Redux: Jaws.

Redux #480: Jaws.

Cast: 

Roy Scheider (Chief Martin Brody), Robert Shaw (Quint), Richard Dreyfuss (Matt Hooper), Lorraine Gary (Ellen Brody), Murray Hamilton (Mayor Larry Vaughn), Carl Gottlieb (Meadows), Jeffrey Kramer (Deputy Leonard Hendricks), Susan Backlinie (Chrissie Watkins), Lee Fierro (Mrs. Kintner), and Peter Benchley (Interviewer) Directed by Steven Spielberg (#126 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind, #168 - Raiders of the Lost Ark, #169 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, #170 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, #302 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, #351 - Schindler's List)

Review: 

You might wonder why I'm giving a revised review of a movie I covered before. Well, that review was nearly 12 years ago on November 11, 2013. Enjoy.

Like most great movies, it all started with taking a novel into one's hands. In early 1974, Peter Benchley's debut novel Jaws was published, which had seen him take inspiration from shark attacks and the exploits of Frank Mundus, a fisherman that once caught a shark weighing over 4,000 pounds off the New York shores. Benchley thought the book wasn't going to be a hit, mainly because it was a first novel and that it was "about a fish". The result was a novel that sold over five million copies in its first 18 months. Ironically, both Benchley and Mundus became conservationists in later years, with the former telling people that he could not write the book as it was in good conscience (for Mundus, he later called the movie "the funniest and the stupidest movie I've ever seen because too many stupid things happened in it.").  Benchley was tasked to write the first draft of the screenplay, and it was he would basically do the "mechanics" of the script more so than characterization, which most notably saw him excise the affair between Brody and Hooper (upon suggestion). Others delivered uncredited work such as Howard Sackler, John Milius, Matthew Robbins, and Hal Barwood; Carl Gottlieb, who was tasked to bring in "some levity", was given co-credit with Benchley on the screenplay. The director would be Steven Spielberg, who had two features to his credit at the time with the TV-film-turned movie Duel (1971) and The Sugarland Express (1974). 159 days of production were spent around Massachusetts and the Atlantic Ocean due to overruns that saw script refinement and a bit of cast strife. You probably already know Jaws was a phenomenon, but it still sounds fun to say it: Universal spent a good deal of money marketing the movie in a media blitz and a strategy that was still not as widely used now: releasing the movie on hundreds of theaters at once for opening week, with over 400 theaters seeing the movie on June 20. For two years, Jaws was the highest-grossing movie of all time and the TV premiere of the movie in 1979 saw over half of the total US audience watch it. Years later, Benchley was asked about a deal involving sequels to Jaws, with him stating, "I don't care about sequels; who'll ever want to make a sequel to a movie about a fish?" Jaws 2, with no Spielberg or Dreyfuss, came out in 1978 as directed by Jeannot Szwarc to mixed reviews. Jaws 3-D (1983) and Jaws: The Revenge (1987, with Gary returning because...) came out later to diminishing box office returns and little-to-no creativity. Benchley went on to write seven more novels, with a handful being adapted into films such as The Deep (1977) and The Island (1980); he died in 2006 at the age of 65.

I admit that I've seen Jaws roughly three times: once in 2013, another a few years later, and lastly just a few days ago with my mom. I wanted to re-live the experience of wondering what was so great about a movie like this, and what better time than in the summer and in July? Steven Spielberg is probably the seminal entertainer for direction in the past fifty years, but I really did want to figure out (at least, again) just how he did it. Whether thought of as an action thriller or as a horror movie (let's be honest, there are people who willingly choose to ignore the latter genre because of bias), there is just something so thrilling about how this movie pushes one's buttons so effectively in great adventure. Filmmakers could only dream to make a movie run as well as one can for two hours that has no bloat or demand for more that come across here, and this is for a film that wisely spaces out its tension until it absolutely becomes important to do what it has to do. To borrow from old me, there were plenty of "animals gone bad" movies before and after this movie such as say, Grizzly (1976), Piranha (1978; widely considered among the best of the Jaws ripoffs), Alligator (1980), and so on, but Jaws just has that enthusiasm and commitment to its tension. You have to remember that the movie characters are meant to be more likable than the book characters, which dealt with a subplot involving the Mayor being tied to the Mafia and the aforementioned affair between two characters. The funny thing is that it was easier to cast Brody with a perceived "tough guy" in Scheider than the other two key roles, which apparently were not cast until the last few days of pre-production that resulted in two people being cast with how good they were in other people's movies at the time: actor/writer Robert Shaw, who had worked on the recent Universal Pictures hit in The Sting (1973) for Quint and American Graffiti (1973) star Richard Dreyfuss for Hooper. They all are essentially perfect for what needs to happen for the film. Scheider in particular shines because he fits the everyman type like a glove, one with real worries and quibbles that sells for all who know the plight of being, well, a fish out of water.

Shaw was a man of the stage who happened to write on the side, so of course he can play the ultimate rugged captain (he was a Bond adversary, for heaven's sake, he could do anything). Every line of his has a certain type of timing and cadence that we find listening to intently that is rewarded with that one particular sequence in the "U.S.S. Indianapolis monologue" that he sells in such a soulful way that it almost doesn't matter just who (Shaw, Milius, Sackler, what have you) came up with what in writing it. Apparently, Dreyfuss thought that the movie was going to be a "disaster" because of the general boredom that came in waiting to film. There's the veneer of charm within a part that apparently was molded to be Spielberg's "alter ego" (debate on that), and Dreyfuss draws a few light chuckles even in the great admirer of, well, the routines in science. Bottom line: you care about these folks. It may interest you to know that this was the debut theatrical performance of Gary, who had done a handful of television performances. But it is Hamilton and his steely smarm in the art of evasiveness that probably sticks out the most now more than ever: a person in a position of power that hears of certain facts and doggedly moves forward with his own self-serving needs anyway. Evidently, there is actual footage of real sharks in the film, as Ron and Valerie Taylor shot footage in the waters of South Australia that had an actor in a mini shark cage. The look of the shark isn't what matters in the end, what matters is the fact that it could come when it comes to suspense that came from someone who honed their craft in suspense with Duel (1971) and plays with the audience just enough to where the climax will splatter in harrowing excellence. As a whole, Jaws is the phenomenon for monster movies one would hope to aspire to do. I'm not really sure exactly where it rests on the pantheon of entertaining Spielberg movies when considering his earlier work (and what's to come), but it sure has a hell of an argument for making a good time.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Great Race.

Review #2396: The Great Race.

Cast: 

Jack Lemmon (Professor Fate and Prince Friedrich Hapnick), Tony Curtis (Leslie Gallant III, aka The Great Leslie), Natalie Wood (Maggie DuBois), Peter Falk (Maximillian Mean), Keenan Wynn (Hezekiah Sturdy), Arthur O'Connell (Henry Goodbody), Vivian Vance (Hester Goodbody), Dorothy Provine (Lily Olay), Larry Storch (Texas Jack), Ross Martin (Baron Rolf von Stuppe), Hal Smith (the Mayor of Boracho), Denver Pyle (the Sheriff of Boracho), and Marvin Kaplan (Fisbee) Directed by Blake Edwards (#329 - The Pink Panther, #481 - The Party, #899 - A Shot in the Dark, #1461 - 10)

Review: 

Every couple of years, some folks try to do a homage to the old favorites. But when you are Blake Edwards, why the hell not? The Oklahoma native grew up with a stepfather that was the son of a silent movie director (J. Gordon Edwards). Sure, he didn't become a film production manager like him, but Edwards did jobs as an actor before serving in the United States Coast Guard before becoming a director in the television-friendly 1950s. He became a director worth watching closely with films such as Operation Petticoat (1959), Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961), Days of Wine and Roses (1962), and, well, The Pink Panther series, obviously. With The Great Race, it took a few years to get things rolling. Apparently, the idea for the film was conceived by Edwards in 1960 that took inspiration from the 1908 automobile race from New York City to Paris, France. Arthur A. Ross was brought in to develop a story to present that eventually saw him hired to do a more substantial script. While Maurice Richlin was recruited to polish the script, only Ross got credit for the screenplay to go with a story that was credited to Ross and Edwards. Amidst bad weather and overrun that meant a budget of $12 million, the movie was not exactly a considerable success at the time of release in July of 1965*, but at least Edwards kept busy (his next film came with What Did You Do in the War, Daddy? the following year), and he kept going with his slapstick interests with such films as The Party (1968).

