Warrior (2011)

9/10. So I LOVE Rocky (1976). It's in my all time top ten movies. As far as fighting movies go, Warrior is now a close second.

It's mostly about two estranged brothers training and fighting their way through mixed martial arts battles (MMA), but the inter/intra-personal relationships are the real story here. Don't get me wrong the fights are intense and well choreographed, but they would fall flat without the drama going on behind the bouts.

Behind the camera, Miracle (2004) director Gavin O'Connor returns to the sporting world with a vengeance co-writing and directing a gritty movie about a broken family. Nick Nolte outdoes himself as the recovering alcoholic father of the two brothers. And like I said, the fighting sequences are excellently choreographed by J.J. Perry and are totally believable.

I'm shocked that this film bombed in the theaters only raking in $13 Million with a budget of $30 Million. I just hope that the DVD sales can make up for the loss because this film truly deserves recognition. Even critics like this movie, garnering it an 83% certified fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes Tomatometer as of this posting.

And this movie has one of the best song placements of any film I've seen, climaxing with a live version of The National's "About Today". Listen to the song below, then watch the movie, I'm pretty sure the film will outdo whatever you picture going on in your head.

Cowboys & Aliens (2011)

5/10. No surprises in this genre mash-up blockbuster.

You can read the synopsis of this film on basically any movie site, as it was one of this summer's biggest films.

I like Jon Favreau, I like Daniel Craig, I like Olivia Wilde, however this film was just too silly, I couldn't suspend my disbelief enough to go along for the ride. I blame this on the writing. It is my understanding that Cowboys & Aliens was in development hell for a long time, and went through many rewrites (this is evidenced by the writing credits), but even super-writing team Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof couldn't save this exercise in ridiculousness. Favreau's directing was crisp, but if you're going to combine two drastically different genres into one film, you need an exceptional script to make it believable. This one fell flat.

I would not recommend this film to anyone, it was just a below average outing upped a notch by all the money they put into it. Even the actors seemed like they weren't really trying.

As an aside, I would like to vent my frustration with the new all CGI monster's that seem to all look the same in today's movies. I call them the "J.J. Abrams Monster", as I feel it all started with Cloverfield. Tell me the alien from Cowboys & Aliens below doesn't look like some rehashing of an Abrams monster from, say, Super 8. Who knows, maybe I should blame Andy Chung.

The Turning Point (1952)

7/10. William Holden shines in this run of the mill fifties noir.

Edmond O'Brien heads up a city wide crime commission set to take down syndicate boss Ed Begley. William Holden is the cynical crime desk reporter who reluctantly joins the cause.

In all honesty this is a pretty forgettable story. a film that would have stood out a decade earlier, but was past it's prime on it's release. Aside from the well written dialogue, William Holden is this films saving grace.

Caught between his performances in Billy Wilder's Sunset Boulevard and Stalag 17, Holden outdoes everyone in this relatively unheard of noir. It's easy to see why, it's basically a rehash of early noirs, only with conservative camera work, and not-so-special art direction. The other players are well known but fail to offer anything exceptional. Maybe I'm prejudiced, as Holden is my favorite actor of his time, but he really earns the top billing he receives. I would have loved to see what could have been accomplished without what appeared to be director William Dieterle holding him back. I'm not badmouthing Dieterle, but he seemed to be running things like it was still the thirties or forties. It really took a modern innovator like Billy Wilder to let Holden cut loose and show his chops.

Oh and criminal standby Neville Brand makes a brief appearance as a hitman. Love that guy too.

So if you're a Holden fan like me, you should check this one out. If you're just looking for a good noir to watch, there's better stuff out there.

Cry Vengeance (1954)

6/10. Classic mid-fifties second-tier noir set in Alaska.

When ex-cop Vic Barron gets out of prison, he travels to Alaska seeking revenge on the mob boss whom he believes murdered his wife and child and framed him for bribery.

This film is Mark Stevens directorial debut. The actor best known for playing Olivia de Havilland's husband in The Snake Pit does an admirable job in helming his first feature, whilst portraying it's main role. There's nothing particularly memorable done on the back end of the camera, save some unique-for-it's-day aerial and dolly shots. The movie as a whole is probably pretty forgettable.

The cast does a standard job for mid-fifties noir. Skip Homeier stands out significantly as the despicable thug Roxey Davis, mostly due to his unique looks as opposed to any acting forte. The beautiful Martha Hyer does an average job portraying love interest Peggy Harding, but as I said before, nothing truly memorable. Mark Stevens is more stone-cold than anything, which is what the character called for.

