Movie #169 Knife in the Water *1962*

Leon Niemczyk - Andrzej
Jolanta Umecka - Krystyna
Zygmunt Malanowicz - "Young Boy"
Roman Polanski (Director)

I try to list the main actors and there character names at the begin of my blogs.  That is only sort of the case here.  These three actors listed here are the only three people in the entire film.  This was Roman Polanski's first film.  It is shot in black and white and in his native Polish language. 

The story is a simple one.  A married couple picks up a hitchhiker on the way to go sailing.  They invite him to sail with them.  Chaos reigns.

I liked this movie, but I didn't love it.  I liked the way Roman used his camera to invoke or heighten the mood.  I like the way that the jazz soundtrack didn't really fit in with the film, but it did add an extra sense of sexuality to the picture.  There is a tension in the air when watching this film.  I felt at any moment that something was bound to go wrong.  It reminded me of the movie Funny Games a lot in that way.

It is official.  I have a thing for Polish girls.  Krystyna is so sexy in this role.  First off she looks like a bit of an old bitty with her cats eyes glasses, but once they are on the boat and she emerges from below in her bikini, forget about it.  There are sexual innuendos and symbols laced throughout this movie.

It is difficult to declare who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist in the film.  The young man is clearly been added to the story to shake things up.  And shake things up he does.  There are power struggles between he and the husband throughout.  It is as if both of them are trying to prove their worth to Krystyna.  Then at time she teams up with either the boy or her husband to poke fun at the other.  This is a slippery story.

I was expecting a thriller and in doing so I was a little disappointed.  There is not much action, just the potential for action which in the end can be better then the actual action its self.  Here I felt like it sort of became much ado about nothing.  I was surprised by the end, but still unsatisfied. 

It is a bold first film and a great window into the talents and perversions of Mr Polanski.  I give Knife in the water ★★★★.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #168 The Red Shoes *1948*

Oops.  I saw this film in October and forgot to post about it.  That might be because I wouldn't shut up about how wonderful it is long enough to type anything.  So I am going to cheat and give you my 3 Reasons.

Reason 1.  The greatest dance sequence ever filmed.  Hands down.  No question.

Reason 2.  Amazing Technicolor!

Reason 3.  Anton Walbrook as Boris Lermontov (the ballet director).  He is masterful.

Rating:  ★★★★★. 

Movie #167 Peeping Tom *1960*

Carl Boehm - Mark Lewis
Moira Shearer - Vivian
Michael Powell (Director)

Powell and Pressberger were famous British directors from the 1950's.  They were behind the camera for films like The Red Shoes and Black Narcissus (Movie #22).  For this film Powell set out on his own and he paid the price for independence.  The film was considered to be near filth based on it's subject matter and Powell was basically blacklisted for it.

The film centers around a man who is obsessed with his movie camera.  He is also a bit of a voyeur.  And to make the perfect trio he is driven by a compulsion to capture the ultimate fear on woman's faces on his camera.  He does this by filming them as he murders them.  We find out through the course of the film that Mark's father was a biologist and he conducted some bizarre and disgusting experiments on Mark as a young boy.  Clearly this is a delicate web to weave for a film maker.  Peeping Tom contains not a drop of blood, nor does it have any nudity.  But it feel like one of the more graphically violent films in recent memory. 

Moria Shearer plays Vivian.  The lovely woman downstairs with the blind mother.  Marks falls in love with Vivian and he has to protect her.  Even from himself.  His mother is safe from Marks attacks because she can not see what is coming from her, her face shows no fear.

This film is an ode to snuff films in a way and I think that is why this film was banned and ruined Powell's carrer.  It is not what is shown, but what is suggested.  I can see where audiences of the late 50's would think that only a sick man could make a film as perverse as this one.  One film fan felt differently though.  Martin Scorsese saw this film when it opened and fell in love with it.  Now he is one of the major reasons that the film is getting the re-release and praise it deserves.  You can see it's influence in Scorsese's work.  Taxi Driver in particular.

I enjoyed the film, but not quite as much as the other Archers films.  I give Peeping Tom ★★★1/2.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #166 Big Time *1988*

And now for something completely different.

I have never understood what is so great about Tom Waits.  He has a very distinctive voice.  Deep and gravely.  He sounds like Buster Poindexter with throat cancer to me.  Big Time is a rock-doc of sorts.  It is really an amalgamation of many things.  Part concert footage, part sketch comedy, part non-narrative / avant guard / 1980's 3:00am MTV programing.

Tom plays many roles in this picture.  Musician is one of them.  Like an anorexic Ron Perlman he lumbers around on stage stomping and hunched over as if he was channeling Daniel Plainview from the coda of There Will be Blood.  The concert its self is an odd mix of music genres.  There is rock-a-billy, free form jazz, different world music types, and traditional ballads.  Due to the style and nature of the film I am not sure if Waits is paying tribute to these varying musical tropes or mocking them.  During the concert and largely through the film there is an overpowering use of the color red.  That singular color was very off putting to me.

At other times during the film Waits acts like a stand up comic and a Spalding Gray like raconteur.  I was surprised at Waits comedic timing.  He was quite funny.  I can see where someone like Jim Jarmusch could harvest the acting and comedic talents from within Waits.

