The Fabulous Baker Boys.

Review #1493: The Fabulous Baker Boys.

Cast: 
Jeff Bridges (Jack Baker), Michelle Pfeiffer (Susie Diamond), Beau Bridges (Frank Baker), Ellie Raab (Nina), Xander Berkeley (Lloyd), Jennifer Tilly (Blanche "Monica" Moran), Dakin Matthews (Charlie), and Ken Lerner (Ray) Written and Directed by Steve Kloves.

Review: 
"Jeff, for me, is like the old time actors who you never know are acting; he's seamless - you just never see him working at it."
"It's my profound fear of embarrassment that's kept me going. That's the key to my success."

There's nothing in show business like films about show business, whether with gimmicks or familiar stories. How could I resist this as some sort of last representation of the 1980s? Really it is the pairing of the two Bridges actors that really got me interested more than anything, since each are quite interesting to see in films from time to time, and this serves as their first and so far only film together. Each had made plenty of appearances in films and television since each were children (they also happened to have served in the United States Coast Guard Reserve like their father Lloyd) that scored triumphs in the early twenties with films such as The Landlord (1970) and The Last Picture Show (1971). Of course the other prevailing reason to view the film is Pfeiffer, who had risen to prominence in the 1980s with films such as Grease 2 (1982), Scarface (1983), and Married to the Mob (1988); she had come across the role after others such as Madonna had rejected it, and she would do her own singing for the film. These actors came together for a film that would be helmed by a first-time director in Kloves, who had written just one previous film in Racing with the Moon (1984).

It certainly proves a dazzling spin on the familiar lounge act, one with a splendid trio and a well-captured atmosphere that I would say makes it an under looked classic. There is just something about this film that inspires plenty of soulful energy and charming nature that makes interesting characters come out with interest that overcomes what could've just been a casual gimmick and makes a diverting look upon talent and the nature of being with others. For the initial first few minutes of the film, it first starts as looking upon the differences about the approach to the act, whether that means the same old banter one could hear in the familiar lounge performers or even something as simple as covering up a bald spot with spray - they may be has-beens, but they are our has-beens to watch, and we are curious about them and their approach to the inevitability of a graying act with graying faces watching. And then of course there comes someone brimming with confidence and appeal that comes right in the middle of all that. Let us start with Pfeiffer, who is brimming with intuition and passion from the very moment we see her on screen, sizzling in competence and style that seems reminiscent of older-style lounge singers and idols with a good talent for singing while also having an understated yet interesting chemistry when paired with J. Bridges. This is apparent with the "Makin' Whoopee" number, bringing down the house on top of that piano with energy and curiosity. J. Bridges has a sort of aloof charm to his performance, weary in his effortlessness that makes for enjoyable drama that the cynical romantic can appreciate. B. Bridges is the other side of the act, showy in desperation (right down to a few moments of groveling) but still amiable enough to watch him try to corral these two acts before it reaches exhaustion. While the scene with them arguing over a botched telethon is a stark highlight, the best one might be their next scene after that, where they reminisce a bit before going into "You're Sixteen", the one time they sing with each other (their piano-work was dubbed by Dave Grusin and John F. Hammond, with the former also doing the acclaimed music score) that is warm and bittersweet. On the whole, the film rises above what could have been a predictable romantic musical comedy-drama through sheer will of its main trio in making capable moments come alive that deal with the grind of show business and human nature that comes with it and trying to find people to go with it, and the film has its certainties and un-certainties to that end. It is a tender gem that deserves further appreciation, a tender and entertaining effort that hits most of its notes with class and style for its era.

Next Time: The eighth edition of Tribute to the Decades, with a surprise for the first film and then the announcement of the films of the 1990s to be covered.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Breaking In (1989).

Review #1492: Breaking In.

Cast:
Burt Reynolds (Ernie Mullins), Casey Siemaszko (Mike Lafeve), Lorraine Toussaint (Delphine), Sheila Kelley (Carrie / Fontaine), Albert Salmi (Johnny Scot, Poker Player), Harry Carey (Shoes, Poker Player), Maury Chaykin (Vincent Tucci, Attorney), and Stephen Tobolowsky (District Attorney) Directed by Bill Forsyth.

Review:
"There's always something you want to say. I would not want to make a film that did not say anything, I'm not interested in getting into something that's just a piece of entertainment, a James Bond or an adventure film. I don't enjoy filming that much, in fact I don't enjoy filming at all and to go through all that for the sake of money would just not interest me."
"I'm not sure if I can swagger anymore, but I can limp with the best of them."

It's easy to forget about a director when Burt Reynolds is your star in a comedy. For example, Scottish-born Bill Forsyth first got into films through an advertisement out of high school and ended up doing short documentary films for eight years, notably founding Tree Films with Charles Gormley in 1970. He wrote his scripts for That Sinking Feeling and Gregory's Girl years in advance, but attempts at getting funds did not take hold with the BFI Production Board. He forged on anyway in making the former film, doing so in 1979 on a cheap budget with actors from the Glasgow Community Theatre. Some of the actors from that film would return for his next film, Gregory's Girl (1981), which resulted in positive notices as the film he is best known for (his next film, Local Hero, also received praise), and he received a British Academy Film Award for each film (the former for screenplay and the latter for direction). This was his second and last film done in North America, with the other being Housekeeping (1987). The film was written by John Sayles (behind films such as Return of the Secaucus 7 and Eight Men Out), whose script had been laying around for a few years that Sayles did not think was something he could direct, and Forsyth updated the script. And then of course there is Burt Reynolds, the one shining reason one might pick this film out in the first place (particularly if you are sentimental towards seeing him in something that could be good). Whether the film is good or not, he remained a fascinating actor to watch be a part of the action for over five decades, with this being at the tail end of his popularity, and he took part in the film for very little money due to his interest in the character role (Forsyth had desired someone like John Mahoney for the role, but a push by Act III Communications for someone with a bit of star power eventually led him to approach Reynolds).

It's a shame that this wasn't a success with audiences on release (making less than two million dollars on a budget of over five million), because it is a decent little movie, even if it isn't exactly the most well-known film for either Forsyth or Reynolds (I happened to have come across this on the Internet and went with it on a guess, although a DVD would obviously be a better quality bet). Sometimes you just have to enjoy a shaggy dog robbery story. In a retrospective article about the film, Forsyth himself described it as "an awkward little movie. It’s not an American film and it’s not a European film; it’s ungraspable what it is." There is definately an interesting sort of tone that Forsyth takes to the material, one that doesn't really go for all of the caper cliches that come with a heist film, instead taking an approach to fleshing out two quirky people that find themselves into this certain business with their own distinct mannerisms and approach. One has probably seen the traditional old pro teaches the hotshot story before, but if one presents it with honesty, it usually works out for a decent time. There isn't anything remotely spectacular about it, but there are bits and pieces that are charming, and the main duo also helps out while also having a few little moments of heists that favor moments of dialogue over anything too explosive (which can work out for those patient for it). Siemaszko, having started appearing in films for six years with bit roles and supporting turns (such as Back to the Future) proves lively enough for the film's liking, carefree yet never lacking when on-screen with various situations of charm. Reynolds, with a hitch in his step and a quieter tone than usual, holds to the challenge quite well, still managing to capture a wise world-weary presence without needing to rely on anything hammy (the makeup on him to make him look older looks fine) that we gravitate to pretty well (of course one could gravitate to Siemaszko too, at least when it comes to brash impulse decisions) with comfort. Seeing these folks try to make a living within a strange world of compromise and duplicity makes for a careful movie, not exactly a laugh-out-loud caper, but also not too plaid for curious enjoyment. It certainly is a curious film for both Forsyth and its two stars in Reynolds and Siemaszko, and if you happen to come across it looking for something diverting, you may be fairly satisfied with what you recieve, getting a few chuckles alongside a decent time.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

When Harry Met Sally...

