Sudden Death.

Review #2510: Sudden Death.

Cast:

Jean-Claude Van Damme (Darren McCord), Powers Boothe (Joshua Foss), Raymond J. Barry (U.S. Vice President Daniel Bender), Dorian Harewood (Matthew Hallmark), Whittni Wright (Emily McCord), Ross Malinger (Tyler McCord), Michael Gaston (Hickey), Faith Minton (Carla), Paul Mochnick (Andrew Ferrara), Audra Lindley (Angeline Ferrara), and Jack Erdie (Scratch) Directed by Peter Hyams (#233 - 2010: The Year We Make Contact, #326 - Timecop, #2477 - A Sound of Thunder)

Review: 

"I was not a hockey fan. I had not been to a hockey game before. I started to do research, and then I started to watch the Penguins play. I began to realize the unbelievable athleticism involved, and the violence involved and the speed of that puck. Hockey is better in the arena than it is on television. It’s a phenomenal sport."

What better day to do a movie about hockey than a few days after the United States of America managed to beat the odds and win the gold medal in hockey (and in true gender equality: the men and women each won*)? What better time to see a movie that could basically be thought of as an ad for a hockey team? The original story came from Karen Baldwin, an aspiring actress who became part of a producing firm with her husband Howard, which basically came on the side of sports ownership, as the Baldwins were among the owners of the Pittsburgh Penguins (as was the case from 1992-1998*). At the time, the team played in the Civic Arena, and the unique roof of the venue that could open up apparently led to Karen thinking about the possibility of doing "something like Die Hard in a hockey arena", which also matched with a story the Baldwins had tried to do about a Soviet goaltender trying to defect because they were wearing a mask; Gene Quintano then wrote the screenplay. When Peter Hyams (not exactly a hockey fan at the time) was approached, he was astounded to see the Baldwins willing to do a movie with so much action in their own venue (he proceeded to suggest a fight scene with a killer dressed up as the team mascot). Of course, the 1994-95 league lockout hindered them in getting the proper filming for crowds, and a good variety of the hockey action ended up being the work of local hockey players (while Mike Lange and Paul Steigerwald provided commentary). As the second collaboration between Hyams and Jean-Claude Van Damme (after Timecop), the movie was a mild success at the time while becoming a rental favorite. 

It does kind of boggle the mind to have your hockey team be part of a movie that has the following: the team mascot getting into a fight with the lead hero (before getting brutally killed), team security basically being humiliated at all costs (mayhem after every period ends no less), and, to top it all, the lead villain wearing Penguins gear right before he dies in "death by helicopter stalling". Of course, the funniest thing is the movie just...ends, because I could only wonder how a hockey game continues after all that. For a movie that freely cribs from Die Hard, except with trying to disarm bombs, it is quite fascinating to see it all play out (right down to a henchman playing Doom), unless one doesn't like violence in their action movie - the body count on this film of people who die is actually considerable, jeez.. This was a movie that had both of its hero and villain cast because other people rejected it (Sylvester Stallone and James Woods, for example) and yet each manage to have a ball with the roles presented here, mostly in the case of Boothe, who has tremendous alacrity to engage with the mayhem without just having it mosey on by. Van Damme may never have really been a great action star in terms of variety, but he at least was still committed enough in physicality to at least make it worthwhile to see him kick the hell out of someone dressed up as a mascot. As much as it would be nice to have some presence from the hostages besides cursory interest from Barry, the movie doesn't hesitate in just going with the mayhem. The maneuvering of the plot does not exactly gel completely with reality (bomb detonations are to be delayed by the onset of overtime because, well, I guess even terrorists wanted to make sure they didn't miss the finale before blowing it up?), but the movie manages to move its machinery for 110 minutes without treating the audience as if they were entitled to be liked for the sake of being liked. You either buy what it is selling (complete with rooftop action for the climax) or you just wash it away quickly. As a whole, Hyams shot and directed a decent little film that basically maneuvers itself the way you would hope for a wind-up action movie in an era where cribbing from others was fine as long as you had some craftsmanship behind it. It's not a great movie, but being good enough is fine anyway.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night presents: Song of the day

*It should be noted that Howard Baldwin was behind the change of the iconic Penguins logo for, well, a loser logo that never won anything when it was around because...merchandising. Also he called the old logo a "pigeon". Just goes to show that rich people really do sometimes have no taste at all.

*I mean this with only a lit bit of venom towards the sore losers towards how the men's/women's hockey games went: Suck it Canada! 

The Trouble with Harry.

Review #2509: The Trouble with Harry.

Cast: 

Edmund Gwenn (Capt. Albert Wiles), John Forsythe (Sam Marlowe), Shirley MacLaine (Jennifer Rogers), Mildred Natwick (Miss Ivy Gravely), Mildred Dunnock (Mrs. Wiggs), Jerry Mathers (Arnie Rogers), Royal Dano (Deputy Sheriff Calvin Wiggs), and Parker Fennelly (Millionaire)

Produced and Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, #964 - The Ring (1927), #965 - Downhill, #970 - Mr. and Mrs. Smith, #977 - Frenzy, #1343 - The 39 Steps, #1739 - The Birds, #1828 - Rebecca, #2014 - The Lady Vanishes, #2032 - The Man Who Knew Too Much, #2374 - Blackmail [1929])

Review: 

"With Harry, I took melodrama out of the pitch-black night and brought it out into the sunshine. It's as if I had set up a murder alongside a rustling brook and spilled a drop of blood into the clear water. These contrasts establish a counterpart; they elevate the commonplace in life to a higher level."

I suppose it is hard to be the ugly duckling of a string of movies, but The Trouble with Harry is certainly a curious film in the work of Alfred Hitchcock. Of the eleven movies Hitchcock directed in the 1950s, it served as his only comedy (and one of just two that weren't thrillers, and the other was the based-on-a-true-story The Wrong Man [1956]). Of course, it wasn't his first comedy, as evidenced by Mr. & Mrs. Smith (1941), but Hitchcock apparently was quite keen on doing this film the way he wanted, complete with doing it in VistaVision with primary filming in Vermont (well, at least until they needed leaves on the trees or scenes in a certain gym). There were a few firsts here too. This was the first Hitchcock movie with music by Bernard Herrmann, who he would work with all the way to Marnie (1964). It was also the feature film debut of Shirley MacLaine*. She was not even in her twenties when she moved to New York to try out acting, which had her go from a bit role in Me and Juliet on Broadway to being the understudy-turned-star of The Pajama Game (due to an ankle injury of the star). The result of stepping into the role on Broadway attracted attention by Hal Wallis that eventually saw her signed to a contract with Paramount Pictures (and, well, Hitchcock apparently was interested to do a film with a charming unknown). Based on the 1949 novel of the same name by Jack Trevor Story, John Michael Hayes wrote the screenplay in his third collaboration with Hitchcock (having previously done the screenplay for Rear Window [1954], To Catch a Thief [1955] before doing The Man Who Knew Too Much [1956). While the movie was not a big hit in the States, it did play fine in Europe for years and apparently the film was one of Hitchcock's personal favorites. Hitchcock had the film rights until his death, whereupon it made the rounds in reissuing in the 1980s. 