Overall I found the novelty of this film to wear off very quick though.  It reminded me of the doc within a doc that Mr. Brainwash made in Exit Through the gift Shop.  To the point that Big Time used a cut of a static TV to segway to the next random scene. 

In closing I will say that it is clear that Mr Waits is passionate and dedicated to his art and I commend him for that.  I can't help but wonder though if his fans aren't confusing originality and uniqueness for genius.  There was not much for me to grab a hold of in this film.  I give it ★★.  But I would recommend this film for his fans and I welcome anyone to explain to me how Tom Waits is brilliant.  He is my Dario Argento of music.  Check out the Trailer Park to see a clip from the film.  This film is available on Netflix Watch Instant.  It is not even available on DVD!

Big Time [VHS]

Movie #165 The Sweet Smell of Success *1957*

I reviewed this film already.  Yesterday my mother visited my house and I put this in.  She is a big Tony Curtis fan and I wanted to show her this little gem.  Instead of writing another review, here are my 3 Reasons.

Reason 1.  Lines like "The Cat's in the bag and the bag's in the river" and "I'd hate to take a bite out of you.  You're a cookie full of arsenic".

Reason 2.  Tony Curtis is the sleaziest thing ever captured on film.  He aspires to be pond scum.

Reason 3.  The Chico Hamilton Quintet music.

Rating: ★★★★1/2

Movie #164 Army of Shadows *1969*

Jean-Pierre Melville (Director)

Reading "Directed by Jean-Pierre Melville" is alone enough reason for me to want to see a film.  He is my favorite French film maker of all time.  And that is truly saying something.  2nd only to the United States in both quality and quantity of films made, the French understand cinema.  It has been said that the art of cinema started in France (mostly is it said by Frenchmen).

Melville is considered "The Father of the French New Wave".  This is not to say that he worked within that style nor was he bound to the manifesto of the La Nouvelle Vague.  He was however a major influence.  Similar to Hitchcock in those regards. 

Army of Shadows is about a group of French Resistance fighters who's job it is to disrupt the Greman occupation of Frnace during the 2nd World War.  These men and women are not soldiers, they are average Joe's who do not have access to guns and knives.  Instead they fight the forces of evil with their cunning, daring and courage.  This is exemplified in a scene where they have to kill a traitor.  The house they are in is too close to the neighbors so they can't shoot him.  They then try to decide which method of execution is the quietest.  All the while their prisoner stands there listening.  It is a brutal, unflintching scene in which Melville just lets the camera roll.

Patience is a virtue.  Melville's films often require patience to watch.  He uses long takes and limited dialogue.  He lets his stories breath and reveal themselves in real time.  Which often times is lengthy.  But I promise you will always be rewarded.  Rare is the film maker that doesn't feel the need to force feed their viewers exposition or narration.  Rare is the film maker that trusts his/her audience enough to introduce as many as 5-6 characters without providing explanation as to who they are, how they got here and what is their purpose.  Melville is that rare film maker.  I definitively feel the need to watch Army of Shadows again now that I have learned about this world and its inhabitants. 

This film is presented in a dark, quiet, desolate France.  Army of Shadows mantra is "How far are you will to go"? or "How much are you willing to sacrifice"?  At one point one of the fighters seems to abandon the resistance and gets himself thrown in jail.  We later see that the reason is that possibly he wanted to comfort and help a different fighter that had been captured.  We also see the beating and inevitable conclusion that he will face because of his actions.  On top of that he is now considered a coward and possible traitor by the people that he is giving up his life to protect.   Because in order to protect them he could not explain his plan.  They would not have allowed him to go through with it.

Army of Shadows is a bleak and depressing picture.  But so was France in 1942.  Melville manages to capture the mood perfectly.  I can't wait to see this film again.  I give Army of Shadows ★★★★1/2.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.  This film is available on Blu Ray through the Criterion Collection and on Netflix Watch Instantly.  Viva la France!

Movie #163 It's Kind of a Funny Story *2010*

Zach Galifiankis - Bobby
Keir Gilchrist - Craig
Emma Roberts - Noelle
Anna Boden / Ryan Fleck (Directors)

This film was a real treat.  I was expecting the same of schtich from Zach G. worked into another quirky indie comedy.  You know the type.  "I'm weird, but your weird so weird is the new norm" kinda thing.  This film did tap that well some, but not so much that it became a problem for me. 

The film is about a 16 year old boy who is mildly considering killing himself.  Instead he somewhat inadvertently checks into a mental institution where he is required to be there for 5 days minimum.  His trouble are the same that every teen faces.  Questions about the future, parents that don't understand them, feeling of inadequacy especially when dealing with the opposite sex.  We are all the lead character in the movie in our own heads.  While at the hospital he meets an interesting display of mentally challenged patients.

Where a grittier film would have made the patients more of a risk to him or them selves, and a quirkier film would have given each patient their own special characteristic, this movie seems to strike just the right tone.  The others in the ward have specific characteristics, but they are not one dimensional.  Everyone's problems seem real and it feel like they are being treated properly.