Review #1491: When Harry Met Sally...

Cast:
Billy Crystal (Harry Burns), Meg Ryan (Sally Albright), Carrie Fisher (Marie Fisher), Bruno Kirby (Jess Fisher), Steven Ford (Joe), Lisa Jane Persky (Alice), Michelle Nicastro (Amanda Reese), Kevin Rooney (Ira Stone), Harley Kozak (Helen Hillson), and Estelle Reiner (Female Customer) Directed by Rob Reiner (#108 - This Is Spinal Tap, #180 - Stand by Me, #232 - The Princess Bride, #363 - North, and #640 - The Bucket List)

Review:
"I try to write parts for women that are as complicated and interesting as women actually are."
"I'd never ask an actor to do something I couldn't do - not that I'm the best actor in the world - but if I can do it, then I know that anyone I hire can do these things."

How many people know about this film? Or, more specifically know the film more than that one great line about having what she's having? It is a testament to director Rob Reiner and writer Nora Ephron in how they managed to generate a classic for the age. Reiner came from a distinct background of comedy like no other, the son of singer/actor Estelle Reiner (whose one line in this film being perfect deadpan) and comedian/director Carl Reiner. A graduate of UCLA Film School, he started in show business through appearances on television beginning in 1966 while also doing some writing for The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour the following year. In 1971, he jumped into national prominence with his starring role as Michael Stivic in All in the Family, which he appeared in for over eight years. He moved onto directing with This Is Spinal Tap (1984).  Ephron had her own distinct background as well, the child of playwrights that originally aimed for a career of journalism. Ephron had her own distinct background as well, the child of playwrights that originally aimed for a career of journalism. She worked at various news outlets such as The New York Post and Esquire while also writing essays and novels, and she shifted onto screenplays as well with the TV film Perfect Gentlemen (1978) and Silkwood (1983, co-written with Alice Arlen). The genesis for this film came from Reiner's experiences while single and divorced, for which Ephron would interview him and producer Andy Scheinman to make a script out of; the title characters were based in some part on Reiner and Ephron.

If Crystal and Ryan had to be remembered for any film they were ever part of, I would say this is definitely the best one for each of them to have taken part of. You don't need me to tell you this is a classic, you can tell pretty quickly that it is a bona fide romantic comedy because of how smart it is about what makes people tick at times when it comes to passion and not-quite passion with each other. Its tale of friendly neuroses make for plenty of quirky enjoyment that builds interest without being consumed by clichés or impatience, both being enjoyably high maintenance with each other. Crystal is quite amusing, capable of juggling funny lines alongside moments of interplay with Ryan that border from combative to friendly, while also being interesting in the perspective of someone by themselves with expressiveness that doesn't grate on you. Ryan provides warmth and plenty of smart timing as well, being quite convincing in grace and charm that account for plenty of interesting moments, whether involving faking an orgasm in a diner, or just having a moment in conversation that makes us feel close with them. Not lost in the shuffle is Kirby and Fisher, who both are pretty amusing when paired with the respective other in casual conversation but also make for an interesting pair together. The film is well-paced at 96 minutes with just enough balance and humor from both actors and direction/writing to make a funny film with a good deal of honesty and warmth to serve as an example of making a romantic film without too many contrivances or fuzzy things to get in the way of a good story.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Heathers.

Review #1490: Heathers.

Cast:
Winona Ryder (Veronica Sawyer), Christian Slater (Jason "J.D." Dean), Shannen Doherty (Heather Duke), Lisanne Falk (Heather McNamara), Kim Walker (Heather Chandler), Penelope Milford (Pauline Fleming), Glenn Shadix (Father Ripper), Lance Fenton (Kurt Kelly), Patrick Labyorteaux (Ram Sweeney), Jeremy Applegate (Peter Dawson), Em Lodge (M.C. May), and Renée Estevez (Betty Finn) Directed by Michael Lehmann (#307 - Hudson Hawk)

Review:
"The teen films of the time, the John Hughes film, were fun. But there’s a whole other wing of the high school they weren’t going into — the dark, Stephen King wing that nobody wanted to look at. And I think Heathers was refreshing."

If you compile enough effort and get a bunch of people together, perhaps you too can make a cult classic. Too bad this is one I don't really like that much. Daniel Waters was a video store manager at the time he decided to write this screenplay, while Lehmann had studied at both Columbia University and the USC School of Cinematic Arts that got attention from his student film The Beaver Gets a Boner. Waters thought that Hollywood romanticized suicide and that people had some sort of "ultimate fantasy" of attending their funeral, and he wrote a lengthy screenplay in response to that, with a lead character described as a "female Travis Bickle". Similarities have been noted between this film and Massacre at Central High (1976), which was about a series of revenge killings at a high school that had the oppressed kids turn into bullies, which also had a looming threat of exploding the whole school for a climax; Waters stated that while he did not see the film, he had read a review of it in a book while writing the script, which might have stuck in his subconscious somewhere (that statement just makes me want to see the other film). Believe it or not, Waters actually originally wanted this to be directed by Stanley Kubrick, since he admired him and also thought of him as the only person that could do a three-hour film (this is where I try to hold myself from abject laughter at the idea of this being remotely connected to Kubrick). With a budget of over $3 million, the film made just one-third of that upon release (being distributed by a slowly dying New World Pictures might not have helped).

Nothing frustrates me more than an average film, particularly one that found a cult audience for itself like this did. I can first start with the positives, since we do have a sometimes-funny film to hang an alright cast with. Ryder is fairly enjoyable to watch here, soulful as a would-be Bonnie Parker kind of role that can sometimes be funny (it certainly was a decent choice for her to pick, since she has stated her appreciation for the role). Slater, in a breakthrough role (after a handful of roles on TV and film), is enjoyably misanthropic, steadily growing darker and darker with each passing scene that certainly grabs your attention in playing mind games with chemistry. Doherty (known for TV work such as Little House on the Prairie and Our House) is fine, with a few decent moments to sneer at. Falk and Walker do okay as the other Heathers, but it is Shadix that probably delivers a few moments of deadpan fun that works the best. There are a few good snappy lines that do help give the film some footing, even when it lingers with insults and dubious moments that seemed dated now; Slater pulling a gun on someone is shown, although the part showing him firing blanks is not - try doing this now.

