THE OX-BOW INCIDENT (1943) *****
D: William A. Wellman S: Henry Fonda, Harry Morgan.
After the murder of a rancher, a posse is formed to find the killers and enact justice whether those found did the crime or not. Once again Henry Fonda plays the moral conscience of the audience.
This powerful drama looks at the horrors of the mob mentality, the definition of justice, the abuse of power, the courage to do what is right and the power of one's own conscience.
The film doesn't strike a false note leaving you flustered, angry, upset, saddened and in the end demanding justice. At only 75 minutes, this is a fast film that will have a lasting impact upon viewing.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
01-05-10: The Triad Saga Continues
TRIAD ELECTION (Hak se wui yi wo wai kwai) (2006) ****
D: Johnnie To. S: Louis Koo, Simon Yam.
The one thing I love about these films is that the guy you find yourself rooting for is just as malicious and violent as the other guy.
Triad Election picks up two years after the events of the first film. Another election is at hand, the current Chairman refuses to give up his power while two others are are looking to be elected. The road that all parties take to assure their victory is a violent path full of backstabbing, betrayal, corruption and some moments of humor.
This film is the purist example of the old adage about absolute power. Consider this a spoiler, there's a character who wanted to uphold the traditions of the election that have been passed down from generation to generation. When that's threatened he will do what's necessary to protect that tradition. However, when tradition gets in the way of what he wants, tradition be damned.
This is a worthy sequel to the original. It's not better than but definitely an equal. I for one am looking forward to the next election.
D: Johnnie To. S: Louis Koo, Simon Yam.
The one thing I love about these films is that the guy you find yourself rooting for is just as malicious and violent as the other guy.
Triad Election picks up two years after the events of the first film. Another election is at hand, the current Chairman refuses to give up his power while two others are are looking to be elected. The road that all parties take to assure their victory is a violent path full of backstabbing, betrayal, corruption and some moments of humor.
This film is the purist example of the old adage about absolute power. Consider this a spoiler, there's a character who wanted to uphold the traditions of the election that have been passed down from generation to generation. When that's threatened he will do what's necessary to protect that tradition. However, when tradition gets in the way of what he wants, tradition be damned.
This is a worthy sequel to the original. It's not better than but definitely an equal. I for one am looking forward to the next election.
Monday, January 4, 2010
01-04-10: Johnnie To's Election
ELECTION (Hak se wui) (2005) ****
D: Johnnie To S: Simon Yam, Tony Leung Ka Fai.
This is an action-packed Triad film but not with the type of action you'd expect. There are flourishes of violence here and there but all the action comes from the drama.
A Hong Kong Triad is about to elect a new chairman, one is well respected and the other is a hot-headed loose cannon. When the latter believes he will lose the election he takes matters into his hands, actions that could start a full out Triad war between the factions.
The film delves deep into honor, loyalty, respect and betrayal. It's a fascinating look inside the Triads and how law enforcements deals with them.
The moments of violence are unexpected, not over-the-top and feel very real.
It's well acted and is one of To's best films.
D: Johnnie To S: Simon Yam, Tony Leung Ka Fai.
This is an action-packed Triad film but not with the type of action you'd expect. There are flourishes of violence here and there but all the action comes from the drama.
A Hong Kong Triad is about to elect a new chairman, one is well respected and the other is a hot-headed loose cannon. When the latter believes he will lose the election he takes matters into his hands, actions that could start a full out Triad war between the factions.
The film delves deep into honor, loyalty, respect and betrayal. It's a fascinating look inside the Triads and how law enforcements deals with them.
The moments of violence are unexpected, not over-the-top and feel very real.
It's well acted and is one of To's best films.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
01-03-10: Terry Gilliam's latest
THE IMAGINARIUM OF DOCTOR PARNASSUS (2008) ***
D: Terry Gilliam S: Heath Ledger, Christopher Plummer, Lily Cole
Terry Gilliam's latest tells the tale of a traveling side show and the trouble that ensues when they come across a man with a mysterious past.
It would be a disservice to the film to reveal too much plot info so I will not do so.
The film is visually striking but it just doesn't connect with the audience. The fantasy sequences are vintage Gilliam, the only difference is they are now presented in CGI.
There is alot that goes on in the film. In particular, how we perceive and see ourselves in our own imagination.
The performances are good with the exception of one.
It's worth checking out if you're a Gilliam fan. Non-fans may be interested but their attention my wear thin before it all ends.
D: Terry Gilliam S: Heath Ledger, Christopher Plummer, Lily Cole
Terry Gilliam's latest tells the tale of a traveling side show and the trouble that ensues when they come across a man with a mysterious past.
It would be a disservice to the film to reveal too much plot info so I will not do so.