You might call it a morbid little movie or one of Hitchcock's more mellow efforts, one that might actually be thought of as filled with whimsical nature. So yes, it is a pretty warm and fairly enjoyable affair (one that even can thread the needle of suggestion when one character asks if they can sketch them in the nude). The body is there just to be there, because the mystery is peeling the layers of these peculiar people in this landscape (yes, even with some studio shots, you get some neat views of the autumn season) for 99 minutes. You either are with the film in its casual sly nature for all the things that come with a ride that basically handles death as if it really was just a case of "so it goes" (yes I am cribbing from Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five that had its own views about death, but, well, I actually did read that in college). Leading the way is Gwenn in one of his swansongs. This was among the last of Gwenn's films as an actor, as he appeared in two more movies (and one episode of Hitchcock's Alfred Hitchcock Presents) prior to his death in 1959 at the age of 81. He deftly handles it with the solid professionalism that comes with selling someone who really can just coast with some of the offbeat lines that come in observation and newfound zest, which probably overshadows Forsythe and his offbeat non-conformism (at least he wasn't going for "beatnik") a bit by comparison. Even as the youngest of the ensemble, MacLaine holds her own with a sense of odd grace and the type of confidence that leaves one invested in their lives and the wayward path that might come with being paired with Forsythe. Natwick rounds it out with solid dignity and understated charm, at least when one doesn't see the considerable age difference [28 years] between her and Gwenn. Rounding it out is Dano pulling out the humorless dry authority figure that mostly balances out the whims had by the main quartet, which I guess works out to how it goes in our everyday lives in sobering qualities. In general, it might not be among Hitchcock's best of the best, but it is a curious film you should seek out, one that has some amusing moments within a film full of peculiar characters brought to life with useful energy and a leisurely pace to make it all matter at the end.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Starting now, we're doing a song of the day. Enjoy at your own risk.

*Yes, that would be the younger sister of Warren Beatty. Go figure each actor would use modifications of their names for films, as she would use a modification of her middle name (MacLean) while, well, someone took off a "t" from their last name of Beaty

Sheba, Baby.

Review #2508: Sheba, Baby.

Cast: 

Pam Grier (Sheba Shayne), Austin Stoker ("Brick" Williams), D'Urville Martin (Pilot), Rudy Challenger (Andy Shayne), Dick Merrifield ("Shark" Merrill), Charles Kissinger (Phil), Charles Broaddus (Hammerhead), Maurice Downs (Killer), and Ernest Cooley (Whale) Directed by William Girdler (#1636 - Abby)

Review: 

Admittedly, the 1970s had some odd (and possibly fun) titles for select exploitation movies. This was the third action movie with Pam Grier in a starring role after Coffy (1973) and Foxy Brown (1974), which were all American International Pictures productions. It was the first of three movies with Grier for AIP that year: the crime action film Bucktown (where she co-starred with Fred Williamson) and Friday Foster (in the title role with Yaphet Kotto as co-star). And then there's William Girdler. You might remember the Louisville native from the movie he made before Sheba with Abby (1974), that movie where they rode the shirttail of The Exorcist. Girdler's next movie was Project: Kill (1976) with Leslie Nielsen as star. The movie was written by Girdler and David Sheldon (who produced the movie) and was filmed primarily in, well, Louisville, Kentucky (not to go on a tangent, since I know it makes some sense to be in Kentucky, but now I expect a movie about boats set in New Mexico) that involves some nefarious people in, wait for it, loan companies. The promotional material for the movie actually called itself "Hotter'n Coffy, Meaner'n Foxy Brown", which is highly ridiculous when you consider those two movies were rated R while this is rated...PG (in fairness, you either got G, PG, R, or X in those days). At least the movie isn't lying in wait for a high quality home media release.

Look, it just isn't a good enough movie to try and get away with being on autopilot for most of its bare 90-minute runtime. Sure, Grier continues to have the charm and stamina to make one believe so much in her as an action star*, but there is basically nothing for her to latch on to in terms of general tension or variety. As ridiculously violent as Coffy or Foxy Brown could seem in their execution, at least those movies actually sounded like they had some energy to them in their craftsmanship. Here, it just seems that Girdler settled for just getting it done in the most basic of ways. It basically is a movie to all hucksters: it wants to coast on doing the most basic of tasks with as little engagement as one can possibly do, where seeing someone on a jet ski is more an "eh" moment rather than seeming like the start of a real fun climax. Another movie where our hero is motivated by the death of a loved one does seem a bit tired when you consider the energy given out by the two prior Jack Hill productions with Grier (okay Grier was in a few other Hill movies, but do you really care about prison movies such as The Big Bird Cage [1972]?). Comparing it to Abby might seem a bit unfair to this movie, but they both still belong to the "dumbass movies you might see on a Saturday night*" classification, so I guess that is a bright side. Stoker flickers with the slightest bit of interest, but he basically is being carried by Grier's energy, and the villains (as headed by Merrifield and a far more interesting Martin) don't exactly thread the needle in why the movie moves the way it does in menace (companies must be acquired because...because!). The best way to talk about the movie is thus: Grier looks cool, things happen, the movie ends and you forget most of it happened right then and there. It is the blaxploitation movie near (or maybe at the end) the back of the line to check out, but there are a few little moments of sunshine through the efforts of Grier and the occasional amusement at the situation presented that may make you not regret it all the way.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

*And also pretty attractive, but again, just the facts.

*This of course assumes that, you, the reader, who I appreciate in getting to the note section, has a nice sleep on the weekend rather than, say, working really late. Hell, some of you may even have friends.

Disco Godfather.

Review #2507: Disco Godfather.

Cast: 

Rudy Ray Moore (Tucker Williams), Carol Speed (Noel), Jimmy Lynch ("Sweetmeat"), Jerry Jones (Dr. Fred Mathis), Lady Reed (Mrs. Edwards), Hawthorne James (Ray "Stinger Ray"), Julius Carry ("Bucky")", Hazel Spears (Ellen Davis), Frank Finn (Lieutenant Frank Hayes), Fitz Houston (Kilroy), and Pucci Jhones ("The Angel of Death") Directed by J. Robert Wagoner.

Review: 

This was the fifth and final movie where you could reasonably see Rudy Ray Moore on the big screen in a substantial role (okay so he wasn't in The Monkey Hustle [1976] that much, but he was on the poster, so...). Honestly, he pretty much peaked with his first one with Dolemite (1975), which somehow soared in its amusement and entertainment value despite clear and obvious flaws (the filmmaking, for one). The Human Tornado (1976) could've gone better. Petey Wheatstraw (1977) was flat out weird. By this point, Moore was actually in his fifties. Okay, so here is a movie written by two people: Cliff Roquemore (who directed Moore in The Human Tornado and Petey Wheatstraw and did a performance film of Moore's act in 1982) and J. Robert Wagoner. For the rest of his life, Moore would make bit appearances in a variety of programs of television and direct-to-video and theatrical works while doing his comedy albums and even being invited to appear in songs. Needless to say, he lived a colorful life that very well could be a hero of what he called "ghetto expression"*.