My fundamental sticking point lies within its execution. Suffice to say this is a movie that baffles me with its lack of convincing vision, particularly with its closing half. We are talking about a film where two kids team up together to frame suicides out of murders, correct? I don't know, I feel both of our leads deserve to be punished, not just one, since you can't just absolve one of their bad decisions (i.e. falsifying notes and actually shooting someone) while trying to stick some sort of meaningful ending, because you can't just turn a new leaf and walk away from it all (she had plenty of chances to go back to her old friends, but she instead kept going back to the others, so screw her). The original screenplay might have worked it out better with its ending, albeit on a much darker scale, since not only did both perish in that ending but the whole school did as well, with a prom sequence set afterwards with them all in "Heaven" (it was not shot, for reasons that were probably politely yelled by studio executives). In my mind, if you want to be dark, you go all the way or get out of the way. When it all comes down to it, I think this supposedly dark screenplay is full of shit. If it captures anything of the high school experience, it might capture the inane sensibilities of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting better results (i.e. staying with the same circle of people that aren't good for you or dumping others), and it also isn't as clever as it thinks it is. Do people really think this is the subversive high school experience? A confused, cynical mess? Maybe the well was poisoned from watching all those other high school movies from past and future, whether that meant films from John Hughes or something like Mean Girls. Those films, however, knew where they were going with their execution. Those films, however, knew where they were going with their humor. Those films...you get the idea. I don't particularly feel that the film works well enough as a satire to really justify itself for 103 minutes, even with Ryder and Slater there to help. Sticking a landing is important, particularly when you are trying to be funny and different in some way from other films of the era. To me, I just don't find it good enough to make it a worthy winner of darkness, merely just seeing it as a mediocre high school film.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.

Review #1489: Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.

Cast:
Steve Martin (Freddy Benson), Michael Caine (Lawrence Jamieson), Glenne Headly (Janet Colgate), Anton Rodgers (Inspector Andre), Barbara Harris (Fanny Eubanks), Ian McDiarmid (Arthur), Dana Ivey (Mrs. Reed), and Meagen Fay (Miss Trumble) Directed by Frank Oz (#521 - The Muppets Take Manhattan, #795 - Bowfinger, #1468 - The Dark Crystal, and #1482 - Little Shop of Horrors)

Review: 
"The greatest thing you can do is surprise yourself."
"I love comedy. I love to make people laugh. If I hadn't been an actor, or an architect, which I really wanted to be, I'd have been a stand-up comic."

To have a good duo film, you need a good pairing to begin with, particularly when it comes to a comedy since pairings really happen only once and just that nowadays. Steve Martin, for example, was a fairly established comedy star at the time, having gone from television writing (such as The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour) to stand-up (defined by self-referential riffs alongside banjo playing) and television work to eventually starring in his own films with The Jerk (1979). As for Michael Caine, he had done over a decade of work in films and television before coming to prominence in the late 1960s that included films such as The Ipcress File (1965) and The Italian Job (1969) that has continued with starring and character roles for over five decades. It is a remake of the 1964 film Bedtime Story, which had starred Marlon Brando and David Niven that had been written by Stanley Shapiro and Paul Henning. This time the two wrote the screenplay with Dale Launer. There were a few changes made while keeping the basic core of two con artists that bump into each other in the French Riveria that goes from apprenticeship to contest, most notably with the resolution (which had originally ended with one of the cons turning good and romancing the one being played...so I suppose that makes sense). This would serve the basis for a musical of the same name in 2004 (featuring John Lithgow) and another remake of the material was done in The Hustle (2019).

However one views the material, this is a fairly well-paired film. It makes for a good natured time with its balanced pair of timing and zippy lines in a relaxed setting that allows for chemistry between its actors without smothering them in complications. With a run-time of 110 minutes, the film runs fairly well for itself in staging amusing situations and bits for Caine and Martin to run free with (of sorts) making general humor that is fairly cheerful in making a decent setup. Martin is quite enjoyable here, jumping at the chance of playing off Caine with enthusiastic contrast that leads to quite a handful of moments to look upon him and laugh, whether that involves him struggling for a name or trying to scare off someone for an act (including a corked fork). Caine proves just as handy for generating snappy charisma and quick chemistry with Martin that does manners on the fly that seems fairly effortless, whether to ladies or gentlemen. Headly makes for a fair foil between the two, not quite too assuming nor too much of a mark to forget in the background, particularly for the last scene together. In general, if you like the movie enough, the last scene helps seal the deal in a charmer (if not however, welp). The supporting cast is a mix of dupers and dupes that do just fine, such as a subtle Rodgers. What we have here is a clever game of tricks and humor that generally work out well in pace and buildup with two likable scoundrels that maneuver gags with reasonable timing that seems well-suited for its era as a fine time for all and a fair piece for both Martin and Caine to have fun with along with a good show for Oz as well.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Rain Man.

Review #1488: Rain Man.

Cast:
Dustin Hoffman (Raymond "Ray" Babbitt), Tom Cruise (Charles "Charlie" Babbitt), Valeria Golino (Susanna), Jerry Molen (Dr. Bruner), Ralph Seymour (Lenny), Michael D. Roberts (Vern), Bonnie Hunt (Sally Dibbs), Beth Grant (Mother at Farm House), and Lucinda Jenney (Iris) Directed by Barry Levinson (#383 - The Natural and #561 - Diner)

Review:
"On a day-to-day basis, he's like an actor who's making his first movie, with the enthusiasm and energy to want to make things happen and try things and experiment."

Winners can come out of nowhere when it comes to film, and it takes several individuals and some luck to really make something meaningful. Rain Man is no exception. Its director was Barry Levinson. He started his way in show business through writing for comedy and variety shows, most notably for The Carol Burnett Show. He soon moved to writing for films, collaborating with others on a few films such as Street Girls (1975), Silent Movie (1976), and ...And Justice for All (1979). He made his directorial debut in features with Diner (1982), which he drew from experiences living in Baltimore, Maryland. The film found first life with the script of Barry Morrow, who had met Kim Peek, a megasavant that had exceptional memory on a considerable scale but also social difficulties. He had previously known Bill Sackter, a mentally disabled man that had spent 44 years in a mental institution for those thought a "burden on society" before working his way through a variety of jobs that led to the two meeting and eventually becoming Sackter's guardian. Both of these individuals played inspiration in Morrow's writing, which later had screenplay contributions by Ronald Bass (who finished just before a writer's strike). Three directors came and went before Levinson signed on, which included Martin Brest, Steven Spielberg, and Sydney Pollack. Hoffman would study Peek along with spending time with autistic individuals (coincidentally, he had worked at the New York Psychiatric Institute as a young adult) and compiling notes. Oddly enough, he actually wanted to quit early into filming, believing the early rushes to be his worst work.