The last few years brought folks to view people pop in for a potential chuckle with Around the World in 80 Days (1956) and It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World (1963). So, we have a pretty neat Lemmon, a worthy sidekick to accompany him in Falk, and even a decent time to spend with Wood (to a point). Hell, and then there is Curtis, our hero to try and hold along a wobbly story, fine gags, and plenty of time to consider the scope of movies, I suppose. In short, Great Race is either on par with Around the World or a bit lower. Apparently, there were quite a few names considered for the role ranging from Paul Newman to Charlton Heston. Pity. For whatever reason, Curtis and his performance is akin to someone saying the lines bit-by-bit for a silent movie. Maybe his blandness is supposed to be the point, but my God, his presence is practically eaten by everyone else in the film. The clash between him and Wood that comes up every now and then does not really gel for anything other than cheap gags (get it, get it, a woman trying to stick up for herself). Apparently, Wood only did the film so she could get to play the lead for Inside Daisy Clover (1965). At least she has the grace and chops to try and have fun with the material in all of the bumps on the road for a character that might be thought of as a chore with a lesser actor (for starters, having a character try and rid us of Keenan Wynn's character for even just a bit of time is a foolhardy mistake if we're talking about comparing timing) in a movie with really just five people to see for more than a few minutes of a 160-minute movie. Falk (a regular supporting presence in movies at the time**) is wonderful of course, tagging with Lemmon for worthwhile hijinks, particularly in his expressions and only men of stone find ways to not like Wynn and his timing. The assortment of people who show up are fine for small bits (Provine gets a song while Martin gets to look from afar). The slapstick as a whole is fine, albeit in that dragging sense where you just have to have so much little gags to even get the actual race rolling (it starts with our dastardly villain popping balloons, for example). And then the movie goes into doing an imitation of The Prisoner of Zenda. Sure. The movie wanted to have a great big pie fight akin to, well, you know. It apparently was the longest pie fight sequence in terms of staging and whatever (basically, it took five days and thousands of pies). The quibble I have is that the one person who deserves to be pie'd is Curtis, and he barely gets hit at all. Keep in mind, Lemmon gets double duty with playing two characters as an acceptable ham, but the bland hero? Barely anything, god forbid. Call me a nut for picking and choosing to obsess over plot motivations, but getting from Point A to Point B in the resolution (i.e. the race doesn't end in a true finish because I guess it shows his love or whatever and it couldn't wait until five minutes later) is a bit hokey for a movie called "great race". As a whole, Lemmon and company hold the movie together in what could've just been a crash-out into just making the finish line with the best of intentions. You'll get some chuckles, some interesting visuals and a little bit of everything that could make a worthy candidate among the long-winded epics of its time, if you dare.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Evidently at some point in time, the movie made $25 million. The big winner at any rate would be Treg Brown, who won an Academy Award for Best Sound Effects for this film.

**Falk was an Academy Award nominated actor by then, for Murder, Inc. (1960) and Pocketful of Miracles (1961). Of course, Columbo loomed a few years later.

The Love Bug.

Review #2395: The Love Bug.

Cast: 

Dean Jones (James "Jim" Douglas), Michele Lee (Carole Bennett), David Tomlinson (Peter Thorndyke), Buddy Hackett (Tennessee Steinmetz), Joe Flynn (Havershaw), Benson Fong (Tang Wu), Joe E. Ross (Detective), Barry Kelley (Police sergeant), Iris Adrian (Carhop), Gary Owens (Announcer), Chick Hearn (Announcer), and Andy Granatelli (Association President) Directed by Robert Stevenson (#1415 - Mary Poppins)

Review: 

You might remember Robert Stevenson was an Academy Award-nominated director. But I suppose that's what happens with the strange magic of Mary Poppins (1964), because Stevenson was a veteran director who Walt Disney Productions liked enough to use for nineteen movies. Stevenson had written scripts since the late 1920s and graduated to directing by 1932, which later included movies such the 1937 version of King Solomon's Mines. He even got to do some Hollywood films with David O. Selznick and RKO and got into the television kick before, well, working for Disney for two decades, starting with Johnny Tremain (1957). He directed into his seventies and closed it out with The Shaggy D.A. (1976); he died in 1986 at the age of 81. The movie cites the use of the story "Car, Boy, Girl" by Gordon Buford as its adaptation material. The screenplay was written by Don DaGradi and Bill Walsh (who also produced the film). The movie made its premiere in late 1968 but did not go into wide release until March of 1969 and would you believe it was a major hit on release? Seriously, it was the second-highest grossing movie of that year, so clearly there were follow-ups, albeit with different cast members. Stevenson directed the first follow-up with Herbie Rides Again (1974); Jones returned for just the second follow-up (and the TV projects) with Herbie Goes to Monte Carlo (1977) before Herbie Goes Bananas (1980) and the TV show Herbie, the Love Bug (1982) sent the series into a slumber for a time.*

Honestly, it is a bit hard to resist the charms of Herbie. Sure, it probably isn't as whimsical as say, Mary Poppins, but there really is something that makes me smile about the charms that come around with a silly car and hijinks that is infectious. It has a breezy sense of enthusiasm that manages to ride along with hit-or-miss gags that puddle together for a slap-bang feature, at least for those who go with it knowing what they will get with a friendly-seeming Volkswagen (note the fact that you never hear the brand named in the film**) from the man that also churned out The Absent-Minded Professor (1961) in terms of "light stuff that ended up getting further returns". Jones had done a bit of Broadway and bit roles for MGM before his role in Ensign O'Toole (1962-63) and Under the Yum Yum Tree (1963) led on to getting signed for Disney film productions that started with That Darn Cat! (1965), which was the first of nearly a dozen collaborations with Disney. He plays it basically as ordinary as one can do when fit into a formula that demands a bit of commitment with a smile without going into say, overacting or complete listlessness. Him and Lee are mostly just pleasant, but the highlight is more on hijinks and the presences of Hackett (who inspired the "Herbie" nickname) and Tomlinson. Hackett and his schtick involving a bit of "New Age" syrup and banter with the car (remember that early in the film one bit posits that we put so much love and time into our tech that machines probably think it *is* somebody) that is a bit twee. But at least Tomlinson is delightfully arrogant enough to basically ham it up for chuckles, as one does. The movie probably toils a bit too long at 108 minutes, and it probably has a few wonky effects (depending on how one views say, splitting a car in half), but there are those moments that are neat enough to tickle my funny bone, such as the pursuit sequence, as one does when searching for a sentient car, which naturally leads to both teetering at the Golden Gate Bridge. You know where it's going to go with its vrooms and booms, but at least Herbie is something you'll watch rather than some generic car, I suppose. In general, it is a candy-coated type of movie, one that might be worth a check if in a comfortable mood that takes what they see and just rolls with its sweet chuckles.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Dean Jones returned for a TV movie of The Love Bug in 1997 before folks saw Herbie: Fully Loaded in 2005 in theaters. Not sure if my mom watched any of them, but she seemed fine with The Love Bug, so there's that.

**Do you really want to look up the origins of the Beetle in relations to Germany? 

Pale Flower.

Review #2394: Pale Flower.

Cast: 

Ryō Ikebe (Muraki), Mariko Kaga (Saeko), Takashi Fujiki (Yoh), Naoki Sugiura (Aikawa), Shinichiro Mikami (Reiji), Isao Sasaki (Jiro), Kôji Nakahara (Tamaki), Chisako Hara (Yazuka's Lover), Seiji Miyaguchi (Gang leader Funada), and Eijirô Tôno (Gang Leader Yasuoka) Directed by Masahiro Shinoda (#922 - Himiko)

Review: 

"Reality for its own sake is not what interests me. If my films had to be perfect reconstructions of reality, I would not make them. I begin with reality and see what higher idea comes out of it."