The only real thing of note about this film is the fact that it's a noir story set in the lumberjack capitol of Ketchikan, Alaska. The two don't obviously go together in one's mind, but the writers manage to pull it off, primarily by having the central ensemble all hail from San Francisco.

SPOILER ALERT

I would have cared for this film much more had it followed classic noir and climaxed in a dismal ending. The writers however chose the happy route and all is resolved with no true consequences. So although this movie was noir in style, it was really just an average Hollywood thriller.

Citizen Kane (1941)

5/10. I watched Citizen Kane for the first time today. I must say it was a disappointment. Most likely this is because I had built it up in my mind my entire life. Loving movies, you can't not know about Citizen Kane's greatness in history.

As there are already so many reviews and studies of this film I'll just give my wholly subjective opinion.

I honestly didn't care for it. The movie made me feel four out of ten stars, but I'm bumping it up to a five simply because it is such an artistic feat. I can see it's groundbreaking style, it's camera work, special effects, dialogue and acting that was a grand avante-garde departure from it's contemporaries. However, despite all of this it left me feeling empty.

Perhaps that was Welles' intention. Perhaps it was meant to be a jumbled confusion of imagery and half remembered dreams... I don't know for sure. This is the only movie that I've ever marked higher than I subjectively felt it rated...

Would I watch this movie again? Probably. Would I watch it repeatedly and study it? Probably not. I'd prefer to study The Trial, Welles' masterpiece in his own book. An opinion of which I share. A film which I actually liked.

Perhaps I've been so conditioned for the "Hollywood Narrative" that I completely missed the train on this one? I just don't know.

I may post more on this film later. But as it stands as a first impression, I'm sticking with my above rating.

Retiring An Old Friend

When people ask me what are my favorite movies, I list my top ten. Ten movies which I could watch over and over again, amazed at their greatness every time. One of them throughout the years has consistently been Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. Perhaps it was nostalgia, I remember seeing it in the theater with my father in 1991. Perhaps it was because I considered Nick Meyer's script to be so intellectual and entertaining. But upon viewing the movie today for the first time in several years, I must retire this old friend. Though I could recite the dialogue along with the movie, my tastes appear to have changed. If you had asked me not too long ago my rating of this film, I would have told you wholeheartedly "10 out of 10 stars." That is no longer the case. This old friend seemed dated and slightly boring in parts, it no longer held my rapt attention as it once did. The script seemed quasi-intellectual, and somewhat forced. The acting, poor. The direction full of holes. It is with a bittersweet heart that I send this film on it's merry way from my top ten list. I can't say I'll miss it terribly, but I can say I enjoyed it while it lasted...

Now I must find a new friend to take it's place. I must determine which film out of the thousands I've seen is worthy to be placed in my personal top ten. It will be a tough decision, but like phases in my life, a new film friend will most assuredly present itself.

R.I.P. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. 8/10.

Hugo (2011)

5/10. This review is a little late as I actually saw this movie three days ago on Thanksgiving Day with my sister and her fiancee. We saw it in 3-D as was intended and none of us really cared for it.

The story follows an orphan named Hugo who lives in a 1930s Parisian train station, and his efforts to find his place in the world. In the process he meets famed silent film director Georges Melies, and is introduced to early cinema.

This was really a labor of love by director Martin Scorsese. The sets are stunning and steampunk, and the recreations of early silent films are engrossing. However, the pace of the film is so unbearably slow that it will not be able to hold any child's attention for more than five minutes. It is also a preachy film, extolling the greatness of film preservation and the history of early cinema. It is quite poorly written, especially for a Scoresese feature, and the acting by all involved is expressionistic at best and tragically bad at worst. But as I stated before the pacing is the trick, and it will leave most viewers with boredom through it's majority.

Overall, this is a feature that rates simply as "okay" in my book, had it been tighter and shorter, it would have been much more enjoyable. If all you care about is 3-D effects and fantastic set design, then this is for you. But not even it's generous embellishments in that area can save it from being a visually stunning borefest.

Even my sister who is a film preservation major and serious movie buff disliked this film, so I'd have to recommend a pass on this one.

Crimson Tide (1995)

10/10. This was the first R rated movie I was allowed by my parents to see in the theater. I was 16. I literally had to beg them to let me, and it was wholly because the R rating was given due to the language and intensity of the film. My guess would be that it would have been rated PG-13 were it to be released today. I enjoyed the film so much that I went out and bought the soundtrack immediately after seeing it. I still consider it one of Hans Zimmer's best scores.