Sometimes a film really does just find the proper road to one's heart. It was a good film in a year with other good movies that found an audience (whether it's your favorite film of that particular year or not is up to you). What we have here is a road movie, but it is one with two enterprising stars spending time with each other with a meaningful and fairly-guided foundation that achieves a majority of what it aims as a story of bonding. I think we all know at one least one person like Raymond or Charlie in our lives (I used to have an autistic friend myself), and it is watching their journey of discovery that makes something more than what could have been exploited for elaboration or over-sentiment- in other words, it's a movie about people that would've either been an interesting consideration in a previous decade or overanalyzed in a later one (now we might just yammer on about how not all autistic people are savants, which misses the whole point of daring to make a film about someone like Raymond in the first place). We first start with Cruise, enterprising and alluringly arrogant in dealing with others that make an interesting performance for the yuppie crowd that grows with you. Hoffman, with a quieter voice and a bit of a shuffled walk that makes a worthwhile performance of someone in the spectrum of life different from what we know that we care to appreciate over the course of the film, being in his own world that we can understand about. The film is really just for these two, but Golino makes a fair impression regardless. What matters most to the film in holding up is how we feel about this particular duo and their journey together as human beings. For the most part, the film works in that regard, going from place to place with little moments of appreciation we feel about these folks. They go through different but similar pathways on the long winding road without becoming a lightning rod for stereotypes and ableist bleating. Probably the most effective sequence is the dance sequence, where they just share a moment as brothers shuffling their feet. By the time they finish their quiet but meaningful last words with each other, we might reflect ourselves on what it really means to know someone and maybe smile a bit.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Hairspray.

Review #1487: Hairspray.

Cast:
Ricki Lake (Tracy Turnblad), Divine (Edna Turnblad / Arvin Hodgepile), Debbie Harry (Velma Von Tussle), Sonny Bono (Franklin Von Tussle), Jerry Stiller (Wilbur Turnblad), Leslie Ann Powers (Penelope "Penny" Pingleton), Colleen Fitzpatrick (Amber Von Tussle), Michael St. Gerard (Lincoln "Link" Larkin), Clayton Prince (Seaweed J. Stubbs), Cyrkle Milbourne (L'il Inez Stubbs), Ruth Brown (Motormouth Maybelle Stubbs), Shawn Thompson (Corny Collins), Mink Stole (Tammy), Joann Havrilla (Prudence Pingleton), with special appearances by Toussaint McCall (Himself), Rick Ocasek (Beatnik cat), and Pia Zadora (Beatnik chick) Directed by John Waters.

Review:
"I pride myself on the fact that my work has no socially redeeming value."

Sometimes you can tell about a director from their influences, which for John Waters ranged from Jonas Mekas to Russ Meyer to Liberace to William Castle. Some directors might squirm at their films being labeled trash in some way but not in the case of Waters (labeled the "Pope of Trash"), who most certainly has had an interesting career worth looking at. He had an interest in taboo stuff from the very beginning, ranging from youth staging of violent puppet shows for birthday parties to hanging out near a beatnik bar while growing up in Baltimore, Maryland; numerous people that he grew up with would later participate in his films (known as the Dreamlanders), which included actors/crew such as Mary Vivian Pearce and Divine (stage name for Harris Milstead, drag queen/singer and counterculture icon) that started doing short films in 1964 and then features with Mondo Trasho (1969). The film he is likely most famous for is the exploitation comedy Pink Flamingos (1972), which is best described by its tagline as an "exercise in poor taste", which featured Divine in a film most infamous for having her actually eat excrement, among other moments. Although Waters has not directed a film since A Dirty Shame (2004), he has kept himself busy in various ways, ranging from a one-man show This Filthy World to acting appearances to artistry in a variety of mediums.

This was his seventh film as director, while being his sixth and last collaboration with Divine, who died just weeks after the release of the film. It would later be turned into a musical in 2003 (winning several Tony Awards) and a film based on the musical was done in 2007. It might seem like a strange duck when compared to some of Waters' other films (it is the only film of his to be PG rated), but then I realize it makes perfect sense because it's a movie of kitsch near his heart, since it is inspired by The Buddy Deane Show, a dance party show from 1957 to 1964 that aired in Baltimore when Waters was a child that featured teenagers as part of "The Committee" that would dance on the show to the hit songs and artists of the time that could range from country to rhythm to rock and roll, which ended not because of a loss of popularity but because of management refusal to integrate. There is something warm and weird about its approach that makes a curious charmer of an experience, benefitting from a cast with a good sense of subtlety and charm and some interesting tunes and turn with jokes that embraces its surroundings with slyness and enjoyment. Lake (in her film debut) proves capable in the lead with awareness and fine timing, worthy of our attention in making humor or rolling to the beat without being a target for cheap plump jokes. Divine, playing roles in each gender, is quite captivating, doing a fair job in enriching deadpan humor without needing to clown for it with hammy-ness, whether that means playing a free-spirited wife or a narrow-minded jerk (believe it or not, the original idea was to have Divine play both the lead and the on-screen mother). Harry makes a good laugh in conceitedness, with Bono and Fitzpatrick being appropriate contrasts to Divine and Stiller in family values to poke and look at. Others like Powers, Brown do just fine with giving perspective to what matters most: a changing time not just for kids but also for adults as well, while the Beatnik scene with Ocasek and Zadora is fairly amusing. It holds the attention for 92 minutes because it has its heart in the right places that can be enjoyed by anyone without getting a feeling of gooey sentiment or general gooeyness. It is a lively and well-crafted look upon the times with an eye looking upon issues involving racial prejudice or what it means to be a teen in 1962 like no other.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Bad Taste.

Review #1486: Bad Taste.

Cast:
Terry Potter (Ozzy / 3rd Class Alien), Pete O'Herne (Barry / 3rd Class Alien), Peter Jackson (Derek / Robert), Mike Minett (Frank / 3rd Class Alien), Craig Smith (Giles / 3rd Class Alien), Ken Hammon (3rd Class Alien), Costa Botes (3rd Class Alien), and Doug Wren (Lord Crumb) Produced and Directed by Peter Jackson.

Review:
"I call them splat-stick. To me, they were a joke. We enjoyed being crazy and anarchic and upsetting the people we wanted to upset in those days."

Sometimes you really have to start at the beginning for a director to really see what their body of work can evolve to, where one really needs to see how they do with their first efforts, whether made for a small or high budget, or if they had to take further hands of production to get it finished. In the case of Peter Jackson, not only did he produce and direct the film, he also served as cinematographer, co-star, co-writer, co-editor and special effects. The film that inspired him the most in imagination was King Kong (1933), which he saw at the age of nine while growing up in New Zealand. As a child, he made his own little films, helped by a gift of a Super 8 camera from a family friend, going all of the work from director to effects. In 1978, he was spurred on to direct a short film for a children's show called Spot On, which had an amateur filmmaking competition, which would feature several people who grew up around Jackson, which would be done over three weeks as a 20-minute feature inspired by his love of Ray Harryhausen (surprisingly, they lost the competition) that featured Hammon and O'Herne alongside Jackson. In 1983, he started on the road of making what would become his first feature, which first started as a short film called "Roast of the Day", shot on an old 16mm Bolex camera that would involve a famine relief collector finding a lifeless town and being attacked by a bayonetting maniac and cannibals, which gradually evolved into a splatter film (including special forces and other various acts of absurdity, like an exploding animal). After spending time on filming, the short film had turned out into a near feature, and he was inspired by a screening of The Evil Dead to make a full 16mm feature, which would ultimately be shot over four years on weekends. The initial budget was $25,000 before the New Zealand Film Commission helped in further funding (with Executive Director Jim Booth personally backing the film along with Jackson's next three films). This is certainly a funny film to introduce New Zealand for those curious in world cinema, that is for sure.