Well, there were a few disco-related movies at the time too, so why not cross that with a message about angel dust? Sure won't see that in Roller Boogie (1979), I imagine. I'm not exactly sure why the movie is called "Disco Godfather", because the lead character is an ex-cop that goes on a double-sided crusade: cracking down on where the drug structure is coming from and pushing along with a community alliance of activists to (no I'm not joking) "Attack the Wack". What I wish I could know about the movie is what type of atmosphere this film was made under: sure, it was probably a B-movie made fast and cheap (Moore was also co-producer) but was there any sort of substances involved to come up with such an incoherent movie? You get plenty of hallucinations (get it, because PCP is like being in hell) for a movie that actually does feature plenty of blood from its array of goofy fights (and one suicide because, yes, a guy gets busted for being an informant) and even goofier stakes, at least when not detailing PCP-affected people that may or may not recover from their addiction while others apparently deal with the ramification of roasting babies when high. Consider one scene where our hero has a hit put on him where the hitmen are right at the disco ready to shoot him...only for the bad guy to put a hit on the hitmen! Because he wants the hero to be alive to deal with. You might wonder how the movie lasts 97 minutes. Well, between all of the goofy sequences involving disco (don't take a shot every time someone says "weight"), I think you can understand. There is a sense of tiredness that becomes apparent in the imagination of all involved with Moore (suffice to say, one does miss the kung-fu trained prostitutes of Dolemite). Here you just get a movie that would probably make a goofy doubleheader with Reefer Madness (1936). As a whole, the film is a goofy hit-or-miss experience that never really clicks into serious gear for any of its interests but is at least committed enough in its vision to provide curiosity that may be up your alley if you like old-time oddball movies.

 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

*I'm not sure if I ever linked to this article, but it is interesting to note that Moore apparently was in the closet: My Coke-Fueled Nights With Dolemite - OZY | A Modern Media Company + New Doc Reveals Details Of ‘Dolemite’ Actor Rudy Ray Moore’s Sexuality

The X-Files

Review #2506: The X-Files.

Cast:

David Duchovny (Special Agent Fox Mulder), Gillian Anderson (Special Agent Dana Scully), Martin Landau (Alvin Kurtzweil), Blythe Danner (Jana Cassidy), Armin Mueller-Stahl (Conrad Strughold), Mitch Pileggi (Assistant Director Walter Skinner), William B. Davis (Cigarette-Smoking Man), John Neville (Well-Manicured Man), Dean Haglund (Richard "Ringo" Langly), Bruce Harwood (John Fitzgerald Byers), Tom Braidwood (Melvin Frohike), Jeffrey DeMunn (Ben Bronschweig), Jason Beghe (FBI Man at Bomb Site), Michael Shamus Wiles (Black-Haired Man), with Terry O'Quinn (Special Agent in Charge Darius Michaud), and Lucas Black (Stevie) Directed by Rob Bowman.

Review: 

"We aimed quite high in some sequences. It’s been extremely challenging. The question we put to ourselves was, do you make it different or do you make it more? Audiences become comfortable with certain aspects and you don’t want to rip all that out from under them. Like the legends that tell the location, we could do them as big fancy LED readouts or somesuch, but in the end we decided to keep it the same plain way we do it on the series. Let’s not take away that which they’re familiar. They’ll cheer when they see it. Of course some things are on a much grander scale. We throw a heck of a lot more rocks at Mulder and Scully.” 

Hey, remember The X-Files? At one point in time, it was the big thing for the then-fledgling Fox network that began in 1993 with various inspirations that popped into the head of Chris Carter, whether that was Kolchak: The Night Stalker to The Twilight Zone to, well, various other things. Various writers and directors were just as important to the success of the show from David Sackheim to Darin Morgan to Glen Morgan & James Wong, to, well the natural chemistry of the stars in Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny. Apparently, the original intent of the film was to start its own movie franchise* while the show would end (so basically what happened with Star Trek: The Next Generation) after its fifth season, but the show was so lucrative for Fox that two more seasons were ordered. At least it was helpful for fans, as the season 5 finale "The End" aired on May 17, one month before the premiere of this film on June 19 (meanwhile the season 6 premiere aired on November 8). Carter wrote the screenplay and co-wrote the story with Frank Spotnitz. The movie was directed by Rob Bowman, who directed countless episodes of the show (by the time of 2000, he had directed 33 of them). The next film in the franchise was with The X-Files: I Want to Believe in 2008.*

Honestly, it is an okay movie, but it is a bit amusing to think this was once conceived as the thing that would follow the fun that came from the TV show, mainly because for the most part, the so-called "Monster of the Week" episodes were mostly superior to the ones involving the "Syndicate" or whatever². It basically is an okay rendition of a usual two-parter (albeit much longer at 122 minutes to say, two TV episodes), one that basically coasts on how much you really care about the lead duo wrapped in the shadowy doubt of whatever lurks beneath the cornfields (this was 1998, before select people believed chemtrails were a thing). It's funny that a movie with a variety of returning characters from the show tries mildly to just have a fraction do something (seriously, Pileggi spends most of his time glaring or, um, sitting down*). The unraveling of actual answers only leads to just asking more questions, which is as frustrating as is easy to see coming for a film that mostly sticks the landings of making you curious for more with these folks. Regardless of how much one has seen the show, it is clear that Duchovny and Anderson were pros at making it clear how much they understand and respect each other in the mish-mash of grounded purpose (ironically, despite the obvious relationship these characters had, there were people actually whining on the Internet about it at the time). So you get the bemused expressions of Duchovny in seeing someone just as odd with Landau while Anderson basically glides through the mumbo-jumbo presented (namely, bees) with graceful charm to basically glue the film from what could've just been mumbo jumbo (right down to the opening scene involving black oil and cavemen, but nothing tops the ending scene involving the X-Files being re-opened...again, because, yes, they did that before). Landau and Danner lurk every now and then to deliver the spiel that comes with having name actors doing things that basically already happened in the show (i.e. "crackpot" and "authority figure in a hearing"), but at least Davis has not lost any sense of malevolence on the transition to the big screen and it is nice to see the cold steely dignity of Neville one more time (hey, it can't all be shadowy rooms with figures standing around). In general, the movie is moderately entertaining when focused on Mulder and Scully rather than the idea of unravelling the proverbial mystery bar (spoiler: the core of that bar is basically a roll of paper saying "try again later") to go along with a few decent visuals for a mostly standard affair. Regardless if you saw the show or not, the movie is mostly one to be enjoyed in the margins of middle ground entertainment, which is fine by me, I suppose.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Evidently, there were rumblings where the Season 7 finale "Requiem" (aired in 2000) could have just easily have been the finale of the show or just the setup to doing another movie.

*Regardless of watching the show on Season 10 or Season 1, what the fuck was "My Struggle IV" even meant to be? Nearly six years later and that's what the show ended on?

² See that's how you know the character of Marita Covarrubias stinks (blame Chris Carter?), she wasn't even in the movie despite being, you know, the informant character (of course I might be biased, I adored Deep Throat and X in the "oh hey, they are in this episode"). Even The Lone Gunmen got to be in this movie, and those guys are lovable scamps. Of course, this note section can't be just geeking out about random X-Files musings, then it would be too obvious (such as saying I would fold to Scully immediately).

Send Help.

Review #2505: Send Help.

Cast: 

Rachel McAdams (Linda Liddle), Dylan O'Brien (Bradley Preston), with Edyll Ismail (Zuri), Xavier Samuel (Donovan), Chris Pang (Chase), Dennis Haysbert (Franklin), Thaneth Warakulnukroh (Boat captain), Emma Raimi (River), and Kristy Best (Polly Perera) Directed by Sam Raimi (#611 - Spider-Man, #1296 - The Evil Dead, #1483 - Evil Dead II, #1495 - Darkman, #1695 - Spider-Man 2, and #1779 - Spider-Man 3, #1840 - Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, #2141 - Army of Darkness)

Review: 

“[The studio] recognized what we were trying to do, and they were on board with that. Instead of taking this feathered fish and trying to cut off the feathers or trying to remove the scales, they said, ‘Yes, this is a unique thing. Changing it would not be for the better.’ Just embrace what it is. It’s just different.”