It does seem apt to turn back the clock sometimes and look back to directors not always referred to in the realms of world cinema. So yes, it seemed about time to cover a movie by Masahiro Shinoda. He was born in the city of Gifu and studied at Waseda University to study theater. He worked with Shochiku Studio in 1953 and honed his craft as an assistant director. He made his debut as a director with One-Way Ticket for Love in 1960; he would work with the studio for the first batch of his films. Shinoda worked on over two dozen movies until concluding with Spy Sorge (2003). Among the highlights listed for the director range from Assassination (1964), the original adaptation of the novel Silence in 1971, and Childhood Days (1990); Shinoda died just three months ago this year at the age of 94. With Pale Flower (known as Kawaita hana), the basis for the film was a novel that had been written by Shintaro Ishihara (believe it or not, he decided being a filmmaker wasn't for him and became quite the public politician, for better or worse); Shinoda and Masaru Baba co-wrote the screenplay, with the former writing the first half and the latter writing the second half. The co-producer for the movie was Shigeru Wakatsuki, who had produced The Human Condition trilogy of films [1959-1961] (by this measure, Shinoda was quoted in an interview for Criterion as saying that because of Wakatsuki's involvement and push, Pale Flower wasn't really a Shochiku project and thus this was the first film he learned about independent film production). Shinoda was quoted as saying that he made the film involving yakuza because that world apparently was the only place where the "Japanese ceremonial structure is sustained." Apparently, the methods utilized by Shinoda in emphasizing visuals and sound over dialogue irritated Baba enough that he complained to Shochiku about it (labeling it as "anarchistic", I'm not kidding) that led to several months of delay in releasing the movie (Shinoda later asserted that the film served as a model for the Toei line of yazuka movies), which apparently worked out for it fine anyway.

I suppose a good deal of noirs really do boil down to the face that certain people just cannot escape their destiny. We all are destined to reach the figurative desert to crash and burn at some point in our lives, some are just prepared to end sooner. What we have here is a moody and stark noir that is filled with plenty of moral ambiguity and bleak surroundings for such committed filmmaking. You hear the sights and feel the murky qualities that arise in the puddle of ceremonies and loyalty and, well, gambling. You get to feel what one does to try and capture the feeling of being alive within the snares of killing within the pointlessness of life (consider one of the early lines of the film talking about Tokyo and seeing people crammed into "tiny cage-like boxes" as such "strange animals"). You can feel the despair all around people who clearly aren't going to have a conventional type of end to their metaphorical roads of travel (as for the film itself, it was done in Yokohama). Apparently, Ikebe was curious why Shinoda wanted him to star in the movie, where he apparently was quoted as saying he was "a ham actor", but the director assured him that his type of presence (which for this film has a good deal of walking rather than long lines) would be right for the movie. Kaga just has that strange factor to match Ikebe in self-defeating grace and mystery, one who we can draw ourselves to without knowing that much about in actual fact. Not to simply just cite Shinoda again, but he (and Ishihara) stated that the dynamic between the two is similar to Tristan and Isolde rather than say, Romeo and Juliet. It goes along with a movie where you don't know what you're hearing is music or just sounds (such as say, tap-dancing) for a harsh film where actions are either irrational or just meant to be, if you think about it. Anything can be futile, such as going back to old loves or half-baked hits or so on. The last sequence with the two characters together in the build-up to the hit is particularly a resounding highlight to experience in its stark execution and procedure that might as well be the ending (don't get me wrong, the last sequence does seal up the futility and the ever-lasting hunger succinctly, but you get the idea). As a whole, Pale Flower is a committed bleak noir that is wonderfully shot and executed for a curious time for all involved, a tragedy with crystal-clear maneuverings worth looking into further. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Gate of Hell.

Review #2393: Gate of Hell.

Cast: 

Kazuo Hasegawa (Endo Morito), Machiko Kyō (Lady Kesa), Isao Yamagata (Wataru Watanabe), Yatarō Kurokawa (Taira no Shigemori), Kōtarō Bandō (Rokuroh), Jun Tazaki (Kogenta), Koreya Senda (Taira no Kiyomori), and Masao Shimizu (Fujiwara no Nobuyori) Directed by Teinosuke Kinugasa (#735 - A Page of Madness)

Review: 

Remember Teinosuke Kinugasa? Well, it seemed appropriate to try and remember the man who gave us A Page of Madness (1926; at the time, people thought the movie was lost). Born in Kameyama, Mie Prefecture, he went from being an actor (at least until the onnagata of men specializing in female roles became less prevalent) to becoming a director who made over a hundred movies from 1922 to 1966, and one of those movies included Gate of Hell [known in Japan as Jigokumon] for Daiei Film. The 1950s saw the dawn of Japan getting to see feature films in glorious color, at least occasionally. Carmen Comes Home (1951), as released by Shochiku, was the first to set that trend. Daiei Film, a studio formed during World War II, had their key place come early. They were behind the production of Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon (1950), the first big piece of a great age for Japanese films going beyond its native country. So, what film did Daiei make for its first color of production? Gate of Hell was based off the play Kesa's Husband by author/publisher Kan Kikuchi (coincidence or not, he actually was the first president of the studio*). The script was written by Teinosuke Kinugasa and Masaichi Nagata (the president of Daiei Film), which is generally put in the "jidaigeki" genre (okay that just translates to period dramas before the Meiji Restoration, which in this case is way way back in the 1100s). The movie was done in Eastmancolor (as one does when having imported film stock) and it so happens that you can watch the film in its restored form for quite some time now. In 1954, the movie was awarded two Academy Awards: the "Honorary Foreign Language Film Award" and for Best Costume Design (back in the days of awarding ones for films in color) to go along with the grand prize at the Cannes Film Festival.

For 86 minutes, one does get a wonderfully curious movie to experience in all of the glances possible, which extends beyond the vivid reds and greens that come across the screen. You might call it a polite sort of tragedy in the slow boil that comes through with this movie, one that allows you to peek behind the curtain of what people seemed to look like in the seemingly quaint times and what really lurks beyond pleasantries and appearances. Sure, those first couple of minutes (call it about 20) are probably the most sluggish in terms of setup, but it is generally worth it after that because of what you will see in the aftermath of conflict that merely leads into the seething-type of conflict. Hasegawa was a prolific actor for over 300 movies in his life, and he does pretty well with this role that an actor would love to have play out on the stage in his unnerving conviction that plays out here. It isn't so much that he is playing a villain as much as you are watching a creature wrapped in lust and obsession that might as well fit the title of the film. Sure, you could label him as just an obsessed creep, but you have to understand that his plight is not exactly helped by the people around him (in terms of samurais, remember). Kyō (speaking of prolific actresses, she was in Rashomon) does quite well with showing the terror that comes across in being wrapped in a situation of an unwieldly triangle that isn't really love on all sides and also isn't easy to simply untangle from (in contrast, one sees a calm Yamagata, at least for one living in such polite surroundings involving samurai that isn't just taking up a sword). Wishes to acquire others are thought to be what you might call quaint rather than, well, pick any other word besides "odd", but you do get to see from one person the true meaning of sacrifice. If it wasn't already stressed to you, it is a pretty movie to watch, one that strikes you with its colors in vivid nature that remind you what it means to look and feel what a film is trying to convey to you about people and surroundings that make for a vibrant experience. It has its highs and lows in pacing, but it never stumbles in being a worthwhile film worth a close eye.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*Incidentally, he is the namesake of an award for achievement in Japanese literary culture.

Cobra (1986).

Review #2392: Cobra (1986).