It can be a fun time to look upon where a director as eventually famous as Jackson started from, where he had the help of his friends and family in making a film that comes off as shocking and amusing as this one proves to be. The actors prove just fine in rolling with the gruesome ridiculousness, including Jackson and his double act as a loopy lead and an alien (made best by the sequence where Jackson's character tortures...Jackson's character through some editing tricks), while the others do their best to remind me of stuff you might do with friends (as if I have friends who would actually care about that sort of thing). It was an arduous experience for the crew, but it surely would still be one to envy in enjoyment because you can see the effort at hand from Jackson, who actually had to harden the latex in the alien masks by cooking them in his family's kitchen. It appeals to the most basic of my sensibilities, in that I sure do enjoy a good splatter show that makes me interested in how it can drive one up the wall in shock and color, matching up with a gruesomely dark premise of aliens harvesting humans for fast food. It isn't exactly a triumph for world cinema, but I readily enjoy what I see on screen because of how it doesn't take itself so seriously, being a clever amateur experience (complete with dubbed-in sound) that shocks and rocks the house down. With a run-time of barely over 90 minutes, how could one go wrong with such a gooey fun time like this? Provocative and crude, it is most certainly an interesting building block for a director to find their footing towards further adventures in New Zealand and beyond.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Broadcast News.

Review #1485: Broadcast News.

Cast:
William Hurt (Tom Grunick), Albert Brooks (Aaron Altman), Holly Hunter (Jane Craig), Robert Prosky (Ernie Merriman), Lois Chiles (Jennifer Mack), Joan Cusack (Blair Litton), Peter Hackes (Paul Moore), Christian Clemenson (Bobby), Jack Nicholson (Bill Rorish), and Leo Burmester (Mr. Craig) Written, Produced, and Directed by James L. Brooks (#1470 - Terms of Endearment)

Review:
"I always feel that I am the advocate for my character. More than anyone else on the set, including the director. I'm there to protect my character, in a way."

"I am a character actor in a leading man's body."

It must have been an interesting task to try and follow up a debut success like the one James L. Brooks had. And to do so with three captivating actors in a romantic comedy-drama about the news (for someone who worked at CBS News as copywriter and newswriter) is surely a solid curiosity, with each having been featured in a couple of films in their own interesting paths. The first key to the film is in Hunter, who had started acting from a young age and had entered film and television in 1981, with work gradually following that built to luck in 1987 with this (chosen prior to production after Debra Winger became pregnant) and Raising Arizona. The next key piece is Hurt, who shifted his focus to acting despite having studied theology at Tufts University, utilizing his training at Juilliard School to start in the stage in 1977 and then film in 1980. The third piece to the puzzle is A. Brooks, who quickly rose through the ranks of stand-up comedy to fair amount of variety and television fame before shifting focus to writing/directing his own films along with acting (most notably debuting in Taxi Driver).

Alongside Brooks' own experiences with the news, one other key inspiration for the film was producer Susan Zirinsky, who Brooks based for Hunter's character, who would also serve as technical advisor and associate producer. It is evident fairly quickly that we are dealing with a smart and capable movie, one with a distinct trio of performances that line up together for an interesting look upon the nature of romance within workaholics and a prevailing shift in the way news is delivered to the public. Each of these performances reflect well upon the other sides of the triangle because they all drive the film with comedic anguish that is easy to see traits of in ourselves without looking away. Hunter is the one to gravitate to first, with a high-strung performance that generates skillful intensity that can be both admirable and one to fear in anyone that hard-driving, which generally makes for plenty of interesting sparks when paired with anyone, particularly with Hurt; the best scene to represent that is when she is guiding Hurt through his first broadcast as anchorman with an earpiece, which almost in a way feels like sex. Hurt proves just as well with the other side of the news coin as the harbinger of fresh-faced infotainment that proves convincing in secretive charm, aware of the surroundings yet managing to never be sacrificed for pretty boy cheap shots. A. Brooks makes up the conscience of the film, and he is quite riveting in keeping our interest over with cynical charm and timing - one of the best lines come from him that asks if it would be "a great world if insecurity and desperation made us more attractive", which only makes scenes like his first anchorman show all the more entertaining. Others prove just as endearing in their own ways, such as the amiable Prosky or with Cusack (participant in another interesting scene involving a dash to get a tape in time), or retired news correspondent-turned-actor Hackes. And yes, Nicholson is also present for a time in the film, and he delivers his brief time with the spry standards one would expect from him. In general, the film does a fine job in showing people and the way they work around it in an evolving landscape along with how they work around themselves in various quibbles and high-strung desperation for 133 minutes. We seem them as children, then as adults, and then finally we see them all together again, steadfast in the honesty of who they are, for better or worse. On the whole, this is a fairly entertaining work, an achievement that hits most of its marks in sharp honesty and amusement that holds together long after its release because of how much we still see of it play out now.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Moonstruck.

Review #1484: Moonstruck.

Cast:
Cher (Loretta Castorini), Nicolas Cage (Ronny Cammareri), Olympia Dukakis (Rose Castorini), Vincent Gardenia (Cosmo Castorini), Danny Aiello (Johnny Cammareri), Julie Bovasso (Rita Cappomaggi), Louis Guss (Raymond Cappomaggi), John Mahoney (Perry), Feodor Chaliapin Jr. (Grandpa Castorini), and Anita Gillette (Mona) Directed by Norman Jewison (#127 - Rollerball, #273 - The Cincinnati Kid, #544 - In the Heat of the Night, and #691 - The Thomas Crown Affair)

Review:
"Directing, in many ways, is manipulation because you're dealing with a lot of egos. You have to manipulate people into thinking it was their idea, to get them to do what you see as being the best, to edit them without their knowing they're being edited."

Norman Jewison is one of Canada's most notable directors, made evident by the fact that he made a honest career of mostly successful films for four decades. He rose his way up from work in television in both Canada (with the CBC) and the United States (on NBC) before being inspired to branch into film, with his first few films being comedies for Universal Pictures, such as Forty Pounds of Trouble (1962) with Tony Curtis, or Send Me No Flowers (1964) with Doris Day. His first true breakthrough came with The Cincinnati Kid (1965), the first of his numerous challenging dramas, described by him as his "ugly duckling" film, which occurred after he was brought in for the fired Sam Peckinpah. Numerous highlights would follow in the next couple of years, such as the Cold War comedy The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming (1966), In the Heat of the Night (1967, winner of Best Picture), the musical Fiddler on the Roof (1971), and the period drama A Soldier's Story (1984). The year after the release of this film, he founded the Canadian Film Centre, dedicated to helping Canadian professionals further work in advanced school training from film to digital media. Jewison was nominated for seven Academy Awards in his career (four for Best Picture, three for Best Director), and while he did not win any of them, he was awarded the Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award in 1999 for his body work as a creative producer, with his final work being The Statement (2003).