Oh hell yes, I was curious about this movie. Apparently, Sam Raimi was tapped to direct this film for a number of years after hearing a pitch from Mark Swift and Damian Shannon (who might be best known for their work on scripts such as Freddy vs. Jason [2003]). They wrote the script in 2019, and in that same year, Columbia Pictures had Raimi attached to do the project but it took several years in actually finding someone that wanted to finance it and also have it play in theaters rather than streaming (argue if you want, I applaud Raimi for his desire to do a theatrical film). It eventually found favor with 20th Century (Fox) Studios; the script was written by Mark Swift and Damian Shannon (who might be best known for their work on scripts such as Freddy vs. Jason [2003]).  And yes, this is the first Sam Raimi horror movie since Drag Me to Hell (2009)*, if you were curious.

Okay, sure, it's a "thriller" movie, but there is a body count and there are a few moments with blood and tension. It just so happens to be a movie involving radical reversal of their everyday routines that can be heaven or hell depending on how you view it. A little bit of Misery and a little bit of Cast Away (or, as others have argued, inspired in some part by Triangle of Sadness, which I never saw) goes a long way for a chippy survival film that has enjoyable bits that actually are darkly amusing. I myself wouldn't know what to do when stuck on an island (especially after being reminded yet again why I don't like the idea of flying on an airplane), so I cannot imagine being stuck with someone that actually watches Survivor (now, I could understand Big Brother, I watched that for a time...). You get your little moments of queasiness in terms of a body count, projectile vomit and more (I saw this in 3-D and yeah, I suppose it works to what you would hope for). With that in mind, McAdams is particularly entertaining because of the layers that fade in and out of that combo of awkwardness and determination. You get the best of both worlds in enjoying the character that comes through in the two environments: one that is corny but basically solitary in corporate life and one that is basically as happy as one could be in a "adapt or die" island life* that is, well, pretty likable. And then of course there is O'Brien, who manages to sell it just as well in the perils that come with being turned upside down in the totem pole of power dynamics that is just as amusing in the overgrown qualities that come with pathetic creatures that believe themselves to be better than you just because of who they were born to. To appreciate this movie is to enjoy the tension between McAdams and O'Brien in what is said and unsaid (at a certain point, any simmering might as well be in the freezer) between them, which is particularly entertaining for the climax in high-energy queasiness. As a whole, I enjoyed this movie to a pretty solid level. It is a nice movie that manages to make the 115 minute runtime roll off without one feeling helpless at what they are seeing (i.e. it feels like a complete movie to actually look at and have glee over without also wondering about the effects being distracting). It's a neat feature with a mix of squeamish and humorous moments that I would recommend without question for the level of fun to be had here.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*I really probably should've picked that movie for last November, because it was a finalist.

*A lot of this is basically code for "they put her in frumpy looking clothes before eventually revealing that when trapped in an island, yes, you would want to be there with Rachel McAdams.

Oldboy.

Review #2504: Oldboy.

Cast: 

Choi Min-sik (Oh Dae-su; Oh Tae-kyung as young Dae-su), Yoo Ji-tae (Lee Woo-jin; Yoo Yeon-seok as young Woo-jin), Kang Hye-jung (Mi-do), Ji Dae-han (No Joo-hwan; Woo Il-han as young Joo-hwan), Kim Byeong-ok (Mr. Han), Yoon Jin-seo (Lee Soo-ah), Oh Dal-su (Mr. Park Cheol-woong), and Oh Kwang-rok (Suicidal man) Directed by Park Chan-wook.

Review: 

"Many people tend to differentiate starkly between commercially successful or nonsuccessful movies, but the simple truth is merely that people have differing tastes about what kind of movies they like or don't. The audience seems hazy to me, shrouded in a veil through which I can't see. They are not real, not concrete. So I chose one person to be my sole audience, representing all the audiences out there. That person is my wife. From the scriptwriting and the editing process all the way to deciding on the music, I discuss everything with her thoroughly in detail. She is a normal housewife with an incredible eye who constantly offers me much advice and help."

One of the reasons for New Directors Month is to make up for lost time and go with people that clearly will get further featuring over time. Born to an architect and a poet in Seoul, Park Chan-wook actually planned to be an art critic. His major was philosophy at Sogang University but couldn't quite settle in to his major (the university did not have many arts classes) and found interest in a photography club. He then saw a screening of Vertigo (1958) and apparently was compelled to "at least try to become a movie director"*. Park worked as a film critic (when he had to make money in college, he did stories based on movies prior to being shown in Korea with subtitles) while earning film experience as an assistant director on Kkamdong (1988). He made his attempt to be a filmmaker with The Moon Is... the Sun's Dream (1992) and Trio (1997) ...and neither found an audience, to the point where Park essentially disowned them. At any rate, he kept going, directing the short film Judgement (1999) that basically made him realized that actors "were not puppets". He got his breakthrough with the mystery thriller Joint Security Area (2000), which for a brief time was the highest ever grossing movie in South Korea. Unintentionally, Park's next film became the first of what has been labeled as "The Vengeance Trilogy" with Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance (2002), with Oldboy (2003) and Lady Vengeance (2005) soon following. According to Park, the theme of vengeance recurred in certain movies of his because of how people have had to deal with the rage and grudges within themselves (with smaller and smaller outlets to get it out) that basically leads to "stories of people who place the blame for their actions on others because they refuse to take on the blame themselves", where morality and guilty consciences are what matters as the subject (he also has stated once that his "through-line of violence" comes with the turbulence he had witnessed as a college youth in the 1980s). In addition to the occasional work for television (such as The Sympathizer in 2024*), Park has continued to make a wide variety of films such as I'm a Cyborg, But That's OK (2006), Thirst (2009), The Handmaiden (2016) and his most recent work, No Other Choice (2025).

The source material for the film was the Japanese manga Old Boy, which was written by Garon Tsuchiya and illustrated by Nobuaki Minegishi that was serialized from 1996 to 1998. Hwang Jo-yun, Lim Jun-hyung, and Park Chan-wook adapted the script for the film you see here. An unauthorized Indian adaptation called Zinda came out in 2006 before Oldboy was subsequently remade for American audiences with Spike Lee in 2013. What you get here is a movie all about making you feel every nook and cranny of the complexities that arise in what it really means to try and seek revenge and the all-encompassing perils that come with guilt. It is an action thriller of course, with a particularly standout single-shot corridor fight scene, but there is something much more involving in what the movie wants to make you feel in the cycles of violence that come every now and then that isn't so much exploitative as is evocative. The performances are particularly worthwhile to experience this disturbing journey of all-consuming violence, with Choi (who did most of his own stunts) managing to take it all in a stride that fits the film perfectly with where it has to go for a movie that really just involves two people confronting a mirror of each other rather than just good vs. evil. Yoo makes that other side of all-consuming revenge just as unnerving with a chilling performance that really does get under one's skin for what you see of him (I think back to the scene where he is just standing in the room with a mask, honestly). Caught in the middle of it is Kang, who handles it all with such hurried grace in this wavering story of someone trying to understand what they cannot possibly understand. You understand the feeling of being in captivity like a chained beast and wonder if they ever actually got out of the cage. Rage and vengeance can be all-consuming if one allows it to permeate through their wellbeing, and it helps that the film basically spreads its violence out in ways that make the punishments all the more unnerving (whether that involves pulling teeth, eating a live octopus, or, well, with its climax). It is a fairly brisk film that manages to be pretty unnerving with its slow burn about what really matters in the pursuit of "the truth" that you really have to not spoil for yourself. There are no triumphs or easy answers at the end of the film, which actually is a pretty big relief when you get down to it. It's a pretty damn good movie, particularly if you go into it with as little to know as possible to really let it wash over you.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

*Among influences Park listed in 2004 were: "Sophocles, Shakespeare, Kafka, Dostoevsky, Balzac, Zola, Stendhal, Austin, Philip K. Dick, Zelazny and Vonnegut." Fun fact: one influence on Viet Thanh Nguyen when writing The Sympathizer was in fact Park's Oldboy (2003).