The plot of the movie is basically a standoff between the Captain of the USS Alabama nuclear submarine (Gene Hackman) and the Executive Officer of the same ship (Denzel Washington). This standoff is brought about by a convolution of Naval rules and regulations during a topside nuclear standoff between the US and Russian rebels. I won't reveal any more in case you haven't seen it, as it is most suspenseful the less you know beforehand.

The primary reason why I rate this film a ten is the script. It is so seamless and intense, with dialogue that matters and stands out. I later learned that no other dialogue heavy wordsmith than Quentin Tarantino was brought on to polish Michael Schiffer's script. I also learned that Tarantino had made the captain a racist who used the word "nigger" in heated arguments with the XO. This overt nature and the use of the n-word were removed at the insistence of Denzel Washington, and it makes for a far more interesting battle of wills.

The technical dialogue and plot points dealing with US Naval rules and regulations are engrossing as well, these I assume were brought onboard by the two retired Naval Captains who served as technical consultants on the film. And there is an interesting subplot involving the morality of nuclear war, and it's classification as war, when it is more accurate to classify as holocaust.

Tony Scott's direction is intense and crisp as usual, with realistic special effects when necessary, but mostly suspenseful pacing and claustrophobic angles that accurately convey what I must imagine serving on a submarine must feel like.

All actors involved, down to the bit parts, are wonderful in their performance, truly conveying the immediacy of the situations. I credit this partially to Tony Scott as well who never seems to overburden his actors, but allows them to work their own magic.

All in all a perfectly executed throwback to the Cold War genre, which I absolutely love even more so than when I first saw it in the theaters nearly twenty years ago. This was one of the movies that almost had me enlist in the US Navy to become a nuclear technician onboard a submarine.

As an interesting close to this post, here is a bit of trivia from IMDB's website:

The disagreement between Cpt. Ramsey and Lcdr. Hunter over the origin of the Lipizzaner stallions throughout the movie foreshadows and illustrates the fundamental source of friction between the two men, both insisting that their mutually exclusive version of reality is the truth. Ironically, Cpt. Ramsey, (who believes the stallions are Portuguese) or Lcdr. Hunter (who says they are Spanish) are both incorrect. The Lippizaner stallions are in fact Austrian.

Life In A Day (2011)

8/10. In 2010 YouTube asked the Earth's residents to chronicle on video the day July 24th. The submitted footage was edited and produced into a documentary in the truest sense. No unifying narration by a third party voice, just the people of the world living their lives.

The resulting film is breathtaking in it's scope, really as a result of so many narrow fields of view being stitched together by director Kevin Macdonald. Some of the footage is poor, some is professional, but all of it captures one's attention.

I can safely say this is probably the most approachable and universally relatable documentary ever made.

The conclusion I can draw from this film is that, save cultural and material differences, we are really all the same. We all have the same fears and loves. We on this planet are really all one. And though we strive against each other to matter to ourselves, in the end we all do matter, we are all important.

"NOOOOO"

‎"People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians" - George Lucas 1988

Sucker Punch (2011)

7/10. Thoroughly enjoyable comic-book-slash-video-game styled movie that every teenage boy will love.

Abbie Cornish plays Sweet Pea, an abused young girl who recruits some friends to help her escape from a mental institution before she is lobotomized. Fantasy action ensues.

This was a pleasant surprise of a movie, probably because I went in with such low expectations. No real acting heroics, no breathtaking screenplay, just alot of stylized action performed by girls in skimpy outfits. If this film were a comic it would be written by J.Scott Campbell as opposed to Alan Moore. No depth, just style.

Excellent soundtrack choices really propel the film along, and the visuals are amazing which is par for director Zak Snyder. You could tell this was his baby as the action takes center stage, and he executes it perfectly.

Lots of homages to the Matrix movies early on which obviously influenced Snyder. Though it produces a similar feel, it's definitely funner and more lighthearted than those.

So next time you can't get a date, check this out, the junior high schoolboy in you will appreciate it.

The Wolfman (2010)

8/10. Great looking Gothic werewolf movie.

Benicio Del Toro plays English stage actor Lawrence Talbot, who while searching for answers to his brother's death near his wealthy father's estate, is bitten by a werewolf.

Great acting. Benicio is understated intensity as usual. As is Anthony Hopkins who plays his father. Emily Blunt is the beautiful fiancee of his late brother. And Hugo Weaving is the scotland yard inspector tasked with dealing with the werewolf issue.