Sometimes there just comes a romance or comedy that hits you right where it matters most, and this is one of those films. Honest but sweet with a tremendous cast and direction, Moonstruck is a film that was surely destined to be a favorite that would make audience brim with warmth and mean every moment of it. There is just something in that script by playwright John Patrick Shanley that Jewison saw as fitting for these actors and these settings that are prime for entertainment of the heart. It is exactly the kind of family film for folks who enjoy dedicated material without overt sentimentalism but instead fair honesty. One might know where it could go with its romance, but it doesn't stop the fun. In a busy year for Cher, it should figure that her third role of that year was the one that received the most acclaim. She does a pretty good job with this role, inviting one in with modesty and good timing that resonates well whenever with Cage or with others, pulling off a compelling performance without artifice. Equally as compelling in energy and spirit is Cage in an early breakthrough role for the actor (having started his career just five years prior under his birth name of Coppola), one that reaches our attention and our passion without having to really do much (his whole bit with the story of how he lost his hand is a good example of that). Dukakis proves just as comforting in amusement in a solidly charming turn with a handful of lines to go with a well-rounded performance. Gardenia also proves just as endearing in his own way of humor. Aiello, even without much time on screen, is enjoyable in generating amusement for a well-meaning dope, while Chaliapin Jr nearly steals the show with reserved amusement. Film and stage actor (alongside acting coach) Bovasso proves a worthy supporting presence, both in charm alongside in helping Cher and Dukakis in doing Brooklyn accents. By the time the film rallies everybody to the kitchen table for its last turn under the sun, it already has proven a worthy time about detailing what it means to be struck in love, or at least the complications that can arise from what the heart and mind wants most. It brings itself together with charm without sacrificing any moment for a cheap gag or a cheap pull at the heart, which makes for a resounding winner to seek out as one of Jewison's best.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Evil Dead II.

Review #1483: Evil Dead II.

Cast:
Bruce Campbell (Ash Williams), Sarah Berry (Annie Knowby), Dan Hicks (Jake), Kassie Wesley (Bobby Joe), Denise Bixler (Linda), Snowy Winters (Dancing demon Linda), Richard Domeier (Professor Ed Getley), John Peaks (Professor Knowby), Lou Hancock (Henrietta Knowby), Ted Raimi (Possessed Henrietta), and William Preston Robertson (Voice of the Evil Dead) Directed by Sam Raimi (#611 - Spider-Man and #1296 - The Evil Dead)

Review:
"It seemed that my lot in life was to either have big parts in small films or small parts in big films."

This film came about because of the failure of Crimewave (1985), Sam Raimi's follow-up film to The Evil Dead that he wrote with Ethan and Joel Coen (the latter of whom had helped with the editing of that film). Plagued by budget trouble and producer interference, Crimewave nearly wrecked Raimi's career into oblivion. The idea for a sequel had actually been thought of during the first film's production by publicist Irvin Shapiro, and Raimi made a concept involving a Middle Ages setting for more deadite action. When it came for funding, Dino De Laurentiis would serve as producer (after having Stephen King give them a recommendation to help fund the film), and he suggested for a film similiar to the first film (the medieval concept was used for the next film five years later in Army of Darkness), with a budget that would be over three million more than before (while keeping the same effects man in Tom Sullivan). Raimi would write it with Scott Spiegel, which would move its focus from straight horror to horror-comedy, influenced by slapstick work like The Three Stooges. Technically speaking this is a sequel to the first film, although its events depicted in the opening are different from the climax of the original. One thing that isn't different from before is the gore levels: the original film had an X rating, while fears over an X for the second led to no submission to the MPAA and a separate company distributing the film for release.

What a marvelous sequel this is. Energetic, violent, and quick to the punch in delivering a punishing tale of horror and comedy with a charismatic lead once again, it proves no surprise to see this regarded as one of the best horror sequels, particularly when compared to a film that already had done pretty well for itself in creeping terror. This excels just as well in gruesome charm, doing so with confidence expected of filmmakers who seem more in control of what is necessary to make a quality tale brimmed with reasonable foundation that makes enough sense in the right places to drive one up the wall for 84 minutes. There are plenty of moments one could probably highlight, some of which being ones with easily quotable moments from Campbell ("groovy" indeed), but the biggest one for me proves to be a fit of laughter with Campbell that proves creepier if one finds themselves with a fit of the giggles as well. He has a distinct quality to him in enjoyability that fits the edge of someone destined for B-movies but without the wooden feet to stay completely on that level. He leads the way as a cult classic actor among disposable others (let's face it, no one is exactly thinking really hard about the others that happen to come across the madness) that make a worthy time. It retains focus on the cabin (with filming being done in North Carolina, with a junior high school being an interior set) without finding itself going through the exact same beats as before, with plenty of good costumes and effects to showcase. It goes for the throat without knocking you completely senseless with anything unnecessary in gore or in humor that detract from the energetic fun deserving of a sequel that raises the level for cult classic enjoyment.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Little Shop of Horrors.

Review #1482: Little Shop of Horrors.

Cast:
Rick Moranis (Seymour Krelborn), Ellen Greene (Audrey), Vincent Gardenia (Mr. Mushnik), Steve Martin (Orin Scrivello, DDS), Levi Stubbs (Audrey II), Tichina Arnold, Michelle Weeks, and Tisha Campbell (Crystal, Ronette, and Chiffon), Jim Belushi (Patrick Martin), John Candy (Wink Wilkinson), Christopher Guest (The First Customer), and Bill Murray (Arthur Denton) Directed by Frank Oz (#521 - The Muppets Take Manhattan, #795 - Bowfinger, and #1468 - The Dark Crystal)

Review: 
"I'm not making art, I think that's too highfalutin'. I'm just doing my best. Someone else can tell me whether it's art or not. In the meantime, I just want everyone else to enjoy it."

Most directors usually don't have puppetry to go alongside their talents, but Frank Oz is a good example of both. He started with apprentice work in Oakland, California with the Vagabond Puppets before he soon met Jim Henson that led to a decades-long collaboration on several projects, with plenty to note of his work with the Muppets, such as Sesame Street, where he served as puppeteer and voice for numerous roles such as Bert and Cookie Monster when the show started in 1969, serving on the show for over three decades. While he kept busy with puppeteering and voice work, he gradually shifted focus onto directing (being inspired by Orson Welles' Touch of Evil) where he debuted with co-director Henson in The Dark Crystal (1982).

The film is adapted from the musical of the same name, which was first performed in 1982 with music by Alan Menken and lyrics/book by Howard Ashman that was loosely adapted from The Little Shop of Horrors (1960). If you are making a remake of something, you better make sure it is better than the original material. The Little Shop of Horrors (1960) was made incredibly fast with an interesting killer plant and good dark humor to make a solid little piece in the lineup of Roger Corman. When it comes to a film like this, what we have here is a mixed bag. On the one hand, I do admire the effort it took to create Audrey II as a presence to admire in its craftsmanship and some of the acting really does generate some laughs. On the other hand, the film simply drones in its first half with a pace kneecapped by its staging of songs that are never as catchy as they think they are, a film that thinks it needs a Greek chorus type of trio when what it really needs is to just take a breath and shut up. Feed the plant, feed the dialogue, but please don't feed me another conversation turning into a song: be seen, not heard. Moranis does a fine job with what he has to go with, warm and completely holding a well-lit candle to Jonathan Haze from yesteryear. Greene (reprising the role done on Off-Broadway) doesn't have as much to go on, seeming to grasp too hard to really make me care for her high-pitched and passive character beyond what you see on the surface. Gardenia is nice in brimming coarseness, even with a segmented role. Stubbs, a Motown singer with The Four Tops making his one film voice appearance, is a delight. He reaches the soul of a carnivorous plant with conviction that extends to the one key song highlight, "Mean Green Mother from Outer Space". When it comes to the rest, Martin and Murray really nearly steal the whole show away, even if they are making small appearances, but the sequence at the dentist's office, with a comedic show of a sadistic dentist with glee in Martin and a glutton-for-dental-punishment in the bright Murray. Candy and Guest are fine in one-scene appearances.