The star of the show is Keir Gilchrist.  He is clearly the next Justin Long.  But I was most suprised with Zach G.  He really added depth and feeling to this character.  He acted.  He wasn't just the zany, mad caped "You never know what this guy will say" dude.  He knocked this one out of the park. I have a totally new respect for Zach G.

There are a lot of cut aways of animation breaks, voice over 8mm footage, flash backs / flash forwards, Wes Anderson inspired montages.  I didn't care for these as a whole.  I think they were overused and they took me out of a story that I was invested in. 

It would be total hyperbole to compare this film to Catcher in the Rye (my favorite book) but the themes are there in both.  In my house every mental institution movie will undeniably be compared to One Flew Over the Coo Coo's Nest.  Of course this film doesn't measure up, but neither does any other.  It is a strong compliment to say that Funny Story is Coo Coo "light".

I have always said that Catcher in the Rye should be required reading for anyone trying to get their first drivers license.  This film could be the new measure of that comment.  I give It's Kind of a Funny Story ★★★1/2. Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #162 Sucker Punch *2011*

NAZI-ROBOT-ZOMBIES!!!

Emily Browning - Baby Doll
Abbie Cornish - Sweet Pea
Jena Malone - Rocket
Vanessa Hudgens - Blondie
Jamie Chung - Amber
Carla Gugino - Vera Gorski
Zack Snyder (Director)

I feel like I should say right off the bat that this is a defense of the movie Sucker Punch.  This film is getting eaten alive by critics.  I have read many of the reviews and I disagree with a lot of the readings of this movie.  The comments have been pretty harsh.  "Collection of near-rape fantasies", "Hands-down the most nightmarishly awful film of the year", and " two hours of humorless, masturbatory non sequiturs". 

Right off the bat director Zack Snyder lets you see what you are going to be in for.  The movie opens with a series of curtains opening revealing stage after stage.  I figured at this point that the films was going to be an "Inception" like film.  Dream within a dream kind of stuff.  There for everything within is subject to dream logic. 

The plot of the film is woven around a girl abused by a step father is placed in a mental institution and by shady means with an orderly, is set to receive a lobotomy.  The rest of the film is told through her dreams in which she and the other girls in the ward fight off a series of monsters, robots, Nazis, dragons, and other meanies in an attempt to collect the items needed to escape their confinements.  This fights are really dreams within her own dreams (I was right) in which the female patients are dancers at a burlesque / whore house.

That sounds like a lot to process I know.  But I didn't really go into the movie looking for any existential examinations or philosophical debates.  I wanted to see hot chicks in fishnets with samurai swords fight Nazi-robot-zombies.  And who better to give me that then the director of Watchman and 300?

I didn't find this film to be a "girl power" flick because the girls weren't really standing up to their oppressors.  They were fighting mythical creatures in their place.  This is pure escapism.  I don't really like it when people say you should just turn off your brain and enjoy the spectacle.  I like to be challenged by a film.  I like it to ask questions of me.  If nothing else I demand to be entertained by a movie.  There was no big challenge in this movie.  The narrative structure is deviceive , but not complex.  The film did cause me to ask questions.  Not deep meaningful questions like a Godard or Felini would, but I was intrigued throughout.  And the movie entertained me from opening to ending.

A few other notes:
The soundtrack was great!  The electric/metal/rock thing is normaly not my bag, but I dug it here.
The performance were all decent.Emily Browning was given the most to do and she made away with the show.  She is so seductive with huge eyes and pouty lips.  I am not calling her the next Marylin Monroe, but I understand where those comparisons are coming from.
Carla Gugino has never done anything for me and that streak continued here.
I see a lot of blogs comparing this movie to the video game Call of Duty.  I am not a gamer and I have no idea what COD looks like, but I think that is lazy writing trying to get hits from video game enthusists and the #1 selling game in the world right now.  Without a doubt the movie has a very video game feel to it, but it is obvious right from the very begining.  Lazy.
I got a very twisted "Wizard of Oz" vibe from this movie.
This is a sexy film.  Yes, it is a collection of every fanboy fantasies but what is wrong with that?

Anyway, I don't think this movie is going to be anywhere on my radar when it comes to the end of year "Best of Lists", but for the time being it was an enjoyable show.  I give Sucker Punch ★★★.  Haters gotta hate.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Win Win Trailer 2011 HD

This looks so good. Add it to the list...

Movie #160 and #161 Paths of Glory *1957*

Kirk Douglas - Col Dax
Ralph Meeker - Cpl. Philippe Paris
Timothy Carey - Pvt. Maurice Ferol

I found an apparent flaw in my movie tracking system.  Sometimes I forget to note that I have watched a movie.  I watched Stanley Kubrick's movie Paths of Glory a few months ago.  I purchased the Criterion Collection Blu Ray re-release last weekend and I figured on doing a "3 Reasons" due to the recent review of the movie.  However when I began searching I realized that I had never written a review of the film.  Sorry about the error.

