Movie #46 Day of the Jackal

One of my favorite parts about being a cinephile is catching references or homages to films that other people might not.  Have you ever seen an episode of The Simpsons where there is a line of dialogue or a particular frame that is totally lifted off a different film?  You know the rush you get of explaining that to you buddy of significant other?  That brief moment where you get gloat that you know something that they don't that fleeting thought that you are smarter than they are.  I love that feeling.

I had that feeling about 1,000 times during my viewing of The Day of the Jackal.  Released in 1973 and directed by Fred Zinnerman (who also directed From Here to Eternity, High Noon and A Man for All Seasons) "Jackal" is the story of a French group of terrorist or self proclaimed patroits who disprove of giving Algeria their independence.  There plan is to assisinate the French president.  Better yet have a foreigner do it since all of their attempts have been foiled so far.  The man they hire has the code name "Jackal". 

At this point we are taken on a two hour long procedural of the up's and downs of the life of a professional assassin.  This film takes it time, but in a beautiful way.  There are long stretches of  time where there is no speaking on screen.  It develops characters through action and reaction.  It spends time on segments that today's Hollywood films would either skip over or try to summarize in a montage.  This is the type of film that the Hayes Code would have never allowed because you kind of get an idea of how to kill the president.  Or at least you think you do.

Another reason this film works is because the law chasing the Jackal is just as sufficient and intelligent as the Jackal himself.  I have long said that the reason so many comic book movies don't work is because the villians are just characterizations.  There is no way that "The Sandman" is going to beat Spiderman.  The penguin didn't stand a chance against batman.  Now contrast that to The Joker in The Dark Knight.  I really thought that the Joker could defeat Batman in that movie.  In The Day of the Jackal that assassin has a several day lead on the law.  They have to play catch up and they do.  They then start putting the heat on him.  He then becomes a rat in a trap.  He is no longer thriving.  At this point he is less James Bond and more Jason Borune. 

The Jackal is played by Edward Fox.  A talent that I was unaware of before this film.  If this had been set in America I can easily see this role being offered to Steve McQueen.  I want to point out the detective who has been tracking the Jackal.  Michael Lonsdale is the actor.  I was really amazed with his performance.  Most of the other character have smaller parts and are only there to move the plot forward.  There are a few female roles in this film and they are all filled with beautiful actresses.

This is a 70's movie in every since, and I mean that as a compliment.  This year I saw a film called The American.  It did it's damnest to emulate this film as best it could.  However it couldn't generate the mood and feeling Jackal does.   There were a surge of these films in the early 70's.  A product of Watergate and other government conspiracies I guess.  While there is a lot of company for films like this, I think this one stands above all the others.  I instantly added this to my DVD to Purchase list.

I could go on singing the praises of this film, but as usual I am way behind on my reviews.  I usually tell you what I though of a film and leave it to my readers to see if they want to check it out.  This is the rare exception where I am urging you to see this if you haven't and if you have see it again.  And a third option is buy it for me for christmas on DVD and come over and I'll have a Day of the Jackal party.  We can have some pop corn and a couple of cold ones and try to figure out how we would kill the president.  Just kidding internet police.  I give Day of the Jackal a 5/5 star rating and place it high up amoung the films of the 70's.  Check out the link below for the trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6xMnTPEzPo 

Movie #45 The Brothers Bloom

There is a film maker a lot of people haven't heard of.  His name is Rian Johnson.  He has two features to his name.  The first is called Brick.  It was a critical darling including this critic.  It was a very atmospheric noir thriller set in a modern day high school.  What really sets this film apart is the dialogue.  It is a mix of current teen slang mixed with 40's gumshoe movie speak.  The other identificating factor is Johnson style and the way he puts his vision onto screen.  Brick is also the film that in my opinion re-launched Joesph Gordon Levitt's career.  Who has a very brief cameo in the film.

But that is a review for another day.  This review is about his sophomore project The Brothers Bloom.  It is the story of globe trotting con artist brothers attempting their final con (of course).  The Brother Bloom are played by Adrien Brody and Mark Ruffalo.  Their non English speaking third part is Bang Bang.  An Asian explosive expert played by Rinko Kikuchi.  Their final mark is Penelope played by Rachel Weisz. 

This is a globe trotting movie for sure.  They visit Montenegro, Prague, Mexico, Romania and a slew of other places.  Johnson's camera work can best be described as playful in this movie.  It is adventurous and bold and can at times be a little silly.  There are moments where I have had to watch a few times to even catch what he was going for.  I am glad that I did, but perhaps a slightly better film maker could have conveyed his message a little clearer.  I'd like to note that the 3 con artists in the movie are all very well played.  This is the movie where I first developed my minor man-crush on Mark Ruffalo.  I will say that Weisz kind of wore a little thin on me.  She was adequate, but I don't think she was the right choice for the role.  Keano Reeves and play the dumbest guy in the room.  She can't.

