge of a situation seen as hopeless by the others; while they quibble and cavil he begins to organize the outpost for war. he is quite good at this and earns everyone's grudging respect as the fort takes on a martial aspect and the idea of safety once again takes hold.

but something happens to fresnoy. most of the colonials are slapstickish fools first, foremost and forever. but fresnoy develops slowly from idealist to man of authority. with power he evolves into a dark shadow of his former self. it is not unlike the descent of kurtz in apocalypse now/heart of darkness. his black mistress openly flaunted, his imperious air, his elevation of africans into minor positions of power all might be seen as his being a moderating and liberating force. i don't think so. i think he has begun to be eaten from the inside by the power he has tasted and that his life will never be the same. the end, where he is seen as almost a twin to the German officer and they both admit to being socialists, is meant only, i believe, as bitter irony.

One Way Passage (1932)

a bit of a split personality

[6/10 · 17 August 2006]

this is not the great cinema, ethereal experience or most romantic movie of all time - despite several reviewers insistence. it is early Powell, and while he is always watchable and just grabs you with his first look, he hasn't quite got the assurance he showed in the thin man a couple of years later. i can't quite specify, but he seems just a little off. Kay Francis plays her part very nicely, and she and Powell go well together. McMahon, as the countess is good; not a demanding roll, but deftly handled. from here on out the cast gets a bit sketchy.

McHugh overplays his part terribly and does it in dumb staggering-drunk fashion. the second time, third if you are a very forgiving person, he lets out with his breathless idiot's laugh you want to strangle him. this part could have been something; it's the chance to steal scenes from the stars. it is one of those little parts that can offer a lot to a fine actor. McHugh, in this role anyway, is not that actor. the routine would have gone over well in a 3 stooges film.

Hymer, as Steve Burke, was a disappointment, too. the figure is cut from cardboard: dumb cop, easily duped, but maybe has redeeming characteristics. he's too dumb here. there is no reason he couldn't have been smart. his portrayal really offers Powell nothing to play against. as for his redeeming characteristics, well, they didn't show me enough to explain why a smart dame like countess Betty would want to hitch her wagon to his star forever. it doesn't play.

oh. lest i forget, catch the bartender in the Brit pub in h.k.in the opening scenes. he has to be Sam Shepard's grandpa. his few seconds of fame is well spent.

i imagine all the actors were really quite competent. the writers let them down, i think. could have been much better.

The Man from Cairo (1953)

wooden as a plug nickle

[2/10 · 7 August 2006]

i am a real sucker for casbah and foreign legion movies. they were the fodder of my childhood. i approached this one with a salutary glass of rum and high hopes. the rum stood up; the film did not.

i have been waiting to add a good george raft flic to my collection of old b&w's. despite his reputation i was sure one existed somewhere. this one wasn't it. the studio forgot to hire writers: the dialogue comes across as if pronounced phonetically by actors unfamiliar with English, reading from scrawls on large pieces of cardboard dimly seen in the lower screen.

actions are equally grotesque. the required motions as mechanical and stiff as if choreographed by engineers using tinkertoy models and expecting no greater dexterity from the cast.

the words fresh, interesting, exciting, captivating, even interesting, have no place in describing this movie. a 'b' film that deserves every slur it has duly earned.

Pursued (1947)

the whole is less than the sum of its parts

[6/10 · 16 April 2006]

the one word that describes this film, for me, is 'uneven'. as others have noted the camera-work is great, the actors top-notch, the music fine, but this is not a movie that can ride on those alone.

some films can ride on visual impact alone; not this one. if i were only allowed to view snippets of the film, taken from almost anywhere in the story i would be drawn in, i would definitely want to see the rest, but when you put all the snippets together you don't get gravy, you get mush.

while the plot hangs a bit too much melodrama in the wind, in the name of psychological something-or-other,and leaves the film a little emotionally bloated, and while the plot is murky in an unconvincing way, i am not sure the plot alone is to blame for the film's jumbled feeling.

guess i can't quite pin it down. sure, see the film, maybe you'll love it. i vote it an interesting failure.