Every cinephile is required by the code to salivate over Kubrick.  And with good reason.   He is the most influancial American director of his time.  There are dozens of fantastic directors from the 50's - 80's but Kubrick's star out shines them all.  He was that the helm of the films that represent the penicle of cinema for 40 years.  2001, Dr. Strangelove, Clockwork Orange, The Shining, The Killing, and this film. Kubrick's second tier (Killers Kiss, Lolita, Barry Lyndon, Full Metal Jacket) are more compelling, thought provoking and ambitious than most directors best.

Paths of Glory is the story of a French army unit that was ordered to take an enemy strong hold even though it was known to be impossible and a suicide mission.  Then when the few lucky were able to retreat, they were tried as cowards by a power hungry officer.  This sounds like weighty subject matter and it is.  But Kubrick's intent seems to be to expose the hypocrisy and absurdity of war.  This is the most horrifically funny movie I have ever seen.  He uses the lunacy of patriotism to unearth the dark comedy within the military system.

In addition to the underlying humor there is magnificent cinematography.  Kubrick was a master at knowing where to put and how to move his camera.  A few shots that come to mind are 1. In the trench.  The camera tracks through the trench as it passes countless injured soldiers.  2. On the battle field.  Kubrick moves the camera parallel to an attempted attack.  We see the horrors of war.  This shot has been copied in countless battle scenes ever since. 3. On a scouting mission.  We follow 3 soldiers on a reconnaissance mission.  We look out on the war torn battle field.  Then a flare is fired and we see that in the light the landscape is littered and shaped by dozen of fallen soldiers.  Then the flare and our view fades into the night.

I again feel that I don't possess the intellect or vocabulary to review this film appropriately.  Kirk Douglas is fantastic as the commanding officer.  He is 100% man.  Sharp and tough.  Loyal beyond measure and witty enough to go toe-to-toe with with any competitors.  Ralph Meeker as the truly cowardice officer is smarmy and  despicable.  Then I wanted to mention Timothy Carey.  What a wonderful character actor.  If he were still alive today I would LOVE to see him in a Tim Burton film.  He feels so out of place in this film, yet he fits the character perfectly.

The Criterion Collection Podcast reviewed this movie a few weeks ago and did a much better job of it than I am.  I highly recommend you check it out if you have any interest in seeing this film.  I easily give Paths of Glory ★★★★★.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #159 Romeo + Juliet *1996*

Leonardo DiCapiro - Romeo
Claire Danes - Juliet
Baz Luhrmann (Director)

I love getting to write scathing reviews of terrible films.  Most of the times I watch films that I am interested in.  I think I have pretty good taste and I know what critics to listen to.  I know the one's that have the same sensibilities as me.  Rare is the time when I am not in control of my viewing habits.  The occasional date movie, sometimes my daughters pick a films for us to watch, every once in a while a friend will recommended a film that I check out based on their review. 

I also love getting to write reviews in which I get to say nothing about the script.  Who am I to criticize Shakespeare?  It sounds obscene, but I have never been a fan of his.  I know that is the equivalent of saying "I'm not really into music", or "I don't see what's the big deal about sun rises?".  It's not that I don't respect the work, but I am criminally undereducated on it.  I feel that the Shakespeare I learned in school was not very well explained to me.  I read some of it, didn't understand it, and never went back to the well.  That put a sour taste in my mouth and I have been avoiding his plays ever since.

While I was surfing Netflix for PG-13 films that I thought my tween daughters might like, I came across Romeo + Juliet.  We all sat down Tuesday night to watch it.

The idea behind this retelling of the classic story is to place the characters in a "modern" environment.  That was today's youth can relate and introduce a new audience to Shakespeare's writing.  Honorable in its premise, the film is insulting in it's execution. 

The film is set in 90's LA.  The waring families from the play are sort of represented as feuding gangs.  I think part of the problem is that Baz didn't truly understand the culture in which he was setting his film.  LA gangs are gritty, murderous thugs.  Not neon Mohawk wearing, Bermuda short clad, Court jesters.  Baz made the urban streets of LA look like a Liberace wet dream.  He goes on then to place a hodge-podge of music in the film that to me didn't relate at all to what was on the screen or what was being said. 

This movie reminded me a lot of Across the Universe.  That was a film that I didn't even make it all the way through.  There are TONS of flaws with that movie.  Here are the big ones to me.  First off it is a film where the director tried to as literally as possible visually represent Beatles song lyrics.  To the extent that there was a character named Prudence, and she locked herself in a closet.  That way they could sing "Dear Prudence.  Won't you come out and play". Of course she was gay.  This was exhausting.  Instead of taking a narrative and working songs into it, the took 20 different ideas and tried to THINLY string a cohesive narrative out of it.  The second big issues with that films (and the one that ties a little closer to Romeo + Juliet) is that everyone already has associations to Beatles songs.  When I think about Here Comes the Sun I think about the summer I spent painting barns in the country for my uncle.  When I think about Twist and Shout I think of Ferris Bueller's Day off.  To take these songs and try to impose a different vision or memory about them is both bold and eventually fruitless.  Also, the visuals in that movie were ridiculous.  Same as this film.

The dialogue was kept in the traditional Shakespeare tongue, and I give Baz a lot of credit for making that choice.  It did help me to understand the story better seeing it acted out, I just wish that it had been placed in a more realistic setting.