Look, there are fifteen musical numbers in this 94 minute film. One might think this might be a silly statement, but jeez is that too many to listen to. On a lark, I looked up a random musical and saw how many number there were in say, Gigi (1958) - that had fourteen, and it didn't feel as ridiculously overdrawn as this seems at times. There exists two versions of the film, differing on the ending. Keep in mind, the musical ended on a downbeat note, so the film ending on something similiar seems fair: we are talking about a plant that actually springs for domination of the whole Earth and eats everybody. How could you not resist that? Preview screening audiences did not see it that way, however, and it led to a re-shot happier ending. Personally, I find it more amusing to have a darker ending, since it wasn't like the original film was that happy anyway, and I admire the idea of subverting the expectation that these two normal loonies will live on to greener pastures after escaping a plant that ate people they knew.. But there's the rub: this just doesn't reach the heights of the earlier film. It has mostly better acting than before and a more developed plant, but it is just an average film with pretty window dressing that sings to you - if you buy into it, all power to you. It is meant to be fun and offbeat, but all I can feel is a loose jangling that only just reaches interesting moments when it is about that massive puppet in Audrey II - the cheesy stuff nearly chokes itself blue in self awareness that modern films would probably bow down to. By goodness, you have to really go for the throat in dark comedy to really make me believe this needed to exist, and all they did was make a passable effort. What is different between this and The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975)? At least this isn't so incessant about singing and degenerate actions while working on some way as horror. On the whole, this is an adequate showcase in some of its comedy alongside a showcase for its puppetry that will likely serve itself well to singalongs or some sort of enjoyment - I may not have had as much as I thought I would, but it still wins out anyway.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Hoosiers.

Review #1481: Hoosiers.

Cast: 
Gene Hackman (Norman Dale), Barbara Hershey (Myra Fleener), Dennis Hopper (Shooter Flatch), Sheb Wooley (Cletus Summers), Maris Valainis (Jimmy Chitwood), David Neidorf (Everett Flatch), Brad Long (Buddy Walker), Steve Hollar (Rade Butcher), Brad Boyle (Whit Butcher), Wade Schenck (Ollie McLellan), Kent Poole (Merle Webb), Scott Summers (Strap Purl), Fern Persons (Opal Fleener), and Chelcie Ross (George Walker) Directed by David Anspaugh.

Review: 
"I took the film at a time that I was desperate for money. I took it for all the wrong reasons, and it turned out to be one of those films that stick around. I was from that area of the country and knew of that event, strangely enough. We filmed fifty miles from where I was brought up. So it was a bizarre feeling. I never expected the film to have the kind of legs it's had."

"For so long studios were afraid of making sports movies because they thought they would only appeal to men. But Hoosiers isn't about basketball...They're about bigger things--family, community, and second chances."

To put it mildly, Indiana loves basketball. If one looks hard enough, you can find plenty of interesting things about Hoosier hysteria for the game, which extends to a film often thought of as one of the best sports movies ever. Writer-producer Angelo Pizzo and director David Anspaugh had first met when attending Indiana University, and each eventually found their way into doing what they liked: to be involved in films, and this was the feature debut for both of them. I think you know the story of Hoosiers, even if you haven't actually seen it. How many of us have grown up in a small town that focused their attention all on one certain part of the high school sports team? I myself can say I've been to countless basketball and football games, and you can certainly see plenty of faces old and new cheering on with pride. Granted, the game and season will end in the same manner, but it is the journey that counts most, right? The film may be very predictable for some, but who can resist a film where the little guy has a shot of winning? There is precedent for this within Indiana sports, with one small inspiration for this film being the 1954 Milan High School Indians, who with an enrollment of 161 students managed to go all the way in the state tournament (which had over 700 schools competing in one tournament), winning it all in the same place that would be used for this film's final: Hinkle Fieldhouse.

One thing that can't be lost in all of this is Gene Hackman. Whether in a supporting role or as star, he certainly knew how to bring a vital energy to the roles he played on screen, which could prove pretty versatile and fairly effective in the right hands. He was cast in this film because of scheduling problems with Jack Nicholson, one of two castings by chance that are interesting to note (the other being Dennis Hopper being cast when Harry Dean Stanton declined).  Although it might seem obvious to note the film's success, Hackman really did believe it wasn't going to be a hit on release, and Anspaugh had some tough times on filming with Hackman. One wouldn't really see any problems here, since Hackman is tremendous here, a show of professionalism and intuition that plays really well to a film that invites one in to no-nonsense warmth. Hershey follows along for the ride with fairness that matches up with Hackman without too many bumps, although the romance between the two seems a bit dubious - an alternative version of the film (which apparently ran at 168 minutes) had more scenes with the two together, although I can't imagine a longer version doing better than the 115 minute version we have here. Hopper, in the midst of a career resurgence with this and Blue Velvet (1986), nearly steals the show. A former addict playing an alcoholic, he proves adept at giving this role the gravitas and care it needs to come alive with warmth that permeates interest whenever on screen. The others prove just fine in giving the small-town spirit the film requires, following along certain traits you could see in your town or in other sports films, whether involving the small athletic wonder, the devout athlete, or the opinionated townsfolk (headed by a distinct Ross). The basketball sequences prove fine in emulating classic 1950s basketball in the midst of fairly effective small town sequences destined to warm the heart of those living in the heartland desiring exactly this kind of film. It overcomes any lingering sense of hokey hooey with enough authenticity to make an interesting piece in the sports film library with a presentable charm and a well-rounded core to go with it all.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Castle in the Sky.

Review #1480: Castle in the Sky.

Cast:
Mayumi Tanaka (Pazu), Keiko Yokozawa (Princess Sheeta), Kotoe Hatsui (Captain Dola), Minori Terada (Colonel Muska), Ichirō Nagai (General Mouro), Fujio Tokita (Uncle Pom), Takuzō Kamiyama (Charles [Shalulu]), Yoshito Yasuhara (Louie [Lui]), Sukekiyo Kamiyama (Henri [Anli]), Hiroshi Ito (Mr. Duffi), Ryūji Saikachi (Old Engineer), Tomomichi Nishimura (Motro), and Machiko Washio (Okami) Written and Directed by Hayao Miyazaki (#1111 - Spirited Away and #1233 - Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind)

Review:
"I believe that children's souls are the inheritors of historical memory from previous generations. It's just that as they grow older and experience the everyday world that memory sinks lower and lower. I feel I need to make a film that reaches down to that level. If I could do that I would die happy."