Cast: 

Sylvester Stallone (Lieutenant Marion "Cobra" Cobretti), Brigitte Nielsen (Ingrid Knudsen), Reni Santoni (Sergeant Tony Gonzales), Andrew Robinson (Detective Monte), Brian Thompson ("Night Slasher"), John Herzfeld (Cho), Lee Garlington (Officer Nancy Stalk), Art LaFleur (Captain Sears), Marco Rodriguez (Supermarket Killer), Ross St. Phillip (Security Guard), and Val Avery (Chief Halliwell) Directed by George P. Cosmatos (#818 - Rambo: First Blood Part II, #1177 - Tombstone)

Review: 

Sure, it is loosely adapted from a book. But the real curiosity might be from the fact that the script for the movie was inspired by a failed idea. You might remember that Sylvester Stallone was the serious candidate to star in 1984's Beverly Hills Cop (after the attached actor in Mickey Rourke dropped out) at least before he made his script revisions. Apparently, he was once quoted as saying "Somehow, me trying to comically terrorize Beverly Hills is not the stuff that great yuk-festivals are made from. So I re-wrote the script to suit what I do best, and by the time I was done, it looked like the opening scene from Saving Private Ryan on the beaches of Normandy." The bottom line is that Stallone's revisions were just not suitable to film (particularly in the budget) and, well, you know the rest. Stallone was credited writing the screenplay while the "based off" material was the 1974 novel A Running Duck, as written by Paula Gosling. Interestingly, the novel was later published under a different name in Fair Game and Andrew Sipes filmed an adaptation of the book under that title in 1995 with William Baldwin as star. The finished version of Cobra runs at 89 minutes after extensive battles with editing, since the MPAA originally rated it as an X, and it probably didn't help that it was released in the wake of Top Gun (1986). Deleted sequences from the film do exist online, if one is curious to search for it, anyway (one small scene for example, has a kid delivering a present to the police that is stated to be a hand). This was actually a co-production between The Cannon Group and Warner Bros. (only the logo of the latter is seen, naturally), and Stallone would be involved with the two again with Over the Top (1987).

It's very amusing to make a Dirty Harry pastiche with two of the actors from the first film (Robinson and Santoni) in it, don't you think? There might be some who believe the film would serve as a comedy to lampoon the over-the-top nature of the movie, what with its view of a character taking extrajudicial measures to get things done and the occasional one liner (those people probably think MacGruber is just as funny as Cobra or go on Reddit). Well, I take that back, he starts the film by listing crime statistics of burglaries happening every 11 seconds and violent crimes happening every 25 seconds and so on. It is a pretty terse 89-minute movie, but I think you can see how someone could enjoy the proceedings, particularly with the curious observation that Stallone saw the lead character as "Bruce Springsteen with a badge." Even in its average qualities that mark it as roughly equivalent to Cosmatos & Stallone's previous collaboration with Rambo: First Blood Part II (as released one year prior), there is something curious to watch with a movie that basically comes off as a supercut of all the cliches possible for strange delight: villains with understated motives? attempts at levity for romance in the middle of mayhem? A secondary character exchanging quips with our lead that gets setup for getting wounded in an ensuing firefight? A grisly finish to close out the proceedings? All that and more is present here, and it goes to show that you can include plenty of familiar aspects of an action movie and seem pretty enjoyable anyways. Edits aside, there is an energetic presence to the film that comes out quite clearly even if it wasn't going to a series of movies. Stallone might've had a bit of an ego present with being part of filming, but there is still something worth watching him engage with the proceedings, which might as well be blueprint for further smart-ass heroes going against free-wheeling bad guys in the future with Stone Cold (1991). It doesn't really mean great chemistry with Nielsen (Stallone's wife at the time), but I can imagine worse. Thompson may not exactly get much to really do as the heavy (okay, there's a cult that likes playing with axes, I expected less anyway), but I like it anyway, he just has a ferocious energy that inherently watchable, particularly when it comes to the climax (okay, it ends with him on a hook, but still). You get the "heh, that's nice to see" with folks such as Santoni and LaFleur, suffice to say, mainly because it's hard to make an unenjoyable wiseass accidentally in an action movie. Robinson* and character apparently was meant to be the real bad guy of the movie, complete with a planned sequence involving a tattoo at the end. Even here there is still a wiseass energy that I can't help but like from Robinson, cliches be damned. The supermarket sequence and the climax are fair enough highlights in mayhem, at least for those who know that what they get here is mainly stuff that wouldn't be too removed from a Dirty Harry offshoot (the ones who don't hesitate to label those movies as "fascist" would probably get more blubbery in criticizing it, but, well, the eyes only roll so much). Cobra might be thought as the litmus test for seeing one's taste in the same way in the same way that one can tell if someone is prevaricating you in explaining things as evasively as possible**. You either get with it or don't, as Cobra is a lubricious but worthwhile piece of entertainment. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*See, I don't hate Reddit, here's a source from there, as Robinson was quoted on there as calling Cobra: "The worst movie I was ever in... well, there are a few that qualify, but on another level Cobra was one of the best things I've ever done because it gave me the down payment on our house of 30 years."

**I heard that one word earlier, so why not use it?

All Monsters Attack.

Review #2391: All Monsters Attack.

Cast: 

Tomonori Yazaki (Ichiro Miki), Kenji Sahara (Kenichi Miki), Machiko Naka (Tamiko Miki), Hideyo Amamoto (Shinpei Minami), Sachio Sakai (Sembayashi), Kazuo Suzuki (Okuda), Junichi Ito (Sanko Gabara), Hidemi Ito (Sachiko), Haruo Nakajima (Godzilla), Marchan the Dwarf (Minilla; Midori Uchiyama as the voice of Minilla), and Yasuhiko Kakuyuki (Gabara)

Directed by Ishirō Honda (#167 - Godzilla [1954/1956], #711 - Mothra, #1092 - Gorath, #1224 - King Kong vs. Godzilla, #1225 - Mothra vs. Godzilla, #1226 - Ghidorah, the Three-Headed Monster, #1623 - Invasion of Astro-Monster, #1999 - Matango, #2250 - Destroy All Monsters)

Review: 

"When I make a monster film, I never think that it will be for children. As a director, I’m a man who wants to imagine and express a story. But when it’s distributed to the theaters it’s always the children who are the most interested ... particularly those in the primary schools.”

You might think I am perhaps a bit generous to select films of the Godzilla franchise, at least within its early years. Ebirah, Horror of the Deep (1966) was the low point for me in the first batch of movies*, if I remember correctly. Anyway, let's deliver some context to what the hell this movie is in the first place: Destroy All Monsters (1968) was planned to be the final Godzilla film at one point in time...until it wasn't the plan. They thought of developing an animated series with Filmation and while that collapsed, the idea to do a Godzilla movie centered for the children's market with a focus on doing it fast and cheap was an obvious one for Toho to latch onto. Outlandish ideas for young audiences wasn't a new concept for Honda anyway, as evidenced by films he did such as King Kong Escapes (1967), a co-production with Rankin/Bass Productions that dealt with North Pole hideouts and guys named "Dr. Who". The movie started production...in October 1969. For release in late December 1969. Ishiro Honda directed his eighth (out of nine) Godzilla movie, one that saw the special effects scenes shot alongside the drama sequences (Eiji Tsuburaya was given credit out of respect), with each being filmed in the same (small) studio. For whatever reason, when the movie was released in America (with edits and dubs, naturally) in 1971, it was called "Godzilla's Revenge", complete with being on a double feature with Island of the Burning Damned. According to one Honda book, the film was the first of a new breed of Godzilla films that would be part of the Toho Champion Festival, which dealt with entertaining children with films (some re-edited, like King Kong vs. Godzilla) that would occur three times a year - the festival would run for nearly a decade. This was the penultimate Godzilla script that Shinichi Sekizawa did all by himself while Honda (who stated his liking of the finished film) directed two further movies in the 1970s. The next Godzilla movie would be Godzilla vs. Hedorah in 1971.