Do you know how hard it is to make a con artist film now a days?  The views of movies are so climatically smart.  Movies like The Sting, Paper Moon and House of Games have put the audience in the know.  Everyone is ion on the con.  Once you revile that it is a con movie the viewers immediately go on the defensive.  No one wants to be con'ed.  Every plot point from then on is questioned.  "Is this for real or part of the con", "what is this characters motives" and "who benefits from this situation" all become question that the viewers ask themselves.   

So how do you get around that?  There is the double cross but that is a dangerous technique.  If you don't provide the audience with the clues to put it together they will feel cheated at the end.  This practice was used wonderfully in The Usual Suspects.  I know the ending and I am still surprised when the final twist happens.  There is the red herring but here again with such a knowledgeable contingency it is becoming harder and harder to pull this off.  So what film makers do is they add con's on to con's on to con's.  The problem here is you run the risk of confusing the audience leaving them again unsatisfied. 

So how do you get around this?  What Mr. Johnson did was make a con movie that wasn't about the con.  I can't spoil anything here or I would defeat the purpose of the review which is to get you to take an interest in this movie.  What Johnson does is he wraps you up in a cocoon of romance, intrigue, travel, beauty, exotic characters and danger.  At times you forget that you are watching a con movie all together.

Then towards the end when the Persian rug is pulled out from under your feet you are left satisfied.  Then when it is reveled that there is a second rug under the first rug and that gets yanked out from under you, knocking you on you ass, you feel enlightened.  Light you have experienced something that you rarely do.  You were outsmarted by a movie.  

There is a line in the film that I think perfectly sums up the entire movie.  While looking at some distorted photos taken from the marks pinhole camera Bloom says "It's the lie that tells the truth".  My girlfriend had never even heard of this movie and she really enjoyed it.  I give The Brothers Bloom a solid 4/5 stars.  Check out the link below for the trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBuPI4m4pO8

Movie #44 Stagecoach

John Wayne never told a lie.  At least not on screen he didn't.  I know there is a stigma that goes along with John Wayne movies.  It's the limping, chawing, shotgun at his side, "little missy" characterization that is associated with Wayne.  And for good reason.  A lot of his films used variations on the same character and he was happy to fill that role.  But let's not forget about the actor inside these characters.  According to IMDB Wayne has 173 roles in movies and TV.  Many of which took place when there were only a hand full of actors working.  Wayne didn't write the scripts.  He just filled the characters he played with honesty and integrity.  That is what I mean when I say he never told a line on screen.  And lets not forget about the breakout roles.  His roles in movies like Red River, Rio Bravo, The Searchers, The Green Berets and True Grit just to name a few are roles that will be remembered as long as there are movie lovers.  This review is about 1939's Stagecoach.

To call Stagecoach a "John Wayne film" is an abomination.  It is 100% a John Ford film.  He is the director.  He is the master.  Today's movies and movie makers would still be trying to perfect the zoom and the tracking shot if Ford hadn't done it 70 years ago.  I know old movies scare some people off.  So do westerns and black and white movies.  I don't care.  If you love movies, you should love this one.

The story is pretty simple. A stagecoach filled with a variety of different people is heading to the next town when they get word of a Indian posse that could attack them.  This is loosly the plot of 60 percent of today's road trip and traveling conflict movies.

What impressed me the most with this movie was the movement of the camera.  Something that Ford was not particually know for.  There are some shots that were 30 ahead of their time.  Including one where they must have had to dig a 20 foot hole in the desert dirt in order to have a stagecoach and horses pass over the camera.  There are pans and zooms that perfect highlight the actors in them and that bring us (the audience ) right into the picture. 

I am a fan of the late 90's movie Tombstone. I think Val Kilmer's Doc Holiday was a once in a lifetime character played to perfection.  After seeing Stagecoach I found his inspiration.  John Carradine as Hatifield had to be the inspration for Holiday.  Tombstone directly owes A LOT to Stagecoach.  I'm sure a lot of other films do as well.

I really enjoyed this movie.  It moved at a brisk pace.  The story was engaging, the acting was good for the period, the action was classic Hollywood.  John Ford wasn't a genius, he was a master and this film is evidence of that.  I give Stagecoach a 4/5 stars.  Check out the link below for an early trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBuPI4m4pO8

Movie #43 Shaun of the Dead

I talk about being behind on my blogs and then I go missing for a week.  Sorry.  Life happens.  Death happens too.  And sometimes, as evidence by this review, it is harder to tell the difference between than you might think.  The review is Edgar Wright's 2004 zombie movie Shaun of the Dead.