Don't look to the script for the draw of this film. There's a little about prodigal sons and the thin line between man and beast, but this is mostly a visual movie. Joe Johnston directs somewhere in the middle of his hits and misses, and he plays this action heavy. The look of this film was the best feature in my opinion. A combination of light computer imagery, and perfectly designed and lit sets and landscapes totally evokes the Victorian Gothic feel of the original story. I was constantly reminded of Edward Gorey's illustrations when viewing this film, which always means "Gothic" to me.

The bloody action of the movie lets us know it's there. And when it's gory, boy is it intense. Decapitations, amputations, disembowelments, this ain't no Lon Chaney Jr. flick. Some cheap scares to make you jump, some terrifyingly bloody werewolf attacks, but it's all done in conjunction with the wonderful visual atmosphere of the film.

If you rent it. Watch it at night.

Transformers: Dark Of The Moon (2011)

7/10. Sam Witwicky (Shia Lebouf) helps the Autobots save mankind once more, this time from a robot technology that has been hidden for decades.

First off let me say this is the best use of 3D I've seen since Avatar, which makes sense as it was shot with the same PACE3D cameras that were used in that film.

The effects of course are mind boggling, which is on par for a Michael Bay film. There are some exceptionally mind blowing shots however during the climactic battles in Chicago.

Sam's new love interest (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley) is annoying, but not as much as Megan Fox was, so that's a plus. Patrick Dempsey plays a baddie, which is quite a turn for him. Leonard Nemoy voices one of the new Autobots, even throwing out some Wrath Of Khan dialogue before the climax. And all the old characters from the other movies make return appearances (save Megan Fox of course).

Over all though, the film was just too long. At almost three hours in length, the majority of time is taken up with seemingly endless robot battles of the second half of the film. These could really have been cut in half and no loss would have resulted. It's a fun popcorn movie if you want to spend the three hours on it, but if you go you must see it in 3D, otherwise you might as well wait for it's DVD/Blu-ray release.

On a nitpicky note: At the start of the film, the Apollo 11 crew discover a robot ship on the "dark side of the moon". This is impossible as the dark side of the moon always faces away from the Earth and the Apollo 11 crew landed on the Earthward side. So unless they hiked thousands of miles in 20 minutes to see the ship... the logic just falls apart. This is a constant frustration I have with Michael Bay movies, the ignorance of logic and science. For me this goes all the way back to the impossible logic of Armageddon (fires in space???). But, I'm used to it with him, so I just suspend my disbelief and enjoy the ride.

Also I think Rosie Huntington-Whiteley botoxes her lips.

Where The Sidewalk Ends (1950)

8/10. Man, do I love these Golden Age film noirs.

Dana Andrews plays a cop with a temper trying to cover up his crime of murdering a suspect. It's only complicated by the fact that the crime is pinned on the victim's father in law, and the fact that he's falling in love with the victim's estranged wife played by Gene Tierney.

Dana Andrews plays against the honorable good guy type he was later known for, this time portraying an on the edge detective trying to break out of the shadow of his deceased criminal father. We've seen this type of cop before, but Andrews really captures the conflict or at least as much as can be expected in a film of this era.

Nice to see Andrews and Tierney together again. Their chemistry is undeniable, and it's understandable why the studios paired them up for a total of five films.

The usual class of noir character actors make appearances, including the thuggish Neville Brand (who I liken to today's Michael Madsen). And we get to see a young Karl Malden playing the by the book precinct lieutenant. Really though, this is Andrews' show, he makes a crooked cop really likable (I mean come on, it is Dana Andrews after all).

I will say it ends up bad for Andrews in the end, but it is the morally right outcome.

River Of No Return (1954)

4/10. Run of the mill western that serves mostly as a vehicle for Marilyn Monroe.

Farmer Robert Mitchum and his son, Lassie's Tommy Rettig, rescue Marilyn Monroe and her husband Rory Calhoun from a river raft with dire consequences.

Not much here, though I was hoping for something with Otto Preminger attached as director. But this film was really just a draw for audiences to see Marilyn Monroe in a western. There's a few of scenes with Marilyn singing, a scene where she's clothed only in a blanket, she almost gets raped by Robert Mitchum, and she gets her overshirt torn off by an Indian. Plus there's a moral about when it's ok to shoot someone in the back. That's it. Other than some not so beautifully shot vistas in Cinemascope, this film has nothing really to offer.

Hobo With A Shotgun (2011)

5/10. Slightly above average grindhouse throwback. Rutger Hauer is the titular Hobo who dons a shotgun for some gory vigilante justice in a crime riddled city.

The only reasons I rented this movie is my love of grindhouse cinema, Rutger Hauer's draw, and the cover art for the DVD release.