Sure, the movie can have a few neat little moments, mostly in the fact that it does have some moments that are shot well, and it does try its best to aim for its selected audience. And the acting in the film is generally about what you would hope for a goofy little movie that surely wouldn't be subject to heavy editing for audiences in distant places, suffice to say. Now let's take a hammer to the egg: it easily is the lamest film of the Godzilla movies in the 1960s. I'm not sure how low it will rank among the lesser of the films of the ever-expanding series (does one count the 1998 American abomination in rankings because of the name?), but it fundamentally is just not a consistent movie in its ambition and execution. It may have a few nice shots, but you can still see the seams in this being a fast-and-cheap rush job. It isn't so much that the movie is expressly terrible in action or in its story, it just so happens that it fundamentally doesn't have enough its foundation to make a whole film. It tries to cover an actual issue (note: latchkey kids) but just comes off as short of making it seem authentic beyond "be more assertive" that comes off as hollow, the kid just seems a bit "timid" more than really troubled. Calling it a movie for kids almost sounds like a shield for something that is packaged like a product ready to be churned and churned over than an actual experience. I wonder if one could re-imagine the film to involve a person (young or not) being so gloomy or so warped that they resort to fantasy to try and cope with their life**. Yazaki may not have become a noted name, but he did fine here for a kid actor, which mainly involves seeing a young soul that is caring and imaginative enough to make you want to root for him in his curious trails (spent in his imagination or otherwise). Amamoto is encouraging enough to make an adequate support (remember that you see more of a neighbor than the parents of the lead character, so that tracks), while the paper-thing characterization of Sakai and Suzuki is about what you expect (incidentally, there are a few folks you might recognize from prior Honda productions). There isn't anything worth going volcanic over, even when you consider that going from Godzilla having a son to having said son depicted as talking is not nearly the worst thing possible. I also think it is a bit funny to have a kid-monster talking about being told to fight one's own battles only to have a climax where the kid ends up helping the poor bastard (catapults, rocks, and stuff) anyway. You'll see a few familiar elements from older films without groaning at it being just a "Greatest Hits" collection, at least.

I particularly find the climax ludicrous, nitpicky or not. So you have a kid cornered by robbers (sure) who decides to take action and goes at one of them while it keeps cutting from the robber to Gabara. Cowardly or not, it seems strange to imagine fighting someone that has a knife by pretending they are a monster (to say nothing if it was an adult being shown imagining it). After this and getting to go home, the kid then goes and has a scuffle with that bully by slideshow presentation (get it, because showing violence by kids isn't as ideal as showing monsters doing it to each other) before the kid decides to honk the horn (get it, because it will lead to an adult getting a bit distracted and goof up in paint, get it). I guess one could replace timidness with brat-nature, but whatever. As a whole, this is a movie removed from the usual Godzilla experience that may or may not be worth a watch for its sheer, well, curious strategy for entertainment. It's not a good movie, but you at least see where one could justify spending 69 minutes maybe once.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

*For the purpose of just outlining every Godzilla movie of the 1960s, here's a list with a blurb: 

King Kong vs. Godzilla (1962) - Godzilla fights King Kong to a relative draw.

Mothra vs. Godzilla (1964) - Mothra joins the mash!

Ghidorah, the Three-Headed Monster (1964) - A monster so important it made the title

Invasion of Astro-Monster (1965) - Nick Adams in: Spaceman's Adventure

Ebirah, Horror of the Deep (1966) - Terrorists, lobsters, and more.

Son of Godzilla (1967) - A real family drama

Destroy All Monsters (1968) - Mash like it's 1999 in Monsterland

**Taxi Driver came to mind, imagine a Godzilla-Taxi Driver mashup. I may be an idiot, but at least I try to throw you a curveball.

Cat Ballou.

Review #2390: Cat Ballou.

Cast: 

Jane Fonda (Cat Ballou), Lee Marvin (Kid Shelleen and Tim Strawn), Michael Callan (Clay Boone), Dwayne Hickman (Jed), Nat King Cole (one of the shouters), Stubby Kaye (one of the shouters), Tom Nardini (Jackson Two-Bears), John Marley (Frankie Ballou), Reginald Denny (Sir Harry Percival), Jay C. Flippen (Sheriff Cardigan), Arthur Hunnicutt (Butch Cassidy), Bruce Cabot (Sheriff Maledon), Burt Mustin (the accuser), and Paul Gilbert (Train Messenger) Directed by Elliot Silverstein.

Review: 

This was based on a book, you know. Roy Chanslor wrote The Ballad of Cat Ballou in 1956, two years after his other work Johnny Guitar had been made into a movie. There were plans to make a movie from the get-go, with Tony Curtis and Burt Lancaster being tapped to star in the film and it went by the wayside to eventually being produced by Harold Hecht for Columbia Pictures. Two writers are credited for the screenplay with Walter Newman and Frank Pierson, although Lee Marvin would take certain liberties for his main performance. Interestingly, this was the first movie directed by Elliot Silverstein. The Boston native changed his major when studying at Boston College from biology to drama and later went to Yale. He produced and directed plays at Brandeis University. He soon directed episodes for several television shows for over a decade that ranged from The Westerner to The Twilight Zone. It was he who suggested Marvin for the film after Kirk Douglas rejected the role, which probably worked better than trying to go with José Ferrer (Silverstein also came up with casting Nat King Cole and Stubby Kaye as basically a "Greek chorus"). Silverstein directed five further feature movies (probably the most known is A Man Called Horse [1970]), but Silverstein kept directing for television into his late sixties before retiring to work on other ventures, which saw him teach film at USC; he died in 2023 at the age of 96.* The movie was filmed on a relatively quick basis between shooting in Colorado and later Hollywood that apparently took around six weeks. The movie (as released in late June 1965) was a fair hit and was apparently interesting enough to inspire two different television pilots (1970, 1971).

The movie was made as a breezy one to play with the familiar scenarios set out by other past Westerns, as one does for a story that involves trying to recruit a gunfighter to settle a score and the quirks that come with ballads and other such things. It might not the great phenomenon that one might expect six decades on, but there is something that is fun to see in the familiar aspects of looking at a frontier and having the funny bone at least be tickled with the energy of an old shoe. It doesn't wear out its welcome at 96 minutes in resourceful little charms that come out, whether that involves the parts with Cole & Kaye jumping in or a horse having its legs crossed. A good deal of the lingering "hang-ups" one could have with the movie could also be answered with "and yet...". Movie isn't consistent in its joke? And yet it was still fun. Marvin's performance isn't really much a double-act? And yet he still is fun in it for those who adore his everyman qualities. Hell of a time to find out I never had watched a movie with Jane Fonda in it. The daughter of Henry Fonda, she had an interest in the arts at a young age and made her film debut with Tall Story (as directed by her godfather Joshua Logan in 1960); apparently, she got offered the role because the manager for Ann-Margret rejected the offer for her. Evidently, she and Marvin apparently didn't think Cat Ballou was going to turn out particularly good, and yet, here we are. She may be playing the straight one in comparison to a couple of loons and killers around her, but she still does pretty well with what she has to work with, growing into the type of mold that one really would sing ballads about. Go figure that it was this particular movie, this particular Western, that saw Lee Marvin win an Academy Award (on his only nomination, no less).** He could be the villain in stuff like The Big Heat (1953), or a cop with M Squad, or have top billing with The Killers (1964), but this was the movie that apparently made him more of a star. Alcohol or no alcohol, he clearly is having a ball with the character of Shelleen, unwieldly and brimming in the same way one might talk about an old peacock that is delightful to watch. There isn't too much to really say about Lee's portrayal of Strawn besides the casual "heavy" factor that is played from time to time (complete with tin nose), but the movie isn't really about detailed heavies anyway, so it's fine by me. The support around Fonda and Marvin are fine, with Cole (in his last film appearance, as he died in February 1965) and Kaye make for a delightful chorus, carrying the film a bit in observations. The movie is here and there when it comes to things that aren't familiar for viewers of the Western, but ultimately, Cat Ballou is a treat for those who buy into what it is selling, one that has fun with its characters and surroundings for a delightful time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*Incidentally, Silverstein was a key figure for the Directors Guild of America in a number of respects, such as making a push for the Director's Cut and also getting a proper workspace for directors such as he.