The performances are hit and miss.  I thought both Leo and Danes were good, but could have been a lot better.  There scenes together were very solid, but I felt their interactions with the other cast member were lacking commitment.  Both Tybalt and Mercutio were very distracting.  I would bet that their performances were exactly what Baz wanted from them.  Unfortunately.

So, some things that I like.  I like the way the news casts were used.  Lines from the play were being read on TV news broadcasts.  I thought that was very creative and worked very well within the film.  I liked Pete Postlethwaite in the role of Romeo's father.  I like the language.  It has made me interested in seeing different filmic versions of Shakespeare plays.

Overall I can say that I barely squeaked out enough from this film to enjoy it.  I am in no hurry to watch it again though. I give Romeo + Juliet ★★★.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #158 Monsters *2010*

Whitney Able - Samantha Wyden
Scoot McNairy - Andrew Kaulder
Gareth Edwards (Director)

I am kind of taken with this film.  Shot for a budget of $800,000 this is a sci-fi monster movie wrapped up in a romance flick.  Kaulder is a photo journalist in Mexico where his assignment just got changed.  He is now to escort the bosses daughter back safely to America.  Why is is dangerous?  An alien race has landed and is currently "contaminating" most of Central America.

This movie is a mash up of Cloverfield and District 9 (Movie #155) all wrapped around love story.  Another film this reminded me of was last years Frozen (Movie #76).  Not really in plot or style but more in ambition.  Both films used normal, realistic dialogue to convey the absurdness of their situations. 

The locations for Monsters are all breath taking.  Both in the beautiful (the ruins, the rivers, wilderness) and the horrific (the villages, the former cities, those left behind).  I love it that first time feature director Gareth Edwards really took his time and developed the characters.  That is something that not every sci-fi film does.  Most nowadays are effects driven with character coming in a distant third behind product placement or marketability (toys).

With this somewhat revolutionary tactic a lot of responsibility was placed on somewhat newcomer actors and they excelled.  Both the leads were totally believable.  The script was smart enough to have them act in a manner fitting to their situations.  Scoot McNairy was charming and a bit of a "soft" protagonist.  He makes some stupid decisions, and is a little whiny at times, but that is how I think someone in that predicament might truly act.  I know I speak too much about how attractive some female actresses are, so allow me to continue.  Whitney Able is radiant.  She is vulnerable without being weak, reclusive and sheltered but also vibrant and full of life.  She won me over within the first 10 minutes.  This film has a lot of extras with bit parts, but they all seem very natural.  I'm not sure if they are trained actors or not, but it might be the best ensemble cast I have seen in a while. 

I'll spend a second on the effects.  They were great.  You are teased a lot with the promise of aliens, but rarely see them.  You can hear them (and the sound design was fantastic!) but when you see them it is generally at night or obstructed be other objects.  I will state without any hesitation that this film with is $800,000 budget had better effects than Spielberg's War of the Worlds with it's $132 Million budget.

I enjoyed this film and I plan on watching it again real soon.  I give Monsters ★★★1/2.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.  You can view Monsters on Netflix Streaming.

Movie #157 Paul *2011*

Simon Pegg - Graeme Willy
Nick Frost - Clive Gollings
Seth Rogan - Paul

Kristen Wiig - Ruth Buggs
Greg Mottola (Director)

Paul is the story of a mild mannered alien and the nerds that befriend him.  I suppose I should say that Paul is the story of a poorly mannered, foul mouthed alien.  The story revolves around the geeks attempts to get Paul to a meet-up location, and of course all the colorful character they meet along the way.

I enjoyed Paul a fair amount.  It is very referential to other sci-fi films.  Fans of films like Star Wars, the Alien films, Predator, Close Encounters, E.T., The X Files and the like should enjoy the all the homages.  The problem is that you had to catch the references in order to get to many of the jokes.  And it is a very jokey film.  I caught most of them I think, but there were times where the pacing was so that I knew that I had just missed something.

Frost and Pegg are the stars of the films Shaun of the Dead (Movie #43) and Hot Fuzz.  Both of those films make references to all sorts of other films, but catching these cues are not critical to the overall plot or enjoyment of the film.

Kristen Wiig may have been the best part of the movie.  She plays a trailer park dweller / Bible thumper that get taken hostage by the crew.  She abandons her religious way and joins the dark side.  She begins swearing after having lived a life without even hearing curse words.  It is not the most original gag, but her enthusiasm and delivery makes it sound fresh and funny.

I love Jason Bateman, but he is not given anything to do here.  He is a government agent that is tracking Paul.  Totally wasted.  The foul mouthed alien has a few funny stints, bout over all the film fell flat.  The story slugs along stopping only to set up the next bit of shtick.

I did laugh (though be it mindlessly) enough to slightly recommend the film.  Even though everyone involved has produced better work.  I give Paul ★★★.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #156 The Last Exorcism *2010*

Ashley Bell - Nell Sweetzer
Patrick Fabian - Cotton Marcus

This film was a bit of a surprise.  I had heard that is was done in a documentary style, but I didn't know that it stuck to that the entire film.  I don't think it was advertised that way.  The movie is about a preacher that has done exorcisms most his life without ever really believing in them.  He is of the opinion that the people that believed that they are possessed have a mental illness, and that sometimes going through the motions helps.  But now he is going through a existential crisis of his own. So he decided to let a film crew expose exorcisms for what they really are.  Smoke, mirrors and snake oil sold to those that need it most.  What could possibly go wrong.