Slightly fun over the top movie, but didn't quite capture the 70's and 80's grindhouse feel ala Troma or Corman. It was silly and it knew it, this film didn't take itself seriously at all which is a must for good exploitation cinema. IMO to have good grindhouse shlock you need to be unintentionally silly, but serious in tone, while at the same time understanding that some might not take you seriously. This movie was just too over the top for it's own good. Also, not enough nudity which is a requirement of good grindhouse.

As a side note, this is probably among the best films I've seen to come out of Canada.

Witness For The Prosecution (1957)

8/10. One of the best courtroom dramas (not to mention one of the earliest and most memorable), with a great twist ending.

Charles Laughton, recovering from a heart attack, defends Tyrone Power when he is accused of murdering a wealthy widow. His wife, Marlene Dietrich, is the titular witness for the prosecution.

Pretty straightforward courtroom drama co-written by Billy Wilder from an Agatha Christie play. Billy Wilder directing.

Other than the surprise twist ending (which the audience is requested not to reveal during the end credits), the main offering of this film are the performances by all those involved, all excellent. Unfortunately Marlene Dietrich was not nominated for an Oscar, though she herself was convinced she would be, but all of the performances are pretty near Oscar worthy, especially for the time period.

Billy Wilder's script is excellent, not quite Sunset Boulevard level, but good just the same. And his direction is unintrusive and pretty straightforward. Of course his pace is excellent, even during the slow parts of which there are few.

All around good suspense that keeps you on the edge of your seat.

The Bravados (1958)

7/10. Henry King directs Gregory Peck as a man hunting down four criminals across south Texas for the crime of raping and murdering his wife.

Enjoyable western, even if it was pretty dark in tone. Nice to see Stephen Boyd as the main bad guy. I wonder if this role is what got him the part of Messala in Ben-Hur the next year. I feel he is quite underrated.

Gregory Peck is wooden and cold as usual, but still sympathetic.

Not much else I can say about this film. Pretty much your run of the mill western for the fifties. Not as epic as The Searchers but somewhere in the middle ground. Just a little on the dark side, like I said.

The Trial (1962)

7/10. Modern. Expressionistic. Avant Garde. Absurdist. Dreamlike. Kafkaesque.

In what Orson Welles called his greatest film, we are presented with Josef K. A clerk played by Anthony Perkins who is arrested for a crime, but not told what the crime is. After attempting to navigate through a nightmarish legal system and meeting many interesting characters along the way. He is finally condemned and executed.

This confusing dreamlike movie forced me to scour the internet for explanations as to what it all meant. Here is the best brief I could find on the novel and subsequent film. I will let you discover this one for yourself.

Something to note about The Trial is the feel of the French New Wave that is apparent. Not sure if this is due to it being filmed in Paris during the New Wave, or if Welles was simply a large influence on the New Wave directors, or if they were on him, or some combination of the above, but it's definitely present.

Also, I imagine the Wachowski's were influenced at least by the novel as there are many elements that are present in the Matrix series.

Altogether it was quite a hard film to digest on a Saturday morning, but I enjoyed the ride.

The 13th Warrior (1999)

6/10. So this is what a flop looks like. Apparently going over budget to a cost of $160 Million, this film lost $123 Million upon release. When McTiernan's original cut apparently didn't please test audiences, Michael Chrichton took the helm and made at least a presentable effort out of the film.

The story of an Arabic poet, outcast from his native land and into the midst of a group of Vikings. He is among those chosen to travel north to fight a mysterious enemy in a mysterious land.

I remember reading part of Chrichton's novel in high school, "Eaters of the Dead". It was pretty slow, but had elements of interest to me. It was unique in that it was written both in Old English (like Beowulf) and in modern English as well.

Unfortunately McTiernan and Chrichton and the screenwriters turn it into a pretty mundane hack-and-slash Medieval action film. No indication in the film that the mysterious hordes were actually descendants of Neanderthals, as was presented in the book. Nor is any of the feeling of coarse poetry, that bled through the pages of the book.

Chrichton was actually my favorite author growing up, and I'm familiar with most of his works (both his writings and his films), and this I would have to say is among the most middling of the film efforts. Entertaining enough, but not really capturing the power of the original story.

A Bullet For Joey (1955)

6/10. Entertaining spy/crime thriller. Geroge Raft plays a crime boss hired by international spies to kidnap a nuclear scientist in Canada. Edward G. Robinson is the police inspector on his trail.

This was your average crime thriller from the 50's. The big bonus was the brief scenes with Edward G. Robinson and George Raft acting together. Up until that point it was just one or the other carrying the shot.