**Marvin beat the following actors for the award: Richard Burton (The Spy Who Came In from the Cold), Laurence Olivier (Othello), Rod Steiger (The Pawnbroker), and Oskar Werner (Ship of Fools). The movie also had four Academy Award nominations: Newman and Pierson for their screenplay, Charles Nelson for Editing, Frank De Vol for Original Score, and Jerry Livingston & Mack David for Best Song in "The Ballad of Cat Ballou". Also: I wait for the chance to encounter that other Western offbeat movie with Marvin in Paint Your Wagon (1969).

Missing in Action 2: The Beginning.

Review #2389: Missing in Action 2: The Beginning.

Cast: 

Chuck Norris (Colonel James Thomas Braddock), Soon-Tek Oh (Colonel Yin), Steven Williams (Captain David Nester), Bennett Ohta (Captain Ho), Cosie Costa (Lieutenant Anthony Mazilli), Joe Michael Terry (Corporal Lawrence Opelka), Christopher Cary (Emerson), John Wesley (Master Sergeant Ernest Franklin), David Chung (Dou Chou), and Professor Toru Tanaka (Lao) Directed by Lance Hool.

Review: 

You might remember that with Missing in Action (1984), there were two movies done back-to-back about a man trapped in a North Vietnamese POW camp that eventually broke out from there and years later traveled with an investigation team wondering if there was any US soldier still out there. Well, the movie about the man going back to the jungle somehow seemed more commercially appealing than the movie about being in a POW camp, so with the planned first movie, they simply just named it "The Beginning". The script for this film (made for roughly over $2 million) was written by Arthur Silver, Larry Levinson, and Steve Bing. This actually was the directorial debut of Lance Hool, who had served as producer on films such as Wolf Lake (1979) and The Evil That Men Do (1984) while spending many years in the Mexican film industry. Hool has sticked mostly to producing movies, but he has directed three other movies as well, with the latest one being 2 Hearts [2020]. Chuck Norris once stated that his films "do deal with certain positive things", believing that people went to see them because of the feel-good endings and stating that one great thrill of his life was hearing people applaud at the end of Missing in Action (1984); he participated in those movies as a tribute to his brother Wieland and also remarked that Vietnam "was a tragic mistake. If you don't want to win the battle, don't get involved.'' Four years later, with a script written by James Bruner and Chuck Norris with direction by his brother Aaron, Braddock: Missing in Action III came out from Cannon Films, complete with yet another different supporting cast around its star.

You would think a movie where Norris has to at least sell the perils of being trapped in a POW camp (with a 95-minute runtime) would be an interesting prospect to set up a tense experience before the inevitable climax. But all you get here is just a movie too wrapped in flat routines. It's not enough for a POW camp to have a guy leading the way in sadistic torture, complete with an actual (dead) rat used in one scene with a bag, no he also grows opium for a side hustle in drugs too. You might say that a good deal of action movies has routines they have to live by, but some of them at least have the energy to back up any audacious moments. Here, you have a movie that is probably only truly interesting with a scene involving, well, a rat. John Wayne impersonation or not, Norris is just too stoic here, somehow having as little personality as possible. Oh may have some of the smug and sadistic qualities needed for an adversary this film desperately requires, but there is still something so hollow in the writing beyond what you might see from the old-fashioned exploitation films of yesteryear. Hell, probably the one thing that sticks out from him is that he and the villain have a fistfight at the end because they share the same rationale of "nah, I can't just shoot him, I must beat him head-on" before the ending decides that, wait, you gotta blow him up too just for good measure. Williams probably is the highlight among most (if not all) of the cast*, mainly because his struggle with his own surroundings as one with the illusion of freedom, but it can only go so far with such few scenes (one being a fistfight, naturally) that it almost seems pointless. The time spent in captivity might be interesting to those who probably thought The Deer Hunter (1978) was too subtle. The movie may believe it has the energy and commitment to have its first half of misery follow with the action-packed climax mesh well together, but it really just comes off as a puddle. I called the other Missing in Action "an action cheese fest", but at least it had gall to set forth on that goal. In general, the movie is probably best serviceable for those who cared about the first film, whether that is the dull sense of the word or not, but this is a movie made on the cheap that really needed fleshing out, because the end result is just too cardboard in its one-sided goals to rise above D-grade entertainment. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

*Tanaka (Charles J. Kalani Jr) was actually a boxer-turned-wrestler-turned-actor and he barely has anything to do besides be the heavy. Incidentally, four of the main ten cast members of the film don't even have Wikipedia pages.

Ballerina (2025).

Review #2388: Ballerina (2025).

Cast: 

Ana de Armas (Eve Macarro; Victoria Comte as young Eve), Anjelica Huston (the Director), Gabriel Byrne (the Chancellor), Lance Reddick (Charon), Norman Reedus (Daniel Pine), Catalina Sandino Moreno (Lena), Ian McShane (Winston Scott), Keanu Reeves (John Wick), and Sharon Duncan-Brewster (Nogi) Directed by Len Wiseman (#320 - Live Free or Die Hard, #1916 - Underworld)

Review: 

Even with the marketing calling it "From the World of John Wick: Ballerina", I was at least semi-interested in seeing what was under the hood of trying to a spinoff of a series that I assumed was staying quiet (this is me pretending that the idea of making a fifth John Wick movie when the fourth's ending already exists). I didn't even realize they utilized the "branding" for a prequel TV show two years ago, incidentally. Apparently, the genesis of Ballerina came around because of seeing a trailer. Shay Hatten wrote a spec script that was inspired by seeing the trailer for John Wick: Chapter 2 [2017] that was acquired by Lionsgate. The script was a sendup of action movies and even had a counter to keep track of the lead character's kills as they went into conflict with secret society assassins in Switzerland and a retirement home. Sure, it was re-tooled extensively, but you might remember that Hatten was brought in to do some writing for the third and fourth John Wick movies. Evidently, the time from development led to several people being credited for "Additional Literary Material: (not on-screen)" in Rebecca Angelo, Lauren Schuker Blum, Emerald Fennell, Michael Finch and Len Wiseman. There were apparently reshoots of the film done in early 2024 by producer Chad Stahelski that was either months of stuff or just a few weeks of additional photography (one sequence cited was the extending opening that apparently wasn't initially filmed due to budget limitations) that was overseen by Stahelski and Wiseman. You might remember that Wiseman was the director for two of the first Underworld movies but had not directed a movie since Total Recall in 2012.

Honestly, I liked the movie fine, but many of my statements about the movie will make it seem like it is a bad thing to be a mediocre spinoff movie. If there was a tinge of amusement to be had at the growing absurdity that comes with one man against the whole band of killers to go alongside a good deal of stakes and danger in those aforementioned movies, you might find a part of that still present here. There is at least enough here for de Armas in shall we say, "killer instinct" to make things stay watchable without turning into a fest of staleness or to laugh at it. The flamethrower sequences in particular work best for the movie for shall we say, "slap-bang enjoyment", one is particularly enjoyable in the nitty-gritty feeling one gets in seeing just what that type of weapon can do and the methods that arise in trying to combat it. Besides, with a movie trying to play with resilience in "fight like a girl" but taking it seriously, as long as one is believing the material enough to not call it slop, it will coast enough for at least the idea of checking it out for 125 minutes. Armas plays it fast and loose in lethal grace that does manage to balance the tightrope of kicking ass without merely resembling a video game character in terms of the action sequences, anyway. Sure, the character probably has the gleam of being pushed and pulled by a few too many writers. Sure, the cult stuff is probably a bit too vague, but it is serviceable in the same sense that it feels like an old pair of shoes, and I suppose that works for Byrne to approach things with some creep factor. Huston accompanies the proceedings mostly to go around with a small bit of charm, which goes fine when it feels like most of the scenes take place in a chair. Obligation or otherwise, it is nice to see McShane and Reeves around for a bit in those vital doses of familiarity. Reedus might be worth talking about if he didn't have a significant amount of time between scenes to actually cite, but so it goes. It isn't too complicated a movie to either buy into or discard, and I found it works just enough to buy into, although I don't exactly expect too many more spinoff attempts*.  In the end, it probably is a bit sloppier than the original script envisioned in executing mayhem, but it is relatively satisfying enough for me to at least say the journey was worth it to get there.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*It amused me to get a trailer for Nobody 2, the sequel to the movie written by John Wick creator Derek Kolstad during this.