Another end to the New Directors Month tradition. Among the finalists for this year include the following: Pigs and Battleships [Shōhei Imamura] · The Man Who Fell To Earth [Nicolas Roeg]  · Wakefield [Robin Swicord] · Bad Company [Robert Benton] · Jacob the Liar [Frank Beyer] · Hundreds of Beavers [Mike Cheslik]

As always, see you next time.

Chan is Missing.

Review #2503: Chan is Missing.

Cast: 

Wood Moy (Jo), Marc Hayashi (Steve), Laureen Chew (Amy), Peter Wang (Henry), Presco Tabios (Presco), Frankie Alarcon (Frankie), Judi Nihei (Lawer), Ellen Yeung (Mrs. Chan), and George Woo (George) Directed by Wayne Wang.

Review: 

"I was always trying to do something that was different. I want to go back and do something where I can unlearn everything that I learned. I always tell film students that everything you learn might be helpful, but, in the end, you want to unlearn all of that and just trust your instincts and make the film you wanna make."

Well, I suppose it helps to understand the perspective that comes with a director's upbringing for certain movies. Wayne Wang was born and raised in Hong Kong and his parents (who had escaped from China after the war) aimed for him to go to America to study and prepare for medical school (the unrest in Hong Kong in 1967 did not help matters) by going to Foothill College. While he lived with a Quaker family, they actually had a radical interest in the burgeoning counterculture that left an impression on him. Combined with having a class involving art history, Wang found himself wanting to become involved in the arts which led to him studying at the California College of Arts and Crafts in Oakland. He thought about majoring in painting but soon changed his major to film because UC Berkley's Pacific Film Archive came into focus to help him get more absorbed into film. After graduate school, he went back to Hong Kong and worked a while at a station that didn't exactly gel with his new-found ideas about film. At any rate, he went back to the Bay Area and became involved in the local Asian filmmaking community while also teaching English at a Chinese language center. In 1975, he worked with Rick Schmidt on a low budget drama called A Man, a Woman, and a Killer that he co-wrote and co-directed that came and went to little fanfare. Chan is Missing (1982) ended up being his breakthrough film onto a career of over four decades. Over the prevailing years, Wang has made a variety of films in and out of the system ranging from Dim Sum: A Little Bit of Heart (1985), The Joy Luck Club (1993), The Center of the World (2001), Maid in Manhattan (2002) and his most recent film, Coming Home Again (2019).

With this film, Wang wrote the script alongside Issac Cronin and Terrel Seltzer (who essentially aided in the narration, they did not write dialogue) that came from the experiences that Wang had involving the center alongside his experiences seeing his elder brother try to cope with living with the high-strung nature of America*. Featuring a mix of professional actors and community folks, the film was shot all around Chinatown over the course of ten weekends (a list of locations utilized for the film can be seen in this link). The result was a festival hit that received considerable distribution that was considered noteworthy given its Chinese American director.  In fairness, the ambiguity and playing with the genres of the mystery noir with its own humor about where it lies with in Chinatown is the point. Wang shot the film with an intention of "evolution of the Chinese written word in mind", which basically meant the movie became what it was after plenty of time in the editing room (apparently Wang spent two years editing). You've got a structure that is then expanded upon with some improv (as aided by the Asian American Theater Company) and a mix of English, Mandarin, and Cantonese to go with songs that were chosen for what one would hear going down Chinatown such as "Grant Avenue" or “Sabor a Mí”. It is a light affair at 76 minutes that borders on a travelogue (hey at least it isn't the scenic route) you might see on television with where it comes and goes with a mostly committed Moy and Hayashi along the way that sees plenty of varying leads about a mystery that isn't really a mystery at all. The film, possibly like the Asian American experience, isn't exactly something you can peg down as one thing, which I suppose is more effective and curious for some. As a whole, Chan is Missing is a decent movie, managing to have a playful energy that can be worth your interest if you understand what you're getting into with the nature of perceptions in culture that can crisscross for whatever type of effect is possible. You just might encounter something you didn't expect with this movie, for better or worse.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Tragically, his brother suffered from schizophrenia.

*Apparently, the movie is available on YouTube: A MAN, A WOMAN, AND A KILLER (77 min., ©1975). Directed by Wayne Wang and Rick Schmidt.

Violent Cop (1989).

Review #2502: Violent Cop.

Cast: 

Takeshi Kitano (Azuma), Maiko Kawakami (Akari), Makoto Ashikawa (Kikuchi), Shirō Sano (Yoshinari), Sei Hiraizumi (Iwaki), Mikiko Otonashi (Iwaki's wife), Hakuryu (Kiyohiro), Ittoku Kishibe (Nito), Ken Yoshizawa (Shinkai), Nobuyuki Katsube (Deputy Police Chief Higuchi), and Akira Hamada (Chief Detective Araki) Directed by Takeshi Kitano.

Review: 

"My advice is: trust nobody. Don't listen to what anybody has to say, just stick to your guns and trust your instincts. If you start to listen to people and put their ideas in your first movie, then you'll have to compromise more on your second, and it will just get worse and worse from there. You can always listen to advice on your third or fourth film, but on your first, stick to your guns. Just be prepared to be labeled a "box office unfriendly" director, like I used to be, if you do this."

Tell me if this sounds familiar: actor-turned-filmmaker. Okay, that's a simplification, but how else does one start talking about Takeshi Kitano? Born in Adachi, Tokyo, Kitano actually started his studies at Meiji University for engineering before he dropped out, finding his first path as a comedian. He became a theater MC and later formed a comedy duo as "Beat Takeshi" with Niro "Beat" Kaneko (hence the duo name of Two Beat). Eventually, he struck out on his own to do appearances on television (such as the game show Takeshi's Castle and, I'm not kidding, designing a video game) and then tried to branch out into film with Nagisa Ōshima's Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence (1983). When he went to a screening and heard people burst out laughing, he found himself devastated but also determined to continue to play serious characters in film and TV. In a filmmaking career of over three decades, Violent Cop, his debut film as a director, is the only film he did not have a writing credit for and one of just two where he did not serve as editor, which has seen films such as the comedy Getting Any? (1995), the crime drama Hana-bi (1997), the one-time American production with Brother (2000), the lyrical drama Dolls (2002), the action film Zatōichi (2003), and his most recent film, Broken Rage (2024) to go along with his continued work in television (he has been quoted as stating that doing shows helped in his filmmaking in terms of the pursuit of knowledge).