This is one of my favorite films from that year.  Shaun is in a state of arrested development.  he can't commit to his girlfriend.  He has a no where job.  He is still living with a dead beat roommate.  He hates his step father.  And he spends all his available time a pub called the Winchester.  Sound like anyone you know?  My guess is that if you are between the ages of 28 and 36 it sounds like almost everyone you know.  But Shaun mundane life is about to change.

A wide spread plague and panic is about to overtake his little town as well all of England.  The dead are rising from their graves and devouring human flesh.  At first Shaun seems numb to this. All of his daily activities stay the same, but the surroundings have changed.  Shaun is so self absorbed that he doesn't realize it.  Once he is confronted with the imposing apocalypse he is forced to develop a plan to save his mum, girlfriend, and flatmate.  A slacker turned hero.

The team of Edgar Wright, Simon Peg (Shaun) and Nick Frost (Ed) were paired together for a hilarious BBC program called Spaced.  In Spaced they used every cinematic trick up their sleeves to parody pop culture elements from all mediums.  The same goes for Shaun of the Dead.  They do stick to zombie movie troupes more than anything else, but there are a few TV and video game references thrown in there as well.  The film succeeds because it parodies the zombie movies without spoofing them.  It is clear that there is a deep love and respect for the source material.

Everything about Shaun of the Dead is top notch.  The writing is sharp, witty and funny without being too precious.  The acting is great.  Everyone knew exactly what they were supposed to be doing.  Therefore the directing is great.  The camera is in the right place at the right time.  The edits match the action which is paced very well.  The soundtrack is out of this world accumulating to a zombie attack to Queen's Don't Stop Me Now.

This was Wrights first major film.  He has since done Hot Fuzz and this years Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (review soon to come).  I like zombie movies, but I am not a fanatic.  Mostly because very few of them are as good as this one.  I give Shaun of the Dead a 4.5/5 stars.  Check out the link below for the trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhBGFqldAvk

Movie #42 Young Frankenstein

I am excited about my next two reviews.  They both are in the same genre.  That would be horror/spoof.  This review focus's on Young Frankenstein and the next will be Shaun of the Dead.  I watched both of these movies with my lovely girlfriend last weekend.  She is a fan of Evil Dead, so I thought she might enjoy these films.  I am glad to say that I was proven correct.

Young Frankenstein was made in 1974 and directed by Mel Brooks.  I think this movie might be under seen because the same year the same director released Blazing Saddles.  That films is thought by many to be his best.  I disagree.  I think Young Frankenstein is his crowning achievement.  It is my opinion that YF ages much better the BS.  It is still as fresh and relevant as it was over 35 years ago.

Young Frankenstein subject is a young professor who is lured to his great grandfathers castle in Transylvania (of course) where he studies the experiments his grandfather did in an attempt to reanimate dead tissue.  In other words he becomes the new Dr Frankenstein.  "Fronk-en-steen" as he pronounces it is played to perfection by Gene Wilder.  He is aided by I-gore (Marty Feldman), Inga the lab assisstant (the beautiful Terri Garr) and Cloris Leachman as Frau Blucher (cue a horses whinnie).  Peter Boyle plays the Frankenstein monster.

As most Mel Brooks movies go this is a spoof.  But instead of spoofing a particular film of series of films like most of todays spoof movies do, its polestar is Frankenstein films.  It takes cues from various of the Frankenstein movies and blends them seemlessly into one solid, well told story.  Much like Tarintino does with all his movies.  If you catch the homages then good for you.  If not, you are not hindered in any way.  You can still enjoy the story.

Gene Wilder is AMAZING in this movie!  His comedic timing has never been better.  He is the perfect blend of rationality and insanity.  Terri Garr is a beauty to behold as well as a great performance.  Madeline Kahn has a small role as the young Frankenstein's fiancee and she pretty much steals every frame she is in.  There is a small role for Kenneth Mars as Inspector Kemp that cracks me up every time I see it.

This film is filled with wonderful jokes and the set up's are perfect.  It is in black and white which I know turns some people off, but give it a chance and I bet it will pay off in a big way.  This is a 5/5 stars film for me.  Check out the link below for the trailer. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOPTriLG5cU

Movie #41 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

If you have never read any of my blogs before allow me to restate a common thread through out.  I don't read.  The only books I read are books about movies or movie makers.  On my coffee table right now is a book about the late 90's independent film movement.  On the back of my toilet is a book detailing the interview Francis Truffaut gave Alfred Hitchcock.  I do listen to audio books and podcasts when I drive, but most of them are about films too.  It is should come as no surprise when I say that I haven't read any of the Harry Potter books.  I joke that "if a book is good enough they will make a movie out of it". 