The film is visually striking but it just doesn't connect with the audience. The fantasy sequences are vintage Gilliam, the only difference is they are now presented in CGI.
There is alot that goes on in the film. In particular, how we perceive and see ourselves in our own imagination.
The performances are good with the exception of one.
It's worth checking out if you're a Gilliam fan. Non-fans may be interested but their attention my wear thin before it all ends.
1-02-10: From the steps of the Museum of Art to the Steps of Odessa
ROCKY V-THE DIRECTOR'S CUT (1990) ***1/2
D: John G. Avildsen S: Sylvester Stallone, Talia Shire, Burt Young, Tommy Morrison
When "Rocky V" was originally released it wasn't well received. Many regard it as the weakest entry in the franchise, I don't entirely agree with that assessment. I've had friends say that's not what they wanted to see, Rocky in the dumps. No one liked Tommy. The whole storyline with Rocky Jr. seemed weak on account of Sage's acting. I'm not saying it's not without it's flaws, but as a character driven story it is better than Rocky IV. Rocky films are at their best when they don't make the fight the central part of the story, it's the characters we want to see. Rocky IV did that and while many consider that the best one, I believe it's the weakest entry.
In "Rocky V", Rocky is forced into retirement due to medical complications and is bankrupt thanks to some misguided money dealings by Paulie. Rocky takes a young fighter under his wing and trains him. Meanwhile, his family begins to grow distant.
I had no idea a director's cut of this existed until recently. I think it's pretty well known that after the film was done, Stallone took over in the editing room and more or less made the film his own. Avildsen actually released his cut online a few years ago.
In my opinion, it is better than the theatrical version. First thing that stands out to me is that the temp track used Conti's and DiCola's themes. None of that hip-hop stuff that I found annoying at the time. For example, in the theatrical cut the hip-hop version of "Take You Back" is heard when we see the Balboa's moving back into the old neighborhood. In the director's cut, it's the original version. Vince DiCola's training theme was used over the montage for Tommy's rise to the top.
The issue of the brain damage that Rocky suffers is now more prominent. There's a touching scene where Rocky tries to explain to his son that his mind is not what it used to be. In another, during the medical examination scene Rocky tries to express his frustration at the thought of retirement but he starts to stutter because he's having difficulty thinking.
The most significant change in the film is the street fight which is now underscored by Conti's themes. The fight seems more real and has more weight to it. The fight is not choppily edited and has a sense of progression as opposed to the fight we see in the theatrical cut. Throughout the director's cut, Tommy continues to bring up respect. He looks for respect when he fights Balboa. In the end of the fight, Tommy clearly loses but Rocky offers him his hand. Tommy takes it, he got his respect. Sure he lost but now he knows his worth. In the original cut, you don't get that. Yeah, Rocky kicked your ass, kiss off.
If they kept in much of the dialogue and kept the original fight, it may have been better received.
It's certainly worth a look.
http://nukethefridge.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2444:rocky-v-alternate-cut-found&catid=17:trailers-and-videos&Itemid=44
Check it out!
THE BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN (1925) ****1/2
D: Segei M. Eisenstein S: A cast of thousands!!!
Potemkin is a propoganda tale about the events that ultimately lead up to the Bolshevik Revolution.
It's visually arresting, epic in scope and powerfully told.
This film contains one of the most memorable, terrifying and awe-inspiring set pieces every committed to film. The Odessa Steps sequence is a sight to behold. You may recall DePalma's "The Untouchables" paid homage to this sequence in that film. The power of seeing the woman carrying her child up the steps is haunting.
At 74 minutes long, the film is packed to the brim with action and drama.
It's definitely worth seeing.
D: John G. Avildsen S: Sylvester Stallone, Talia Shire, Burt Young, Tommy Morrison
When "Rocky V" was originally released it wasn't well received. Many regard it as the weakest entry in the franchise, I don't entirely agree with that assessment. I've had friends say that's not what they wanted to see, Rocky in the dumps. No one liked Tommy. The whole storyline with Rocky Jr. seemed weak on account of Sage's acting. I'm not saying it's not without it's flaws, but as a character driven story it is better than Rocky IV. Rocky films are at their best when they don't make the fight the central part of the story, it's the characters we want to see. Rocky IV did that and while many consider that the best one, I believe it's the weakest entry.
In "Rocky V", Rocky is forced into retirement due to medical complications and is bankrupt thanks to some misguided money dealings by Paulie. Rocky takes a young fighter under his wing and trains him. Meanwhile, his family begins to grow distant.
I had no idea a director's cut of this existed until recently. I think it's pretty well known that after the film was done, Stallone took over in the editing room and more or less made the film his own. Avildsen actually released his cut online a few years ago.