Apparently, the original plans were to make a movie adaptation of a non-fiction novel (about insurance fraud) called Travelers of the Southern Cross with Kinji Fukasaku* as director and Kitano as one of the leading roles. Apparently, an incident involving Kitano storming a scandal magazine spurred curiosity to have Kitano not just be in the film but play a detective once delays from the fallout of, well, stumbling onto a building with a "gang" because a gossip magazine wrote about them. Fukasaku's disagreements with the producer over the scheduling and tone led to the idea of Kitano doing both direction and starring, complete with freedom to do what he could, complete with doing re-writes on the original script (as done by Hisashi Nozawa, who later took his original script and turned it into a novel). Kitano has been quoted saying that he wanted to show violence as the horrifying thing that it is rather than say, as one to be glamorized or depicted as inevitable. Basically, you get a movie from someone who is making their first steps of a worldview involving bleak surroundings, long takes that leave the viewer in a sort of a stasis for what they are seeing and a generally resigned nature to what will end up on screen in terms of violence that is as swift as it is startling. It might not exactly be a great movie, but it does manage to have enough to make the 103 minutes manage to work in the stone-faced chaos that ensues from people that essentially has no qualms about having no heroes. The violence that comes out from Kitano paired with the middling amount of resistance from the authority around him (consider how he mostly writes apology notes) is there because that's just how the wind blows in "life going on". It isnt exactly the Japanese Dirty Harry, you know. One minute you could be at the theater with a friend and the next minute, a mishap leaves someone splattered onto the floor. You get a chase scene with a bit of jazz poured in to go along with plenty of running for a movie that really could only end one way in the circle of violence. People live, people die, and the cop machine (vice or otherwise) moves on. As a whole, Violent Cop is a shaky but curiously enjoyable experience that is worth seeing further with Kitano as a filmmaker in looking upon violence and the people that inhabit that world. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*You might wonder, hey, is Kinji Fukasaku part of New Directors Month? Surprisingly, he actually has been covered before because he directed Message from Space (1978) that we covered years ago. But there are films one (i.e., me) should probably check out such as Battle Royale (2000) or the Battles Without Honor and Humanity series of films (1973-1976). Incidentally, Kitano ended up working with Fukasaku on Battle Royale.

Sexy Beast.

Review #2501: Sexy Beast.

Cast: 

Ray Winstone (Gary 'Gal' Dove), Ben Kingsley (Don Logan), Ian McShane (Teddy Bass), Amanda Redman (DeeDee Dove), James Fox (Harry), Cavan Kendall (Aitch), Julianne White (Jackie), and Álvaro Monje (Enrique) Directed by Jonathan Glazer.

Review: 

"I’m not the kind of director who has 10 projects on the go to see which one works out. It feels more like music to me — I have this idea for an album and I want to make it. If I do something, I have to do it well and sometimes that takes a little time."

I suppose I should've done this one sooner. Sexy Beast was the debut feature film of Jonathan Glazer, who grew up in London to a Reform Jewish family (he noted that that in his childhood, he encountered various "East End Jews who had moved to the suburbs for a better quality of life" that imprinted on him with their culture) saw him attend Jewish Free School. He then went to art school because he believed that drawing was the only thing he was good at. However, he got into the habit of directing because there were friends of his in bands that wanted him to shoot music videos for them. Eventually, after graduating with a degree in theatre design from Nottingham Trent University, Glazer got into making film trailers and eventually got into doing commercials; eventually, he did videos for bands such as Radiohead. Apparently, Glazer was slated to direct for the first time with the movie Gangster No. 1 which was written by Louis Mellis and David Scinto based on their play before disagreements with the casting led to all three people leaving (Paul McGuigan eventually made the film in 2000). According to Scinto, Sexy Beast "was born, out of a reaction to all that chaos and soap opera", going from a stage play draft with the working title "Gangster No. 2" to, well, Sexy Beast; the two had one further collaboration turned into a film with 44 Inch Chest (released in 2009 which also featured McShane and Winstone). Made for a budget of roughly $4 million that premiered in the festival circuit in 2000 before going into theaters in 2001, the movie was a light decent hit with audiences, apparently more so in America than expected. Glazer has since directed select commercial advertisements and three further films (which unlike Beast had Glazer serve as co-writer) with Birth (2004), Under the Skin (2013) and The Zone of Interest (2023), which won an Academy Award for Best International Feature Film*.

Glazer apparently called the making of the film "perfect baptism for me" because of the writing that he could trust completely for a film that is particularly intense in its dialogue for what Glazer once called "neo noir" that is basically trying to have a heist while avoiding being a "heist movie". Shaggy dog heist film or not, there is plenty of mischief to experience within the obvious qualities that come with Winstone being paired with Kingsley. It's because you get a passively bulked sunburned lead presence paired with someone who basically is fighting with him on a primal level with such a level of containment that is actually pretty frightening. At least, for a movie that basically shows the upcoming storm by having a boulder crash down the hill onto a pool in the opening minutes. So yes, you can't really hide from your past, but you can sure try to confront the present to maintain a worthwhile future. Within its aspects of the thriller is black comedy that actually is quite entertaining in the machinations of how you can make 88 minutes roll along where you aren't thinking about the heist as much as you are experiencing pros at work. Kingsley just has that magic to startle you with his presence and where he packs his expressions and dialogue in a way that just sounds tailor-made to him while Winstone lumbers as one could only do as someone who aspires to stay in their particular corner of the burning sun (as opposed to the burn of the heist). McShane is intimidating enough in the brief moments one sees of him around the scene of the growing crime (consider how the last scene sees him and Winstone talk about the various truths that lie under the surface). The heist in London isn't the point, it's a film all about what you see and hear in Spain more than anything, I imagine. As a whole, Sexy Beast is basically an acquired taste that either sticks with you or just leaves out the back door. I thought it was curious enough within its maneuvering of the crime film with humor and solid enough performances to make the journey worth watching.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*It was set in 1943 in the life of German Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höss filmed in German, Polish, and Yiddish. I hear it's a good movie. I just want to mention that film mostly because the Oscar speech he did talked about the ongoing Gaza war that managed to make a whole bunch of people look like petulant children. 

Onibaba.

Review #2500: Onibaba.

Cast: 

Nobuko Otowa (Older Woman), Jitsuko Yoshimura (Younger Woman), Kei Satō (Hachi), Taiji Tonoyama (Ushi), and Jūkichi Uno (The masked Samurai warrior) Written and Directed by Kaneto Shindō.

Review: 

"Speaking about Onibaba in particular, my main historical interest focuses on ordinary people . . . their energy to carry themselves beyond the predicaments they encounter daily. I wish to describe the struggles of the so-called common people, which usually never appear in recorded history. This is why I made Onibaba. My mind was always on the commoners, not on the lords, politicians, or anyone of name and fame. I wanted to convey the lives of down-to-earth people who have to live like weeds."