I was expecting this to be something more noirish along the lines of "Kiss Me Deadly", but it ended up being more like "G-men". Not a terribly bad thing, but I ended up giving it a lower score because of that. Really the only reason I gave this film above average score at all was because of Raft and Robinson.

Also of note is Peter van Eyck playing a variation on his evil Nazi, only this time we get the impression that he's an equally evil Commie.

Pan's Labyrinth (2006)

5/10. I'm not really sure what to make of this movie. It certainly wasn't what I was expecting. It was much much darker than I pictured it being from what little I'd heard about it before hand.

Basically a fairy tale set against the backdrop of the Spanish Civil War in 1944. That's all it really is. I'm sure there are deeper meanings and metaphors than I got out of it, but they were lost on me.

I guess you could compare this to a David Lynch film with a classical narrative structure, as it was apparently very personal to Guillermo Del Toro, the director, and it was very surreal in parts. So while I'm sure Del Toro loved it, and others around the world appeared to have loved it as well (at least judging from it's IMDB score), I was just kind alternating between being appalled and apathetic about this story. It really didn't live up to it's hype to me. To sum up how I feel about this movie: "meh".

Brick (2005)

5/10. Gritty film noir involving students of a suburban California high school. Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Brendan, a high school loner who navigates the school's cliques to find out who murdered his ex-girlfriend.

At first this film comes off as silly. High school kids, getting mixed up in overly serious situations, bantering back and forth like criminals out of an Edward G. Robinson movie. But, if you suspend your disbelief, and overcome the extremely poor sound mixing, and are able to understand what they are saying to each other, this throwback to California noir of yesteryear ends up being pretty entertaining.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt wasn't too shabby in one of his first post Third Rock starring roles. Though I've seen better work on his part, he did the best he could with what was given.

I probably would have rated this film higher if it just weren't for the fact that these are kids in this movie. I'm sure people have heard that films are all just about playing dress up or pretend. Well that's what Brick came across as being. Like a shined up version of some high school play, like Dawson's Creek without all the "issues" or doucheness. It was entertaining enough though, I only cought myself looking at the clock a few times, plus I finished the movie, which is more than I can say for some other indie films.

Dark City (1950)

6/10. In Charleton Heston's first screen role he plays one of three grifters who dupe an out-of-towner out of his every penny in a poker game. The out-of-towner hangs himself and his psychopathic brother hunts down Heston and crew seeking vengeance.

Dark City was your run of the mill 50's film noir. It's most notable in my opinion for introducing us to a very young Charleton Heston. Heston really stands out in this film, with his stilted acting and intense demeanor that won him more starring roles. There were other notables including Dragnet's Jack Webb as a baddie, and M.A.S.H.'s Harry Morgan as a punchy sidekick.

Not as memorable, or dark, as most film niors, but it was entertaining nonetheless.

The Crucible (1996)

7/10. This film covers that black eye on the New World known as the Salem witch trials. In the film, the town of Salem, in the colony of Massachusetts is turned upside down over accusations of witchcraft. Many are arrested and some are hanged. The thing is, the accusations all come from a group of young girls who lie to assist their own jealousies, vanities, and fears of reprisal. Once the government steps in everyone is vulnerable to the accusation of witchcraft and the whole town is whipped into mass hysteria And with strict literal puritans running the courtroom you know this won't end well.

The whole subject matter is hard to watch for me being a Christian, as it's always difficult to see your brothers and sisters portrayed as hypocrites, even if it's rightfully so.

I should note that this is based on a screenplay adaptation of Arthur Miller's most famous play, by the playwright himself. He initially wrote the Crucible as a response to having been forced to testify before the House of Representatives' Committee on Un-American Activities, that is, the McCarthy investigations in 1956. You can definitely see why the McCarthy era is now commonly referred to as a witch hunt.

On the production side, Daniel Day-Louis is excellent as always. Winona Ryder is awful as usual. When the two are acting in the same scene together, she just comes off looking like a rank amateur. It's interesting to see the great Paul Scofield on the opposite side of the bar as he was in "A Man For All Seasons". Though there's weight in some of the performances, most of the townspeople and government officials seem like caricatures, even if they have excellent King James style lines to read.

All in all, a parable of the dangers of mass hysteria. Hard to watch, but a good film nonetheless.

Doubt (2008)

9/10. This movie elicited the exact responses from me as it intended. I attribute that to the strong writing of the story. I was not surprised to learn that this film was based on a Tony and Pulitzer Prize winning play. Aside from musicals and farce, the theater is where real drama is displayed.