Well first off the setting is a big part of this (and most) horror films.  They are in the deep south in New Orleans.  Home of voodoo and a variety of other religions.  The town folks are all superstitious people.  Cotton drives way down a dirt road (meeting a young boy that reeked of Deliverance) to perform his last exorcism.  Boy did he get more than he bargained for. 

The main reason to watch this film is for the performance art of Ashely Bell.  She plays the possibly possessed young, Nell.  When she is going through her Linda Blair like transformation there are no special effect (either visual or audio) used.  Everything you see and hear is her.  This is an amazing performance.  I don't know if it is acting, but it is a sight to behold.

There is a surprise ending that I will not spoil, but I felt that the film didn't really earn it.  I be that this is one of those films that shot at least 3 different ending and then tested them all to see which one was the most popular.  It feels like a consensus.  Over all I enjoyed this movie.  I never really felt tense of creeped out by it though.  I did like the cinemaverdi style.  I felt it did provide a realism to the film.  I give The Last Exorcism ★★★.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #155 District 9 *2009*

Sharto Copley - Wikus Van De Merwe
Neill Bloomkamp (Director)

I first saw District 9 in my hometown based on a recommendation from Filmspotting.  Both hosts enjoyed the film, but neither liked it.  They then had herds of fans coming to the films defense and calling it the best sci-fi film in years.  This peaked my interest and I attended a screening.  I remember being impressed upon my viewing.

District 9 is about a pencil pushing geek that gets put in charge of a mission to deliver evacuation notices to a bread of aliens that have been "infesting" Johannesburg, South Africa for years.  He runs into some complications along the way and the story progresses from here.  The first thing I remember about this film is how funny the first act is.  I love the character Copley plays.  He is set up to fail by his father-in-law.  The script is tight as a knot and delivered with grace and timing.  He even has a calculator attached to his bullet proof vest.

Then in the 2nd act things start to get real.  This is a relativity low budget sci-fi film, but you would never be able to tell by simply looking at it.  The effects are amazing, and I am not one to go on about effects.  And it is not just the big action scenes or the aliens either.  You can tell loving care went into every frame of this film.  There a shots of news reports.  If I didn't know I was watching a movie and I happened to walk into a room when these clips were playing I swear that I would think earth had been invaded.

The third act is where most critics of the film thinks it starts to fall apart.  Up until now the director has been cultivating a heartfelt, funny movie that had something to say about humanity.  It's true that in the third act it gets a little too much "Aliens" and not enough "Alien".  But I don't fault the film for that.  It stays true to it's self and the directors vision.  No wonder Bloomkamp's name is being mentioned for every sci-fi job that comes up these days.

Upon my second viewing I didn't feel the connection between the main character and his wife as much as I did in the theater.  I also felt the movie didn't pay off on a second viewing as much as I thought it might.  Perhaps it was because I was now watching it on the small screen?  Maybe I have seen some other effect driven films that topped it?  Maybe the "newness" wore off?  I don't know.  All I do know is that even with a bit of a diminishing return this is still a very good movie.  I give District 9 ★★★★.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #154 House *1977*

Where do you even begin?

House is a film that I have been interested in ever since I heard the guys on the Criterion Collection podcast talk about it. This film is INSANE!  I don't really know how to describe it.  The plot centers around a group of 7 Japanese school girls that go to visit one of their aunts house during summer break.  The house turns out to be possessed and it starts eating them.  But the story here isn't the plot.  It is the methods in which this story is told.  Director Nobuhiko Obayashi used every trick in the book while filming this movie.  There are slow motion shots, jump cuts, repeat shots, crazy camera angles and erratic zooms.  The more I try to systematically break down this film the more I realize that it is futile.

While I was watching this I started texting a friend who wanted to know what House was like.  I think my texts will give you the vibe of the film better than any critical analysis.

"This is INSANE!  It's like Dennis Hopper's drug riddled stream-of-conscious filtered through David Lynch's nightmares told through Miyazaki's camera".

If Hunter S. Thompson and Chuck Palahniuk made a 70's Japanese horror / after school special it would be like House.  Only not as messed up".

If Monty Python and Rob Zombie tried to turn a Van Gogh painting into a Japanese movie..."

If Andy Warhol and Salvador Dali conceived a baby, then aborted it in the 3rd trimester it might look something like House".

If Michael Gondry made Charles Manson's acid trips into 70's Asian horror flicks..."


I have never said this before, but House deserves to be watched if for not other reason than that it exists.  Rating this films is nearly as ridiculous as the film its self.  But I will give it ★★★1/2.  This can be seen on Blu Ray through the Criterion Collection.  Check out the Trailer Park to have your mind blown.

Movie #153 Animal Kingdom *2010*

This is another film that I have already watched this year.  It was Day #18.  So I am going to give it the # Reasons treatment.