I suppose it's something to be a filmmaker that made nearly 50 movies and lived to be 100. Born in Hiroshima, Kaneto Shindo stepped into films as a teenager when he joined the art section of the Shinko-Kinema studio in Tokyo in 1939. Inevitably, he was later drafted into the Japanese Army, where he served with a squad that saw all but him and five others killed in action. He returned from the war and worked at Shochiku as a script writer that saw him make connections with Kozaburo Yoshimura, who he formed an independent film company with (alongside actor Taiji Tonoyama) called Kindai Eiga Kyōkai. He directed his first film with Story of a Beloved Wife (1951) for Daiei Film, which was loosely based on his first marriage. That film featured Nobuko Otowa as the lead and she ended up starring in numerous Shindo movies. Likely one of his most noted early works came with Children of Hiroshima (1953), which saw him invited by the Japan Teachers Union that was admired enough to be shown at the Cannes Film Festival while ironically also being criticized by the Union for not going further in social criticism. Shindo made a variety of features from the dialogue-less The Baked Island (1960), horror movies such as Kuroneko (1968), biodramas such as The Life of Chikuzan (1977), comedy-dramas such as A Last Note (1995) and movies based on his war experiences such as Postcard (2010), which he did in his nineties; he died of natural causes in 2012 at the age of 100.

I will admit that there was an inkling of doing this film for the horror season last year. No, really. Some people might call it a stage drama or a period drama, and sure, some people can go with that, but it basically is a horror movie within the confines of masks and erotic nature (besides, horror deniers always want to call things "dramas" and "thrillers" with this or Les Diaboliques because they don't have guts). The horrors that lie within outcasts and the craven nature of trying to survive is one that seems timeless regardless of it being the 14th century or modern times. Shindo was inspired by a Shin Buddhist parable that he heard as a child (referred to as yome-odoshi-no men/niku-zuki-no-men), which involved a demon mask and, well, women. Apparently, the effects of the mask on who wears it was supposed to be symbolic of the disfigurement of the victims of the atomic bombings. But here we are with something where a group of scavengers must confront the most real thing of all: sex. It is such a dazzlingly haunting film to see the amoral qualities explode like ice, complete with having such a devastating look on the prairie and the people who live and die on it. It should be noted that the age difference between Otowa and Yoshimura was just 19 years. And yet each pull off tremendous performances, particularly with Otowa, who manages to evoke the feeling that arises from being one of flesh and blood with obvious desires even wrapped in the isolation of the reeds. Consider how she handles seeing the younger woman entwined with a newly arrived man in Satō (who plays it so well in smarmy charm) and clings on to a tree, for example. The 102 minutes rolls along with deliberate pacing that rewards those who like icy composition and even colder tension before the demon mask comes into play, which basically serves as a sort of curse for all involved. Admittedly, the ending is a bit quizzical, mainly because it just...ends. I suppose it makes sense to go with ambiguity that has a pit that might as well be purgatory for the lead characters that they just can't escape. As a horror drama, this is a pretty damn good one to let sift through you with a worthwhile chilly experience.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Yes, that's right, 2,500 reviews - you may remember Movie Night cracked 2,000 on April 20, 2023. Only so many reviews to go to 3,000.

The Stunt Man.

Review #2499: The Stunt Man.

Cast: 

Peter O'Toole (Eli Cross), Steve Railsback (Cameron), Barbara Hershey (Nina Franklin), Allen Goorwitz (Sam), Alex Rocco (Jake), Sharon Farrell (Denise), Adam Roarke (Raymond Bailey), Philip Bruns (Ace), Charles Bail (Chuck Barton), and John Garwood (Gabe) Directed by Richard Rush.

Review: 

"The idea of a fugitive hiding his identity by posing as a stuntman and falling under the dominance of a director seemed like a marvelous way to examine our universal panic and paranoia over controlling our own destinies. And it offered a chance to do it inside the structure of a big screen big action picture, which would be entertaining at the same time.”

It does help to look outside the box with someone who directed a total of twelve films. Richard Rush liked films from a young age, once stating in an interview that he saw Mildred Pierce (1945) fifteen times while working as a theater usher. He attended the UCLA Film School and stated with clear honesty that the Theater Department was wonderful while not learning anything about film, with his real education coming with making propaganda (his word) TV programs about the Korean War. He had a production company to produce commercials and industrial films before selling it so he could make what became his first film: Too Soon to Love (1960), which he ended up selling to Universal Pictures for $250,000 (of note is one of Rush's co-writers was a young Francis Ford Coppola) that was described once as "the first American New Wave film". Other highlights include some work for AIP such as The Savage Seven, studio work for Columbia with Getting Straight (1970), a "love it or hate it" film that served as an early example of the buddy cop movie with Freebie and the Bean (1974). Rush could not get as much work after The Stunt Man: he was paid to walk away from Air America [1990] and the production of Color of Night [1994] had a publicized disagreement about the best cut that gave him a heart attack, although Rush's version on DVD apparently was better than the theatrical version. At any rate, save for a DVD documentary about the making of The Stunt Man, Rush mostly retreated to his Bel Air residence for the rest of his life*; he died in 2021 at the age of 92.

In 1970, Paul Brodeur's novel The Stunt Man was published. Almost immediately, there were ideas of making a film adaptation, which actually started with Brodeur's Harvard classmate Frederick Wiseman. Francois Truffaut and Arthur Penn apparently were considered for the film but instead ended up doing films that have been said to have story elements from the book (with Day for Night [1973] and Night Moves [1975], respectively). At any rate, with the relative hit of Getting Straight (1970), Rush came into the picture in 1971 that originally was to have William Castle as producer. Columbia Pictures had the film rights and Rush wrote a treatment that apparently was described as one the executives were too confused about what genre it was (asking if it was a comedy, drama, social satire, or action adventure and getting "yes, all" as an answer does tend to make things a bit weird). Having decided to buy the film rights from the studio to work on a screenplay with Lawrence B. Marcus, Rush tried to shop for a studio to fund it to no avail (it did not help when the movie that ended up being called Hooper [1978]* was originally in development as "The Stuntman"). Eventually, the funding for the film came by way of Melvin Simon*, who actually was a prominent real estate investor before he tried his hand at producing in what he later called a "big mistake" (likely the most noted film with financing from Simon was Porky's [1982]) and was distributed by 20th Century Fox to little release.

I really wanted to like this movie. It is fascinating, sure, because this is a film that Peter O'Toole said was not so much released but "escaped". But I can't help but feel like most of the movie is a smoke and mirrors show to hide what is basically a shaggy dog story more than some sort of mixture of adventure-comedy-drama. Oh but certain stuff in the movie is just part of a movie- that only works if you are absorbed into the idea that the film is actually going to fool you, and, well, I didn't. It's not nearly as fun as, say, Hooper, and it is not nearly as compelling to answer the question of "is that it?" beyond presenting a mish-mash between Railsback and O'Toole-well okay there is Hershey, but eventually one starts to roll their eyes at the perceived free spirit (the first time you see her is in makeup trying to look like an old woman, which might actually be a bit funny in the punchline). Honestly, the most interesting part of the film is the exchange between Railsback and Bail (actual stuntman playing himself) in the art of the stunt, since it actually goes into something meaningful: selling the stunt with natural dialogue that is amusing in what it says about people with the stones to go through with a jump. Of course, O'Toole is basically doing an imitation of Rush (complete with clothes given by Rush to O'Toole) that has an amusing ego within wily maneuverings that extends to doing scenes on a crane. By the time the movie maneuvers through 131 minutes of semi-interesting moments involving stunts and moments meant to make one understand the PTSD-haze* of the lead focus, you just wish the conceit was funnier. It is one of those movies you might encounter in the middle of the night and possibly find something really curious within its game of conceit in movieland that is sometimes entertaining and other times is somewhere in the middle.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Incidentally, Rush wanted to do a film about Barry Seal for many years, as evidenced here - MONEY INTO LIGHT: AN INTERVIEW WITH RICHARD RUSH (PART 4 OF 4)

*Call it a hot take, but I think I enjoyed Hooper more than I enjoyed The Stunt Man.