The basic story line is of a strict nun who accuses a Catholic pastor of sexually abusing one of the students at the Catholic school. She doesn't do this publicly, but rather behind closed doors and in secret, mostly utilizing and referring to implications and gossip. The pastor maintains his innocence in the face of her certainty. On the third side of this triangle is another younger more naive nun who, like the audience, has doubts at different times as to the genuineness of both the accuser and the accused.

Sound confusing? That's because it is. This play/movie successfully had me second guessing the characters and myself, which I believe was it's full intention. Belying it's title, there were so many messages and truths to be felt and seen in this story that it was somewhat overwhelming. And these messages were not just for the Christian, but for all moral peoples. However, the ultimate overriding force throughout was one of doubt; which, as the pastor foretold in his opening sermon, can divide us or unite in commonality. It is ultimately up to us.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention the apt direction of the playwright, and the Oscar caliber acting of all the players. I would definitely like to see this movie again sometime.

Black Swan (2010)

8/10. Wow. This ballet is definitely not boring. Natalie Portman plays the leading ballerina in the NYC Ballet's production of Swan Lake. Only, as she strives for perfection in her performance, things begin to become unraveled, leading to a horrifying conclusion.

In my humble opinion, this movie can be most likened to Brian De Palma's Carrie (1976). An innocente awakens into womanhood under tremendous social pressure, and an overbearing controlling mother to stifle her at every turn. The only result can be psychosis. Not necessarily the overt parapsychological climax of Carrie, but one nearly as dramatic.

Aranofsky's camera work following Portman at every turn, and featuring more close-up shots on it's protagonist than any movie in recent memory, only heightens the tension as we follow her down her spiral into madness. Araonofsky said this film was his companion piece to The Wrestler (2008), and while it may not be as manly, it's just as hard not to look away.

Caligula (1979)

2/10. I hated this movie. I couldn't even finish it.

Gore Vidal knows his Romans, and Tinto Brass knows his erotica. Unfortunately, the socio-political intrigue of the imperial court doesn't mix well with the sexual exploits of it's emperor. At least not when the founders of Penthouse magazine are doing the editing.

I didn't even watch the X-rated version with the hardcore sex scenes and yet it was almost too much to handle. This was the recently re-released R-rated version, but there's so much nudity and fornication that you begin to become desensitized to it. In reality, they weren't just doing it all the time in Rome, they did have an empire to run.

I think I may have not given it such a low score, save for the fact that the set design and lighting were too impressionistic. That's something I have little patience for, at least when dealing with historical subject matter. I imagine Hell could look something like these garish sets. And the devil may act somewhat like Peter O'Toole's over the top performance. As an avant-garde art film, I guess you could call this a win, but the sexualization of every little aspect is too much for my puritanical American mores.

Sisters (1973)

6/10. Sisters is among Brian De Palma's earliest works behind the directors chair. Made for American International, the production company best known for grindhouse schlock in the 60's and 70's, this picture stands out.

After witnessing a murder in an apartment on Staten Island, a feminist reporter begins an investigation into the life of the apartment's owner played by Margot Kidder. What she finds out is horrifying.

All of De Palma's touches are here: the Hitchcockian suspense; the overbearing musical score; the split screen and POV camera work; the touch of parapsychological horror. What made him famous for Carrie, can definately be seen in Sisters. I bet the once priceless Bernard Hermann was pleased to be once again working on a film with substance, instead of the run of the mill slasher fare he'd relinquished himself to in his later years. This film is definitely a stand out from the rest of American International's catalog.

I wouldn't say I liked this film, as I don't usually like horror films. It just impressed me as a well crafted film that didn't quite end up how you thought it would.

Sanjuro (1962)

8/10. Kurosawa's sequel to Yojimbo sees Toshiro Mifune reprising his role as the wandering samurai, this time aiding a clan in some medieval intrigue. Not as action packed or as hardcore as I recall Yojimbo being, but still keeps the viewer wondering what may happen next. Mifune plays Sanjuro thoughtfully when needed, yet at the same time a steely killer. A naked sword, unsheathed and unsettled.

Kurosawa's movies always seem to me like they could be just as interesting filmed shot for shot today as they were 50 years ago. Truly timeless.

True Grit (2010)

8/10. What can I say, I love movies that implement old-timey dialogue, and this has it in full. Among the Cohen brothers best films. I was surprised to see Spielberg's name attached to this as executive producer. I wonder what kind of hand he had in it's creation? Regardless, the direction of this film was excellent, but it was the brother's script that really did it for me. Not quite as authentic as The Assassination of Jesse James, but it was an excellent attempt.