In my opinion, it is better than the theatrical version. First thing that stands out to me is that the temp track used Conti's and DiCola's themes. None of that hip-hop stuff that I found annoying at the time. For example, in the theatrical cut the hip-hop version of "Take You Back" is heard when we see the Balboa's moving back into the old neighborhood. In the director's cut, it's the original version. Vince DiCola's training theme was used over the montage for Tommy's rise to the top.
The issue of the brain damage that Rocky suffers is now more prominent. There's a touching scene where Rocky tries to explain to his son that his mind is not what it used to be. In another, during the medical examination scene Rocky tries to express his frustration at the thought of retirement but he starts to stutter because he's having difficulty thinking.
The most significant change in the film is the street fight which is now underscored by Conti's themes. The fight seems more real and has more weight to it. The fight is not choppily edited and has a sense of progression as opposed to the fight we see in the theatrical cut. Throughout the director's cut, Tommy continues to bring up respect. He looks for respect when he fights Balboa. In the end of the fight, Tommy clearly loses but Rocky offers him his hand. Tommy takes it, he got his respect. Sure he lost but now he knows his worth. In the original cut, you don't get that. Yeah, Rocky kicked your ass, kiss off.
If they kept in much of the dialogue and kept the original fight, it may have been better received.
It's certainly worth a look.
http://nukethefridge.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2444:rocky-v-alternate-cut-found&catid=17:trailers-and-videos&Itemid=44
Check it out!
THE BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN (1925) ****1/2
D: Segei M. Eisenstein S: A cast of thousands!!!
Potemkin is a propoganda tale about the events that ultimately lead up to the Bolshevik Revolution.
It's visually arresting, epic in scope and powerfully told.
This film contains one of the most memorable, terrifying and awe-inspiring set pieces every committed to film. The Odessa Steps sequence is a sight to behold. You may recall DePalma's "The Untouchables" paid homage to this sequence in that film. The power of seeing the woman carrying her child up the steps is haunting.
At 74 minutes long, the film is packed to the brim with action and drama.
It's definitely worth seeing.
Friday, January 1, 2010
When movie watching meant something.
Back when I worked in a theatre in NJ, we actually did what we could to ensure everyone had an enjoyable movie going experience.
The standing policy was "No Children Under 6 Admitted into PG13 or R Rated Films after 6pm". Ushers would actually do theatre checks every 15-20 minutes into the feature. Projectionists would actually ensure that everything is framed up when the previews start and check that the feature is in frame when it starts.
Since coming to LA, I haven't seen anything like this anywhere with the exception of the No Children Under 6 policy at a few theatres.
The theatre checks were done to ensure that picture and sound looks good, as well as ensure proper audience behavior. When was the last time you saw an usher tell people to be quiet? Or the last time someone told someone to stop texting?
When a feature starts, it's the projectionists job to make sure everything is properly framed. If the previews are off by a sprocket, they need to check that the feature is in frame when it starts. I've never seen this done. When I was a projectionist, I would make sure the trailers are in frame before walking away to start the next film. When walking by I'd check to make sure the feature is in frame. Countless times from the Arclight to Burbank, I have not seen anyone make a framing adjustment during the trailers which led to the film being out of frame. It's not my job to get up and walk all the way back to the lobby to ask some one to fix the framing. Just because the picture is on the screen and no frame lines are visible doesn't mean the picture is centered. The New Beverly is the only theatre I know of that corrects the framing as the feature goes. They have older prints and are always at the ready to fix any problems.
Another thing that really pisses me off is Pacific's policy, which includes the Arclight, to only issue readmissions in lieu of refunds. I had a friend who was trying to make a show, Defiance, but finally texted me that they won't make it in time. The feature had just started. When I told them that they said if you had come out they would have refunded it. I said you're telling me I'd have to miss part of the movie to take care of this. It's there policy. Incidentally, the theatre was the Grove and I still have that pass. I haven't been back there in over a year, nothing there to see that I can't see elsewhere.
The movies are what people are paying for, if you're gonna half-ass when presenting them they should just assume watch them in the comfort of they're own home.
The standing policy was "No Children Under 6 Admitted into PG13 or R Rated Films after 6pm". Ushers would actually do theatre checks every 15-20 minutes into the feature. Projectionists would actually ensure that everything is framed up when the previews start and check that the feature is in frame when it starts.
Since coming to LA, I haven't seen anything like this anywhere with the exception of the No Children Under 6 policy at a few theatres.
The theatre checks were done to ensure that picture and sound looks good, as well as ensure proper audience behavior. When was the last time you saw an usher tell people to be quiet? Or the last time someone told someone to stop texting?