Reason 1.  Ben Mendelsohn as "Pope" and Jacki Weaver as "Mama Cody" are two horribly frightening yet mysterious characters.

Reason 2.  David Michod's direction is well paced.  It creates an atmosphere of chaos and uncertainty through slow tracking shots and hand-held scenes of potential madness.

Reason 3.  Stay on the forefront of the Australian film boom with the Aussie "Goodfellas".

Rating : ★★★1/2

Movie #152 Night of the Hunter *1955*

Seeing as how I have already reviewed this film, I thought I would do a 3 Reasons for it.

Reason 1.  "Let me tell you the story of Love and Hate".

Reason 2.  The stark cinematography is like nothing you have ever seen before.

Reason 3.  You just don't see children have their lives threatened by a preacher with a switchblade anymore.

Rating: ★★★★★

Movie #151 Prince of Persia *2010*

The things a parent will do for their children...

I finally broke the chains and canceled my cable.  300 channels and I ever watched was TCM and a little ESPN.  Now I am totally reliant on Netflix for my viewing habits.  This news did not go over so well with my kids though.  They have a lot of concern that they won't be able to watch iCarly.  Even though when they come over to the house every episode that they watch they have seen dozens of times.

So I offered them an olive branch and I let them put a few movies on my queue today.  I also allowed them to pick a movie for us to watch after diner.  They decided on Disney's Prince of Persia (The Sands of Time).  This is a film based off a video game.  I am not much of a gamer, but I could tell which scenes in the movie were directly ripped off from the game.

The first thing I noticed was how horrible the action scenes were.  For an action scene to be effective, we (the viewer) needs to know where we are in relation to the action.  For example:  The French Connection.  One of the most famous (and in my opinion over-rated) car chase scenes in history.  The camera moves from inside the chase car, to looking out the back of the lead car at the chase car.  Then a wide shot to see both cars run an intersection.  Then back inside the chase car except this time we are looking at the determination in Popeye Doyle's face.  The there is a shot outside the car from a camera mounted as close to the pavement as possible.  All this provides a spacial relation between the cars in action, their surroundings, and the spectators including the audience.  A different example would be The Borne Supremacy with its claustrophobic, hand-held, in your face action shots.  That film forces you to be a part of the action.  You feel as if you are ducking punches.  That is because the production team choreographed the fight scenes in a way that the action would be fast paced, but still distinguishable in space and time.  Prince of Persia was content to abuse CGI and place the camera in ridiculous locations and absurd angles.  Then throw in a hack job of editing and I couldn't have cared less about who was fighting.

Another problem with the movie is that I didn't care who was fighting because none of the story made any sense.  Video games aren't generally known for their bravura storytelling.  Maybe that is why 90% of movies based on video games suck.  Prince of Persia tows that line.  A brief explanation of the story is: adopted son to a king unravels a plot of his uncle's to overthrow the king with the use of a mystical dagger.  The son attempts to hide the dager with the aid of a princess from a neighboring town.  Now take that story and stretch it out over two and a quarter hours and fill it with maddening exposition and every cliche in the book.

Throw in a bat shit crazy performance from Alfred Molina and a sword fighting Ben Kingsly (if you think this sounds like it might be interesting, it's not) and a wooden performance from Gemma Arterton and you have the basic ingredients.  The icing on the turd of a cake would be Jake Gyllenhaal.  An actor that I usually like and I can't wait to see him in Source Code.  But here I feel like he is totally phoning it in.  This role could have been played by any actor with decent abs.

The final problem is Disney.  I know they are a wholesome company with all the family values and blah blah blah.  I don't mind that.  Then why is there a hard-on joke in this film?  Why is it that when Gyllenhaal is trying to look at the locket the princess is wearing around her neck we get a 3-4 second cleavage shot?  Why are nameless guards being stabbed to death and maimed?  I don't mind the moral high ground, but stick to it.  You can't have you righteous cake, and eat it in the sewer.

I enjoyed writing my "3 Good Reasons" blogs and I considered continuing, but I couldn't come up with 3 reasons to watch this movie. I give Price of Persia ★★.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

Movie #150 Tropic Thunder *2008*

Reason 1.  The moment after Steve Coogan's inspirational speech.

Reason 2.  An American actor playing an Australian who gets his skin pigmented so he can method act his way into a black character that has to dress up like a Vietnamese villager.

Reason 3.  He went full retard.

Rating: ★★★ 

Movie #149 - 28 Days Later *2002*

Reason 1.  The empty London streets.

Reason 2.  Fast zombies.

Reason 3.  Danny Boyle is like Steven Spielberg poessed by the devil.

Rating:  ★★★★

Movie #148 The Killer *1989*

Reason 1.  "The Killer had two 45's, now everybody wants two 45's".

Reason 2.  Advertised as more BPM's (bullets per minute) than any film prior.

Reason 3.  Quintessential John Woo action scenes.

Rating:  ★★★1/2

Movie #147 Rififi *1955*

Reason 1.  A 20+ minute dialouge free heist scene.

Reason 2.  Le Stéphanois.

Reason 3.  The song Rififi being sung at the French night club.

Rating:  ★★★★1/2

Movie #146 Do the Right Thing *1989*

Reason 1.  The Public Enemy soundtrack

Reason 2.  The best use of ice ever put to film.