Bring Her Back.

Review #2387: Bring Her Back.

Cast: 

Billy Barratt (Andy), Sora Wong (Piper), Sally Hawkins (Laura), Jonah Wren Phillips (Oliver / Connor Bird), Sally-Anne Upton (Wendy), Stephen Phillips (Phil), and Mischa Heywood (Cathy) Directed by Danny Philippou and Michael Philippou (#2065 - Talk to Me)

Review: 

"I love that there's - that it's scaring people, as well as touching them. Like, that feels so incredible. And, yeah, as you said, the scares are definitely there, and, you know, it's pretty gnarly at times." - D. Philippou

"If it is - yeah. And it's so, so incredible that you can do this imagery or, like, talk about these subjects, and I feel like it feels really raw, which is - it can be rare sometimes in a horror film." - M.Philippou

It sure is nice to see a sophomore effort from a directing duo in the best venue possible: a movie theater, free from the whims of streaming and since it is an Australian production, technically an example of world cinema. The funny thing is that Talk to Me and Bring Her Back each came as a surprise to me in finding out it was in theaters, because if there is anything that tempts me to watch a movie, the "on a whim" option wins out far more than say, a critic site with tomatoes (I'll be honest with you: I still don't know what RackaRacka actually is).* As with the last Philippou brotherly effort, the movie was written by Danny Philippou and Bill Hinzman. We might as well get to the point: it is a satisfactory horror movie, so that's nice to hear. Sure, some might wonder just how far you can teeter on the edge of bleakness or wonder aloud about how many times people love to say "it's about trauma" when talking about movies (what's next, making me watch Hereditary to try and get me to appreciate its mediocrity?), but it is at least jaded enough to know where to end up at the end. Besides, who doesn't like shock value and a bit of blood? Grief, grief, grief, sometimes you need to see a movie about people stumbling onto oddballs (look, there may be some places that have you kiss corpses on the head, but I'll be damned if I go along with that). It relies heavily on just rolling along with careful pacing (104 minutes sounds about right) and a highlight performance to rally it all together, at least in the eyes (and ears, well) of this viewer.

 

It should be noted that Wong made her film debut here, having been casted after her mother encouraged her to do a casting call she saw on Facebook, while Barratt has a few films of experience already. They do work well together in that shaky bond of eyes and thoughts in a world that is weary regardless of if one can see it beyond shapes or not. Barratt in particular excels in making the journey of wear and tear at new surroundings of doubt and strange things one to really feel for. And then there's Hawkins, who plays things with such an unsettling quality that comes within natural believability, one who knows what they want to say and do with the new people in her life, a manipulator born in the shrouds of grief. Manipulator, victim, whatever you want to term her character, she pulls it all in for an engaging performance all about truths and lies to be seen and heard. Phillips rounds out the main cast with a ravenous hunger that is about as unsettling as can be possible when not having many words to convey for said strange behavior. The knife sequence in particular is probably the highlight of the movie in terms of jagged strangeness and getting the movie closer to locking in for those not already believing this environment as one of, well, being nuts. The ending apparently was intended to be a bit bleaker, and I guess it makes sense to say that the Philippous stated that the movie has folks in and out of the "cycle of grief".* Even in the eyes of what you see, it might have even gotten bleaker, but so it goes. But at any rate, it is a neatly vague type of horror movie involving delusions and grief that will make its punches clear for interesting moments and a solid new effort from its two directors.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*And then there's ones I just don't feel like doing, such as what, the sixth Karate Kid movie? To say nothing of another Final Destination movie. And I would not be caught dead watching a live-action remake of a movie I already saw in animated form 10+ years ago. 

**Call me a rube, but with how Talk to Me went out and with how stuff was going with the aforementioned corpse chewing, I thought that when Laura did the ritual thing (scroll to spoiler reveal, I guess): she actually would succeed in getting someone else into the body of Piper but having it be Andy, who happened to die by drowning just like, well, Cathy. But it is funny in a mean way to go through the trouble of getting VHS tapes about possession and then have to skirt around the whole bringing-back thing.

Titan A.E.

Review #2386: Titan A.E.

Cast: 

Matt Damon (Cale Tucker; Alex D. Linz as Young Cale Tucker), Bill Pullman (Captain Joseph Korso), John Leguizamo (Gune), Nathan Lane (Preedex "Preed" Yoa), Janeane Garofalo (Stith), Drew Barrymore (Akima Kunimoto), Ron Perlman (Professor Sam Tucker), Tone Lōc (Tek), Jim Breuer (the Cook), Christopher Scarabosio (the Drej Queen), Jim Cummings (Chowquin), Charles Rocket (Firrikash/ Slave Trader Guard), and Ken Hudson Campbell (Po) Directed by Don Bluth (#1466 - The Secret of NIMH) and Gary Goldman.

Review: 

"A movie to me is about character, about how personalities come together, how they relate to each other and what the ramifications of that are." - Don Bluth

"I think it's the people. The crew has passion. They really want to make it work. They really want to learn more...that teaches me. My whole goal, besides trying to get more production value back into animation, was really to provide an environment like there was at Disney at one time, where you felt secure as an artist, filmmaker, contributor, animator." - Gary Goldman

On June 16, 2000, Titan A.E. basically was released into theaters and died a quick death. But time does heal some wounds, even if it remains the last current effort for its directors in Don Bluth and Gary Goldman. The two had met in 1972 when working at Walt Disney Productions with each at distinct stages of their animation careers: Bluth (seven years older) actually had been hired to work as an assistant animator at the Disney studio in Burbank and even did work for Sleeping Beauty (1959) but found the work "kind of boring" and jumped around to do various things that ranged from a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to local theater to studying English Literature to eventually returning to animation and, well, that led back to Disney. On the other hand, Goldman was a recent art school graduate that had been accepted to Disney's animation training program and encountered Bluth. Alongside John Pomeroy, the group shared similar ideas about animation and strived to make their own animated film (as an exercise, according to Bluth), with their first effort being Banjo the Woodpile Cat. I think you get it from there: NIMH was a big thing for the "it's not Disney" crowd and the first of a string of movies with varying levels of quality. Goldman moved from producing to co-directing with Bluth with All Dogs Go to Heaven (1989). Sure, there were misfires in their intertwined efforts (The Pebble and the Penguin [1995] was so miserable that the two wanted their names taken off it), but their efforts with Anastasia (1997), the first film for Fox Animation Studios, worked out. Coincidentally, during the time of the release of that film, the starting points for what became Titan A.E. started. "Planet Ice" was slated to be directed by Art Vitello, with November 1997 seeing concrete plans to make it animated rather than live action, complete with a voice cast all picked out (such as Bill Pullman, for example). They had a screenplay drafted up by Ben Edlund before John August came in months later to polish the dialogue and other select re-writes. The result of years of pre-production was $30 million sunk into a whole bunch of recording...and basically little to actually show for it. Where Bluth and Goldman came in is that 20th Century Fox, in need of getting a project going for the animated studio, asked the two to get involved, showing them the script. Despite their lack of expertise of sci-fi, they went with the move; incidentally, Joss Whedon was soon hired to finalize the script. It should be noted that Bluth and Goldman had $55 million and 19 months to get the stuff animated, one that saw them move the apparent focus of the film away from hardware to, well, character, which saw re-recording of certain dialogue (basically they wanted to aim for the family, right down to the teenagers rather than be a "Disney wannabee"). The result was five writers were given credit: the story was credited to Hans Bauer and Randall McCormick while Edlund, August, and Whedon were given credit for the screenplay.*