Battle: Los Angeles (2011)

8/10. I wish I had seen this movie in the theaters. I remember someone telling me it was lame and that's why I skipped it. Last time I'll base my theater going on that person's opinion.

Basically it's an alien invasion movie meets a standard war film focusing on a single marine unit. Not much character development, but who cares! It's just a fun to watch, epic action movie that never slows down. Time seemed to fly by watching this film. I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to see an exciting action movie with a sci-fi edge.

Spike Lee and the Double-Dolly Shot

Watching "Inside Man", I recalled Spike Lee's use of what I would say is his signature shot: the double-dolly shot. You see when filming, the camera is sometimes placed on what is known as a dolly. Essentially a miniaturized train car on miniaturized train tracks. The movement of the camera is then smooth and fluid as the platform coasts along the tracks. This shot has been utilized since the early days of film, when cameras were large and bulky and heavy and required such a mechanism to achieve any movement at all. Well, in his shot, Lee places the camera on a dolly, and the actor on a second dolly. Thus when the dollies move the actor appears to be seamlessly floating through the scenery.

Lee usually seems to incorporate this shot to signify an inevitability on the part of the character involved. For example in Malcolm X, when Malcolm is walking to the theater where he is gunned down, the shot gives the feel that his destiny is approaching.

In Inside Man, Detective Frazier's rage compels him to the door of the bank in probably the quickest double-dolly shot Lee has ever used.

And in The 25th Hour, Anna Paquin's character floats through a club as if on air.

Lee uses this shot in most of his films, in my opinion to ultimate effect. Not as a gimmick but as a tool of the narrative. The actors are more or less motionless in the double dolly, as opposed to the reverse-POV camera shots (think "Requiem For a Dream") which capture even the tiniest of movements. With the double dolly an almost out of body experience is projected onto the character. Keep an eye out for it.

Inside Man (2006)

8/10. Re-watched one of my favorite Spike Lee movies, "Inside Man". A heist movie, about a particularly perfect bank heist. It's a pretty straight forward thriller, no overt socio-political messages like in many of Lee's other works. Really, it's as much of a popcorn movie as I think Lee can muster. A tight script from first time writer Russel Gewirtz made this movie a treat to film, I'm sure. See it if you haven't.

The King's Speech (2010)

7/10 stars. Who would have thought that a movie about speech therapy could be so enthralling. I guess if you add in some psychotherapy, family drama, and geopolitical weight you can't help but spin a winning tale. The fact that it was all true makes it that much better. Must mention Danny Cohen in particular. His intriguing camera work and beautiful cinematography made this film that much more enjoyable to watch. And Colin Firth most assuredly deserved his Oscar win.

Super 8 (2011)

7/10 stars. I think the trailers for this movie were a little more exciting than the movie itself. Don't get me wrong, I liked Super 8. It just felt rushed in production. The reviews say Abrams was trying to channel Spielberg, which was pretty blatant, including several Close Encounters homages, it just didn't have all the emotional punch that Spielberg usually manages. It was flashy and fun sure, but don't go in with too high of expectations. I think the best example were the conversations among the kids. Spielberg's handling of such things always felt way natural with multiple ad libbed dialogues going on at once (think Goonies or ET). Abrams just doesn't have that same kind of handle, everything was scripted, from a pretty predictable and emotionally dry script... Still, I liked it.

Here's the misleading trailer that made it seem totally epic:

Fade In

This is a poorly written, rarely updated, blog for my movie reviews and other movie related posts and comments.

Labels include:

- spoiler: contains spoilers
- */10: rating number out of 10
- review: full review of the film including summary
- comment: brief comment after viewing
- analysis: comment or review breaking down themes, tropes, metaphors and other meanings
- essay: discussing a specific thesis
- coming soon: regarding upcoming releases
- news: current events
- non-fiction: regarding documentaries, books about film, history of film, etc.
- art: movie related visual artwork
- image: photo or other image
- video: video clip
- trailer: movie trailer
- music: soundtracks and movie music
- script: screenplay
- quote: quotation
- making-of: regarding behind the scenes information
- people: regarding filmmakers, cast and crew
- tech: regarding movie technology and technique in film production and post-production
- write: regarding screenwriting
- theater: related to the movie theater and the movie theater experience
- me: personal, regarding myself specifically

Note: my rating system is entirely subjective, completely personal. Out of ten, here's what the numbers mean:

0 - never want to see again
1 - really hated
2 - hated
3 - really didn't like
4 - didn't like
5 - so-so, okay
6 - pretty good
7 - liked
8 - really liked
9 - loved
10 - absolutey loved