When a feature starts, it's the projectionists job to make sure everything is properly framed. If the previews are off by a sprocket, they need to check that the feature is in frame when it starts. I've never seen this done. When I was a projectionist, I would make sure the trailers are in frame before walking away to start the next film. When walking by I'd check to make sure the feature is in frame. Countless times from the Arclight to Burbank, I have not seen anyone make a framing adjustment during the trailers which led to the film being out of frame. It's not my job to get up and walk all the way back to the lobby to ask some one to fix the framing. Just because the picture is on the screen and no frame lines are visible doesn't mean the picture is centered. The New Beverly is the only theatre I know of that corrects the framing as the feature goes. They have older prints and are always at the ready to fix any problems.
Another thing that really pisses me off is Pacific's policy, which includes the Arclight, to only issue readmissions in lieu of refunds. I had a friend who was trying to make a show, Defiance, but finally texted me that they won't make it in time. The feature had just started. When I told them that they said if you had come out they would have refunded it. I said you're telling me I'd have to miss part of the movie to take care of this. It's there policy. Incidentally, the theatre was the Grove and I still have that pass. I haven't been back there in over a year, nothing there to see that I can't see elsewhere.
The movies are what people are paying for, if you're gonna half-ass when presenting them they should just assume watch them in the comfort of they're own home.
01-01-10: From the heights of Scorsese to the depths of the toilet
THE KING OF COMEDY (1983) ****1/2
D: Martin Scorsese. S: Robert DeNiro, Jerry Lewis, Sandra Bernhard
This is a dark, funny and at times uncomfortable black comedy about the dangers of celebrity and obsession. This is definitely one of DeNiro's best performances. Like Taxi Driver, you are just waiting for him to blow up. When he does, it's not what you expected. DeNiro plays an aspiring stand-up comic who will not accept no for an answer. It's taken me forever to get around to watching this one and I was not disappointed. The thing I found most fascinating is that throughout the film we see moments of Pupkin's imagination or is it madness. In today's society the conclusion of the film may raise some interesting questions. Released in 1983, the end would seem outlandish however in present day it is very plausible as outlandish as it may seem. So it begs the question, what did we see at the end of the picture?
TROLL 2 (1990) 1/2*
D: Drago Floyd. S: Michael Stephenson, Connie McFarland
I have heard about this film's reputation as being one of the worst films ever made. In fact, a documentary was made about it "Best Worst Movie" which I must now see. Going in I knew it was going to be bad but so bad that I fell asleep at one point. Yes, when I woke up I rewound it and finished it. The film is a sequel in namesake only. It's about a boy who must convince his family that they are in danger before it's too late. Horrible acting, atrocious dialog, terrible direction and the list goes on. I wonder if when they were making this film did they know they were making a bad movie or were they playing it for laughs? There are moments where the acting is so over the top you have to think they can't be serious. Can they? As a film, it's really bad. 95mins felt like 2 1/2 hours, not including naptime. However, there is one saving grace. This is the kinda film you want to have your friends over to watch and just go all MST3K over. You're guaranteed to get more enjoyment out of it then if you were to just watch it as is.
D: Martin Scorsese. S: Robert DeNiro, Jerry Lewis, Sandra Bernhard
This is a dark, funny and at times uncomfortable black comedy about the dangers of celebrity and obsession. This is definitely one of DeNiro's best performances. Like Taxi Driver, you are just waiting for him to blow up. When he does, it's not what you expected. DeNiro plays an aspiring stand-up comic who will not accept no for an answer. It's taken me forever to get around to watching this one and I was not disappointed. The thing I found most fascinating is that throughout the film we see moments of Pupkin's imagination or is it madness. In today's society the conclusion of the film may raise some interesting questions. Released in 1983, the end would seem outlandish however in present day it is very plausible as outlandish as it may seem. So it begs the question, what did we see at the end of the picture?
TROLL 2 (1990) 1/2*
D: Drago Floyd. S: Michael Stephenson, Connie McFarland
I have heard about this film's reputation as being one of the worst films ever made. In fact, a documentary was made about it "Best Worst Movie" which I must now see. Going in I knew it was going to be bad but so bad that I fell asleep at one point. Yes, when I woke up I rewound it and finished it. The film is a sequel in namesake only. It's about a boy who must convince his family that they are in danger before it's too late. Horrible acting, atrocious dialog, terrible direction and the list goes on. I wonder if when they were making this film did they know they were making a bad movie or were they playing it for laughs? There are moments where the acting is so over the top you have to think they can't be serious. Can they? As a film, it's really bad. 95mins felt like 2 1/2 hours, not including naptime. However, there is one saving grace. This is the kinda film you want to have your friends over to watch and just go all MST3K over. You're guaranteed to get more enjoyment out of it then if you were to just watch it as is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