Reason 3.  It's the most important black film since Sweet Sweetback's Baddddassss Song.

Rating:  ★★★★★

Movie #145 The Wild Bunch *1969*

Reason 1.  Slow motion ultra violence.

Reason 2. The cast: Warren Oats, William Holden, Ernest Borgnine, Struther Martin & Ben Johnson

Reason 3.  Peckinpah's delicate, subtle nature.

Rating: ★★★★

Movie #144 8 1/2 *1963*

Reason 1.  It is the film everyone mocks when they are trying to spoof an Italian black and white 60's film.

Reason 2.  Federico Fellini

Reason 3.  The women.  I posted that 8 1/2 has more beautiful women in it that I had ever seen on screen.

Rank: ★★★★1/2

Movie #143 The Adjustment Bureau *2011*

Reason 1.  The Chemistry between Matt Damon and Emily Blunt.

Reason 2. If you are a fan of fedoras...

Reason 3. Terribly flawed script based on a Phillip K Dick short story.

Rating: ★★★1/2

Movie #142 Nights of Cabiria *1957*

Reason 1.  The most expressive female face I have ever seen, Giulietta Masina.

Reason 2. Frederico Fellini.

Reason 3. I hated the end of this movie.  I fell in love with Cabiria and wanted to take care of her.

Rating: ★★★★1/2

Movie #141 Blast of Silence *1961*

My first 3 Good Reasons.

Reason 1.  Allen Barron.  He wrote, directed and stared in.

Reason 2.  The opening monalouge and voiceover.

Reason 3. The movie lulls you to sleep then punches you in the face time after time.

Rating:  ★★★★

Lie, Cheat & Steal

Good news.  I have internet service again.  Bad news.  I am 11 blogs behind and brain dead from working too much this week.

So I have decided to cheat a little on my reviews.  I am going to steal an idea that is done 1000 times better at the Criterion Collection.  They have web segments called "3 Reasons".  They are videos kind of like trailers, but instead of trying to put a story line together in 30 seconds they point out the 3 topics or scenes or themes or what-have-you's that might want someone want to see a movie that they are on the fence about.

I saw the Sweet Smell of Success "3 Reasons".  I checked the film out and now it is one of my favorites.  So I am going to list my 3 reasons why I like or don't like a movie until I am caught up and then I promise to get back to my full reviews.

Movie #140 Code 46 *2003*

Tim Robbins - William Geld
Samatha Morton - Maria Gonzales
Michael Winterbottom (Director)

Last year I saw Children of Men at a film festival for dispopian future movies.  That was the only film I was able to see at that event.  I did however get the program that was handed out.  I listed films like A Clockwork Orange, Brazil and Blade Runner.  It also had a film that I had never heard of named Code 46.  It was the only movie on the program that I hadn't seen so I added it to my Netflix queue.  Netflix in turn added it to their Watch Instant list this week and check it out the other night.

Code 46 takes place in a world that is similar to the world we live in now, but with some major differences.  It is largely set in Shanghai, but not the Shanghai that exists now.  The city is surrounded by a desert and there are border patrols everywhere.  The situation is that the world government is controlling all breeding habits to avoid genetic mutations.  You are only permitted to mate with people that have a different genetic code to a certain percent. 

Some other differences between our world and the world in the movie is the language.  There is a universally spoken language.  It seems to be mostly English with elements of Chinese and Spanish (Latin) mixed in.  One of the things that I loved about this film is that it never spoon feed me this information.  It never felt obligated to explain or justify its self.  It simply presented the world and let the rules of that world unfold naturally.  There was little to no exposition as to why things are the way they are.  I love it when a script and film maker trusts their audience so much.  I could see how this film could push away more pedestrian viewers.  Fans of the Twilight series and movies like Inception can be used to or even requiring all the plot elements to be spelled out to them.

The movie is about a man that has taken a virus that provides him that gift of empathy.  After only being told one personal thing about you, he can tell your entire life story.  All the way down to your computer password.  He is in Shanghai investigating some theft in a company that manufactures "passports".  Only in this world your passport has your genitc code on it. The government controls all mating for the purposes of procreation.  You are not allowed to mate with anyone that has a similar genetic code (which is apparently a problem in this world).  He questions Maria, realizes she is the one stealing the passports, then falls in love with her.

The performances in this movie are pretty strong too.  Samantha Morton continues to amaze me with her range.  There is also something innocent in her voice that really helps in this role. Tim Robbins was decent in his performance.  The visuals in the movie were off putting at the start.  There was a lot of faded out colors and overpowering white tones.  Later in the film after they got into the city I found the color scheme more tolerable.

Code 46 is an interesting take on the distopian future genre.  I has no clue that this was a Michael Winterbottom film until I saw his name in the opening creidts.  I give Code 46★★★1/2.  Check out the Trailer Park to see for yourself.

The Wild Bunch on Blu Ray looks great!

8 1/2 is filled with more beautiful women than I've ever seen on screen before.

I am suffering from loss of internet signal. I assure you I'm watching films and getting back logged on reviews. I should start posting again on Tuesday or Wednesday.