I have seen all the Harry Potter movies.  All the titles get mixed up in my head like a fantasy version of Bond titles.  I was secretly excited about the latest instalment of the HP franchise.  The trailer looked good and all my booky friends told me that the last book in the series was fantastic.  The movie prior to Deathly Hallows was a bit of a let down but mostly because I enjoyed the movie prior to that very much.  Prisoner of Askaban or something like that.

I made this a special night by taking my tween daughters and a friend of each of theirs to the nearest multiplex to see the show.  Before hand we went to a classic American diner for supper.  Once we arrived at the theater we had to wait in line.  Not for tickets (I foresaw this problem) but instead we had to wait for the prior showing to be over and the theater cleaned before we could enter.  Security was very tight.  You had to show your tickets before entering or exiting the theater.  By the time we found our seats, the 5 of us had to sit in 2 different rows because there weren't 5 consecutive open chairs.  We got there 45 minutes before showtime.  it was madness.

I couldn't believe the crowd.  The couple in front of me were so drunk I could smell the booze on their breath from behind them.  There were people there with babies.  Not small or little children, babies.  Not able to hold their heads up aged babies.  Now on to the review.  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

This movie moved at a snails pace.  I strongly disliked it!  It wasn't poorly made, it just seemed very grandiose and unnecessary.  I know that all the book nerds rip these films to pieces for either not putting something in the movie that is in the book, or trying to use a little creative license and add something new to enhance the film.  That is no excuse for just being flat out boring though.

This was the first of two films based on the final book in the series.  The run time on this film alone is over 150 minutes.  I know everyone says there was too much in the final book to make one film out of it, but I could have easily shaved 45 minutes off this film without losing a beat.

The Lord of the Rings movies were mocked in Kevin Smith's film Clerks 2.  The characters in that film said it was 9 hours of people walking.  That is true, but at least there was motion.  I guarantee this film has at least 30 solid minutes of characters sitting or standing in deep reflective thought.  There is no activity at all.  This movie doesn't have one single memorable battle.  The jokes in DH seem to be geared 100% towards the younger audience so they don't get board watching people brune, and postulate. 

Then the film tries so hard to tie all the past HP's in with it.  The exposition seems to serve no purpose other than to evoke a sense of nostalgia.  Gobblty gook is what DH devolves into.  It reminded me a lot of the video game "Zelda".  Harry needs to get the sword of perseverance in order to unlock the crystal thing-a-ma-jig.  Then and only then will Pinocchio's secret handshake along with the star of Bartholomew open the Arc of the Covenant.  If you enjoy my writing in this paragraph then I say rush out and see this film. 

The acting in the movie is decent.  Especially Emma Watson as Hermione Granger.   There are too many cameos or secondary characters in this film.  Most of whom either don't have any lines or the lines they do have are merely filler.  They just make for another "Best of Harry Potter love fest". 

The music didn't seem to bother me but for the life of me I can't remember any of it.  There was one scene where the legend of the Deathly Hallows is explained.  At this point in the films it switches to animation.  I was intrigued at first as the animated characters danced around the screen as Hermione narrates their activities, then it grew old and harder to clarify what was happening in the cartoon.

Another thing.  I am sick of films that plan to have a sequel not completing their first movie.  A movie should be a movie.  One part of a series of films like this has to stand on it's own.  The comparison of the other movies in the collection is inevitable, but each need to represent a full idea and concept.  They all need structure.  Intro, action, struggle, resolution, conclusion.  HP has the intro that drew me in.  It was a nod or homage to something I think, but I am not sure what that is.  The films totally skips the action.  It attempts to replace action with character.  The problem is the characters need to drive the story then.  Aimless gazing didn't do anything for me. The film is over-soaked with struggle.  More like strangle.  It bogs down with shot after shot of our leads narrowly escaping a mildly menacing villain or villains.   The resolution might very well be in all the nonsense it puts forward.  I forgot my Hogwarts to English dictionary at home so I was lost.  Finally there is no conclusion at all.  The final shot seems to come out of no where and all it does is set up the final movie.  Take Back to the Future 1 or 2.  Both films knew there would be sequels but they told a full and entire story.  That is what this movie is missing.

Good news is I had a great time escorting 4 lovely young ladies around.  Nest time I will take them to go see a better film.  I give Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows a 2/5 stars.  Check out the link below for the trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EC2tmFVNNE

Standing in line for Harry Potter with 4 tween ladies.