Goldman stated prior to release that "about 87% of the film is some form of CGI", and perhaps ironically, the visual effects and one certain animated sequence was done by Blue Sky Studios, who would begin production of their first animated film Ice Age the same month that this film was released. Apparently, midway though production is when Fox basically was ready to give up on 2D animation and just focus on 3D ventures, and by June of 2000, over 250 animated staff members at Fox were laid off. Just to twist the knife a bit further, the same week that this movie came out, Fantasia 2000 (1999) by Disney was finally being shown in regular theaters**. Sure, a race against time in fetching one big thing that might as well be a shaggy way to do an ark story is a bit shaky. But it is a neat ride for those who want to buy what it is selling for a movie that has an astounding look within a cobbled-together story. The 94-minute runtime somehow manages the weird effect of breezing by certain aspects (read: familiar tropes) but taking its sweet time to really make sense on other parts. In an age now where certain people seem to believe that any damn animated movie seems up to "re-made" for live action, Titan A.E. is good proof that some stuff really should stay in animation without the risk of being turned into potential slop, one that inspires awe with unwieldy adventure. Forget being generic, it seems like fresh air with its enthusiasm. The rag-tag group of voices are fairly decent, mainly because it isn't merely just picking big names for the hell of it, with Pullman in particular being pretty suitable as a rogue to go along with Damon's wavering sense of humanity (or whatever you want to call it, but burrowing hope seemed silly). The rest of the cast is fairly decent in parts, mainly with adding some levity (Lane comes to mind), which works out when having the bare minimum in characterization for Barrymore to work with. I like its general action and general mood of making sure one wants to take a look at what they are seeing beyond having mild attention (the rock soundtrack might help in that regard). The ice rings sequence is probably the key standout sequence for showing both the potential of understanding why some films just are destined for animation along with having interesting tension to really keep things drawing along. The movie may not always go along smoothly beyond some of the usual expected stuff, namely with a villain that is more interesting to look at than their actual motives, but if you are vibing with what the movie is showing in its atmosphere of trying to scrape along beyond refugees on the food chain, it will be a pretty good time anyway. Underrated and under-looked in its time, Titan A.E. deserves a cult audience willing to stick up for spry adventures in animation.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Hell of a writer's room. Edlund is best known for creating The Tick, Bauer wrote Anaconda, August wrote for a handful of Tim Burton movies, and Whedon, well, he went from co-writing Toy Story to something called Firefly... 

**For whatever reason, Fantasia 2000 had *months* of IMAX showings and concert hall screenings before you could just see the damn thing in a normal theater. Go figure, that movie didn't make too much money. The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle was released on June 30, 2000 and had live action and animation to the tune of barely any money. You know what animated movie did make money that June? Chicken Run, which was released on June 23, 2000 by Aardman Features. Funny.

Legend (1985).

Review #2385: Legend (1985).

Cast:  

Tom Cruise (Jack), Mia Sara (Lili), Tim Curry (Darkness), David Bennent (Honeythorn Gump; voiced by Alice Playten), Alice Playten (Blix), Billy Barty (Screwball), Cork Hubbert (Brown Tom), Peter O'Farrell (Pox), Kiran Shah (Blunder), Tina Martin (Nell), Robert Picardo (Meg Mucklebones), and Annabelle Lanyon (Oona) Directed by Ridley Scott (#100 - Blade Runner, #530 - Alien, #739 - The Martian, #1076 - Thelma & Louise, #1524 - Gladiator, #1879 - The Last Duel)

Review: 

"I could have taken this script and gone two ways. One would have been dark and Celtic, which would have limited it. The other was the Disney route, and as I made Legend primarily for children, my children to be precise, that’s the avenue I pursued. Having visual references to Snow White, Fantasia and especially Pinocchio were clear cut decisions by me."

Once upon a time, you really could just flop around with a fantasy movie. Ridley Scott's fourth feature film was a dark fantasy movie that he had been cultivating for years. He actually conceived the idea when filming The Duellists (1977) because his plans to do a movie on the medieval legend Tristan & Isolde fell through. However, he went with doing Alien (1979) because of his belief in a lack of audience appeal for Legend. After his time spent developing Dune saw him drop out, Scott went back to that fairy tale project that took inspirations from the Brothers Grimm. Scott met American novelist William Hjortsberg (writer of books such as Falling Angel [1978] and one other screenplay with Thunder and Lightning [1977]). and interested him into writing a fairy tale. Their shared appreciation of Jean Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast (1946) based their working relationship. The script was worked out from a rough storyline by 1981 into further revisions over the years before shooting began in 1984. There exist three cuts (complete with modified endings) of the movie because of audience perceptions. The first cut was 125 minutes long before Scott trimmed it to 113 minutes long for testing in America....that was apparently too long for folks to be entertained by, which saw over 20 minutes trimmed (such as the clockmaker's cottage sequence) to go with replacing the music score by Jerry Goldsmith for music by Tangerine Dream, Jon Anderson, and Bryan Ferry. International audiences in 1985 saw a 93-minute film while American audiences in 1986 saw an 89-minute film that was a flop with audiences, but at least Rob Bottin got an Academy Award nomination for his makeup on the film. In 2002, home video saw the release of a 113-minute Director's Cut that restored cut sequences and the Goldsmith score (which is what I saw; also, for whatever reason, there is a site detailing the road to getting the DVD there). Scott never has returned to the world of fantasy since, although obviously he continued directing, with his next movie being Someone to Watch Over Me (1987).

Part of me can't help but wonder why I found this to be a very, very, very average movie to experience despite the visual interest. For what it's worth, you are reading words from someone who had to look back to recall that I seemed to like Krull (1983) a bit better than Willow (1988). With Legend, you get a bit of a fever dream. It takes a hell of time to really get going but is at least held up with one notable presence to make its strange whims worth a trip, mainly because I can't find myself hating where it all ended up. It goes to the inevitable places that come with big red creatures and attempts at showing an adventure of light and darkness that may very well be fascinating for all of the right and wrong reasons possible, whether one finds themselves in the cult classic argument or not. Is it too murky? Maybe, but I go with murky. It's funny to cast two actors on dueling sides of getting to be known better. You've got Cruise just two years removed from Risky Business [1983] while Sara (five years younger than Cruise, I might add) made her debut before appearing in Ferris Bueller's Day Off [1986]...and then there's Curry being cast because of his film and theatrical experience.* Cruise is probably a bit too green to really make this role anything more than a middling hero (apparently it inspired him to suggest input for his next project with Top Gun [1986]), but his shakiness is somewhat palatable to watch. Sara fares better, mostly because she gets to play with the definition of innocence with the whole other getup worn around the climax. Sure, the chemistry between the two leads is shaky, but we are talking about folks in a strange unnamed land that go around throwing rings in water. I cannot imagine the time spent wearing makeup and iron frame lifts for Curry. But it sure seemed worth it with such a tremendous presence captured here. He oozes a certain type of devilish curiosity that really does seduce one into finding solace in shadows that makes the best type of threat: booming and a great threat in the eyes of eternity. It is kind of curious to have one person voice two characters (Bennent was dubbed over because of his accent), but I like the distinct levels of mischief played in voice/physical performance anyways, so I guess they got me there to accept that one talks in a handful of rhymes. Well, at least the movie is sometimes funny with people such as Barty and Picardo, at least. Its buildup to the big finish (well, a finish, because light, darkness, yeah, get it?) proves to be worth the journey in fun, and saying "oh but the cliche of good vs. evil" seems easy to then say "hey, I like some of those good defeating evil movies". In the end, it basically is the kind of movie you either "hum" with or you just let go by the wayside, but it has a sort of energy to me that I liked enough to accept on its own terms and find worthy to recommend with an open mind, at least.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*See, at least one good thing came from the overrated The Rocky Horror Picture Show, because Scott watched the movie in thinking about casting Richard O'Brien to play the role later played by Robert Picardo. Also, did I miss anything in the last three weeks?