Valdez Is Coming (1971)

one of the best

[10/10 · 31 March 2006]

i re watched this film last noc, for the umpteenth time, and it is better than i recalled. i would have to put it in my top five westerns. it is that good. i can't write a technical review; it's all about the emotion for me. a couple of folks have done what i would call technical reviews, and they are spot on. my sole purpose here is to say that this film is about dignity in a way that rarely does a film achieve. it is not, as some claim, a spaghetti western - they are visually confused, i think. it is a spare, lean film that speaks to individual human dignity. yes, it does have racial overtones, but it goes far beyond those limits. the film is absolutely universal in its compelling portrait - in a way i think it is more like a samurai film; it speaks to bushido, to honor and duty. no one ever did elmore leonard a greater service on screen. i simply can find no fault with any of the cast, writers or director. don e.

The Street with No Name (1948)

not too much here

[5/10 · 12 October 2005]

OK, everyone seems to think widmark is the cat's meow in this one. well, he is the standout, but he is just doing what widmark does, and he does it better in other,better films. there isn't a lot more to say about this one. it is not noir. yeah, it gets dark and gives you the shadows now and then, but it just ain't noir. the film was either constrained by the censors to explain, over and over, why this picture needed making for 'public education' - thus the incessant monotone, droning voice-over, or it was simply made as overt propaganda. either way it is simply a docu-style film about cops getting the bad guys. nothing new and exciting here. for its time it might have been something, but that time has come and gone and the film is pretty flat.

Clean Slate (1981)

in my top ten

[10/10 · 12 September 2005]

let's see - our reviewers have, to date, set the novel in Texas, the Carolinas, Kansas and Florida. does it matter? no, because this is one of the best films ever made, and where you think it should have been set doesn't matter a bit. and don't be put off by comments of this being about an idiot who finally gets offended and runs amuck, or a serial killer, or that it lacks the suspense a good thriller needs,or that the film is a failed noir; it is a noir that breaks the mold and never tries to insert venetian blinds into colonial Africa. it is a film that has enough layers that after 4 viewings i am sure i have not plumbed them at all well. i just cannot imagine what some of these reviewers were watching; it really isn't for everyone. if your shtick is political correctness, skip this one - it is just full of people saying 'ni--er'. people say the eff-word, as well. go somewhere else if this offends. but if you are interested in what makes folks tick, and how much odd crap lurks just beneath your own skin and by extension that it isn't yours alone; it belongs to all of us - then just go see the movie. a remake? might as well remake Golgotha and see if you can't improve on the tone of the moment, or get the message across better....

Slightly Honorable (1939)

a real dollar-bin gem

[8/10 · 8 September 2005]

this is one of those pleasant surprises that makes buying cheap films you've never heard of before so much fun. the first thing that came to mind as this film unreeled was how much fun the dialogue was. this is the blue collar version of the thin man. what it lacks in dry humor and sly irony, from nick and nora, is made up for in sheer fun. ruth terry is terrific as pat o'brien's wannabe girl. her energy is almost manic, and o'brien plays off it perfectly as the straight man to her ditzy rambles. the rest of the cast doesn't let you down either. arnold, arden and broderick crawford play their parts without flaw. the mystery, per se, is pretty average; realizing that you must wonder why more 'average' plots don't fall into the hands of talented directors, writers and cast and go on to be really good films. my only sorrow is in the DVD i have, the alpha video version #alp4644d. if you can find another print, get it. the visuals are OK, at least i have seen much worse, but the sound track is dreadful. about half of the film i couldn't understand, and i still loved it.

The Snows of Kilimanjaro (1952)

extraordinarily self-indulgent schlock

[5/10 · 28 August 2005]

if hemingway was really like this portrayal of him i have to wonder what i saw in his books as a young man. i am sure the makers wished to show him, as harry street, as a tormented man who, at the end of his days, lies questioning his life's direction, but they end up presenting the protagonist as a completely self-involved and puerile victim of testosterone o.d. whining his way thru a gangrenous fever. i can't believe this is the way hemingway thought of himself or wanted to be remembered. i always have some trouble with a film if i absolutely cannot identify with someone in it to some little degree. there was no one in this film to carry the load, no one that didn't strike me as so egocentrically self-involved and somehow wounded by 'fate' that i could even begin to feel a shred of empathy or understanding for them. the performances are wooden when not histrionic. i gave it a five because i did like the mountain.