*You might recognize Simon because he and his younger brother Herb bought the Indiana Pacers in 1983 and Herb still owns the team.

*I imagine that if my father had lived long enough to talk to me as an adult, it would've been something to talk to him as an adult, given that he served in Vietnam.

Come Drink with Me.

Review #2498: Come Drink with Me.

Cast: 

Cheng Pei-pei ("Golden Swallow" Zheng), Yueh Hua ("Drunken Cat" Fan Da-pei), Chan Hung-lit (Jade-Faced Tiger), Lee Wan-chung ("Smiling-Tiger" Tsu Kan), Yeung Chi-hing (Abbot Liao Kung), Wong Chung (Zheng Bi-qiu), Shum Lo ("Number Five", bandit), and Wang Ruo-Ping ("Baldie", bandit) Directed by King Hu.

Review: 

Sure, let's pick at least one perceived Hong Kong classic. Well, actually King Hu was born in Beijing to an affluent family that had an interest in Peking opera from a young age more than movies. He moved to Hong Kong (then under British rule) in 1949 that found him take a variety of odd jobs, one of which was with set design. By the mid-1950s, he was appearing as an actor in films but eventually found his way working with the Shaw Brothers and their noted studio, which saw him take on assistant duties with films such as The Love Eterne (1963). Hu became a director with Sons of the Good Earth (1965). However, Come Drink with Me (1966) ended up being the one with noted success. this film was written by Hu and Ting Shan-hsi; the decision to cast Cheng Pei-pei in the film was because of her background in dance and ballet in what was her breakout role. In 1968, Cheng reprised her role in Golden Swallow, which had Jimmy Wang as co-star that was directed by Chang Cheh. Hu left the Shaws and travelled aboard to direct that resulted in roughly a dozen movies of varying cult curiosity, whether that involved Taiwan with classics such as Dragon Inn (1966) and his cult classic A Touch of Zen (1970-71) or South Korea with Raining in the Mountain (1979). Hu directed on-and-off all the way until Painted Skin (1992); he died in 1997 at the age of 64. Films such as Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (which happened to have Cheng in a supporting role) are reported to have taken influence from Hu's films.

Okay I guess I forgot to mention the movie is called a "wuxia" for its genre, which basically is an adventure with martial arts and also elements of historical fantasy, which is, well, why you see swords and stuff.* Honestly, I wish I liked the movie more, but a solid 7 is still a solid film to seek out. The action that comes through basically is timed to rhythm that would basically qualify as a crowd-pleaser for 91 minutes, right down to its blend of studio sets and frontier viewing. You get a little musical interlude to go along with the proceedings, which basically go about the way you might expect in terms of good vs. evil. I suppose it will mean a good deal more for those familiar with opera or zen or, well, those who know their Mandarin. But one appreciates the editing and positioning to make the action feel enough like it is coming from a certain kind of quickness to really pop out to you. The best parts of the film basically are the staging of the action more so than the characters themselves, mainly because at a certain point it becomes more focused on Yueh rather than Cheng, although at least you get a sense that both are trying to maintain that sense of balance in trying to not be consumed by violence, at least when compared to Chan and Lee. The first half basically holds it together a bit more in curiosity (gee, a drunken master, I wonder) than the second half, arguably. It is relatively charming as a movie to see eventually play out, I just wish it was a bit more focused with its characters, although at least the climax is swift enough to let the film close on a relatively high note. As a whole, Come Drink with Me has a certain kind of appeal for those who like a bit of mystical charm within their action movies that rolls with rhythm and the energy to make the entertainment just click in a way that doesn't seem antiquated.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*There are essays about Hu and wuxia that might be more helpful in you are curious: Hu, King – Senses of Cinema

Or, alternatively, if you like reviews of stuff in horror or action from a source definitely more experienced: http://www.1000misspenthours.com/reviews/reviewsa-d/comedrinkwithme.htm Never let it be said that I don't try to recommend others

A Night at the Opera.

Review #2497: A Night at the Opera.

Cast: 

Groucho Marx (Otis B. Driftwood), Chico Marx (Fiorello), Harpo Marx (Tomasso), Kitty Carlisle (Rosa Castaldi), Allan Jones (Ricardo Baroni), Margaret Dumont (Mrs. Claypool), Sig Ruman (Herman Gottlieb), Walter Woolf King (Rodolfo Lassparri), and Robert Emmet O'Connor (Sergeant Henderson) Directed by Sam Wood.

Review: 

In fairness, Sam Wood does sound like a name I've covered before. But so it goes. Wood actually was a real estate broker in his young years in California before the growing industry of film for the 1900s eventually became something worth investing time into, starting as a movie assistant and eventually assistant director, most notably with Paramount Pictures for a number of years. He became a director by the turn of the 1910s with Wallace Reid. His efficient nature in getting films done landed him several opportunities to direct for a variety of places over the next two decades, although his longest tenure ended up being with MGM, where he worked in both silent and sound productions starting in 1927. In the middle of his tenure there, Wood ended up as the one directing a key assignment with the Marx Brothers because Irving Thalberg needed a dependable guy to direct the group (now consisting of Groucho, Harpo, and Chico), who had recently departed Paramount Pictures after five features because of contractual disputes that boiled over with Duck Soup (1933). The resulting success led to Wood directing the next Marx movie with A Day at the Races (released in 1937 months after Thalberg's death). For the Marx Brothers, they worked with MGM further on with At the Circus (1939), Go West (1940), and The Big Store (1941). Wood moved on to a wavering list of noted work, most notably with Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1939) before he became a freelance director for the remainder of his career and life, which led to films such as Our Town (1940), Kitty Foyle (1940), and Kings Row (1942). During production of Ambush (1950), Wood died from a heart attack at the age of 66 in 1949. Incidentally, both of Wood's Marx movies served as loose inspiration for the 1992 movie Brain Donors.

With this film, certain parts of the routines were basically workshopped with live stage performances that the brothers did on the road that was performed around the country prior to filming, with Wood traveling with the group from city to city to watch the audience reaction to the gags. The writing credits went to James Kevin McGuinness for the story, George S. Kaufman & Morrie Ryskind for the screenplay while gagman Al Boasberg contributed uncredited dialogue. If Thalberg's idea that the brothers would be best served by having a solid framework to hold up a grab-bag of jokes, well, he probably had a point. Basically, you get a good chunk of Marx mayhem with a handful of gags that come and go with solid efficiency depending on just how much you love seeing a group of oddballs casually loop in and out of affairs that either come off as trivial or just about the right sort of absurd. Obviously, the stateroom sequence is a key highlight of the film in that high-desired quality of rhythm and setup, although I would say the scene with the group trying to evade trouble involving furniture-moving is a nice favorite. Admittedly, the aspects involving Carlisle and Jones is the weakest part of the film, particularly since Dumont is such a solid straight presence anyway. But Groucho is Groucho in terms of just slinging lines full of zip with efficient nature that manages to evoke the charm within conman routines. And of course, there is the usual bumbling from Chico and the not-exactly silent Harpo. As a whole, it isn't hard to see why the Marx Brothers thought A Night at the Opera was one of their favorite films, as it manages to zing on a consistent level with its humor and execution to where one is immediately chuckling with its trio of stars with warm familiarity regardless of how many Marx movies you've seen. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.