Anyone who encounters enough animated films will likely approach the ones of Studio Ghibli at some point in time, with plenty of good reasons to do so. Studio Ghibli was a fresh company destined to deliver high quality tales involving traditional animation since its very first movie that was released in 1986. Four people founded the studio in 1985: Hayao Miyazaki (previously associated with Toei, A-Pro, Zuiyō Eizō, Nippon Animation, Tokyo Movie Shinsha, and Topcraft), Isao Takahata (who first collaborated with him on The Great Adventure of Horus, Prince of the Sun in 1968), Toshio Suzuki (who helped in getting the Nausicaa anime made in the first place), and Yasuyoshi Tokuma. The former two were directors while the latter two were producers, and the company had been formed after the success of Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, made by Miyazaki (his second ever directorial effort) under the production company of Topcraft (which had its dissolved assets turned into Ghibli). As is the case with numerous Miyazaki films (past and future), there is plenty to keep one's attention involving nature and technology, with elements inspired by mystic legends alongside Gulliver's Travels (in regards to the flying island of Laputa). One can't go wrong with our main duo in Tanaka and Yokozawa, each of which doing quite well in portraying innocence and care that go well with each other along with certain situations that demand capable characters for fascinating situations, even if that involves something as early as just meeting with each other. Hatsui makes a warm presence of amusement to go with the other spirited pirates, while Terada soothes with greed and arrogance for well effect.

It is a captivating film for all ages, capable of delivering a story worth getting involved in with careful execution and a fair cast to drive the movie with the right senses of charm and conviction. If we didn't care about this community and their inner strength that stands clear when compared to the other group depicted in the film, we wouldn't appreciate what it means to feel the ground on your feet. Sure, there are plenty of interesting things to look at when it comes to the vehicles or the grand castle in the sky, but the main core is a core of warmth. We aren't dragging our feet waiting for something to happen because we are instead being absorbed by what we see, feeling everything in the soil and in the air with enjoyment. With a 124 minute run-time, the movie sure builds itself with enough steam in its animation and foundation to make any scene feel diverting without any real slowing point, playing to the imaginations of its audience quite well. It surely isn't surprising to see the influence this has had over subsequent works in Japan and abroad, particularly in inspiring further steampunk depiction in anime and manga. On the whole, this ranks fairly high among animated films of its era in its strength of animation and adventure without any creative sacrifice to make an easy recommendation for one desiring an animated classic.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Big Trouble in Little China.

Review #1479: Big Trouble in Little China.

Cast:
Kurt Russell (Jack Burton), Kim Cattrall (Gracie Law), Dennis Dun (Wang Chi), James Hong (David Lo Pan), Victor Wong (Egg Shen), Kate Burton (Margo Litzenberger), Donald Li (Eddie Lee), Carter Wong (Thunder), Peter Kwong (Rain), James Pax (Lightning), Suzee Pai (Miao Yin), and Chao-Li Chi (Uncle Chu) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween (1978), #634 - Escape from New York, #712 - The Thing (1982), #732 - Escape from L.A., #1221 - Dark Star, and #1298 - They Live)

Review: 
"I'm pretty happy with who I am. I like myself and what I'm doing. I don't need to be the world's greatest director or the most famous - or the richest. I don't need to make a whole lot of great films. I can do my job and I can do it pretty well. This is the realization I've come to, later in life. It's called growing up."
"I seem to have a knack for picking movies that go on to be cult favorites."

John Carpenter is a director that deserves further inspection, one that is far more than just his horror films. The 1980s are ertainly an interesting indicator of this diverting director, with eight of his eighteen directorial efforts being in that era (ranging from The Fog to They Live), comprised of success and flops that eventually alienated him away from Hollywood, but most of the features are generally well appreciated for their efforts in horror, science fiction and action, with some of those features also being composed or written by him as well. At the helm as star for some of those successes is Kurt Russell, who first rose to prominence as a child star in television and for Disney films before growing into further lines of work in the 1980s as an action hero (along with sentimental favorite in my view). The film had three different writers credited: Gary Goldman and David Z. Weinstein originally wrote it as a western that would combine Chinese fantasy elements one might find in a martial arts film within a western; subsequent attempts to turn it into something more filmable led to their firing and W. D. Richter (writer of films such as Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)) brought in to rehaul the screenplay into a contemporary tale that kept just basic elements like Lo Pan and Jack Burton, using Rosemary's Baby (yes, that one) as his template.

Ultimately, what we have here is a film that screams cult classic - it was a flop at the box office in the midst of a busy summer (to put it in perspective, the top films of that summer were Top Gun, The Karate Kid Part II and Aliens) and marketing that even Russell found not to his liking, with the studio not really understanding Burton's character (to the point where they had them do the opening scene about his heroism). It influenced Carpenter back to independent filmmaking as yet another painfully misspreciated film of his catalogue in the 1980s (with only his film The Thing (1982) being more unappreciated in its time, which also found a deserved following). For all of its obviousness, one can't help but enjoy its b-movie style - cheesy but with wonderful effects and a zippy charm to its cast that make a strange and stark delight to the action film. Russell proves quite enjoyable with brash brightness for a part that is part-hero and part-sidekick, lumbering through lines of screwball bravado, whether in engaging in some trucker lines on a truck, or showing confidence right before knocking himself out of a fight. Cattrall follows along the screwball aspects of the film at times with sharpness, making for a quirky time when paired with Russell. Dun proves well in keeping with the quick pace and timing required of our true hero with confidence that springs well with the action sequences. Hong (a prolific Chinese American actor of various mediums for six decades) proves a fair villain, inviting one with some creeping mystery (we are talking about a long-living sorcerer who wants a green-eyed bride/sacrifice, after all) that makes a satisfactory threat. Wong, Burton, and Li prove a decent supporting cast to a film that moves along for 99 minutes with an aim to make a snappy martial arts effects film and succeeding fairly well at it. With floating eyeballs, lightning effects, a underworld beneath Chinatown, and a big ugly monster, how could one resist such a film? To call it contrived or bumbling is missing out on the fun, particularly one with an interesting approach to the hero-sidekick dynamic. On the whole, it is a likable film with enough well-done staging in action and design to go with an amiable cast for a deserved cult classic and a fair piece in John Carpenter's line of work that is worth a watch.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Color Purple.

Review #1478: The Color Purple.

Cast:
Danny Glover (Albert "Mister" Johnson), Whoopi Goldberg (Celie), Oprah Winfrey (Sofia), Margaret Avery (Shug Avery, Táta Vega as singing voice), Akosua Busia (Nettie Harris), Adolph Caesar (Old Mister Johnson), Willard E. Pugh (Harpo Johnson), Rae Dawn Chong (Squeak), Laurence Fishburne (Swain), and Carl Anderson (Reverend Samuel) 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, #480 - Jaws, #563 - The Sugarland Express, #573 - E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, #642 - Jurassic Park, #958 - Always, #1068 - Ready Player One, and #1305 - Catch Me If You Can)

Review:
"Storytelling is the most important aspect of anything I've ever done. It's how the story is told. That's all I've focused on. If something doesn't tell a story or if it's confusing, I either don't shoot it or I cut it out."
"The way I played Celie was to stand back from her. There's a theory that an actor should identify with the character. Well, I loved her, but I didn't identify with her. Celie is so far away from me, it was easy to allow her pain to be there, because her life has so little to do with mine.”

Who better to do a tender and touching in humanity than Steven Spielberg? He grew into a filmmaker through shorts as a teenager with an 8mm camera. His first film that he made released to any sort of cinema was Firelight (1964), a $500 film released in his local cinema made at the age of 17 (made with the help of his family and high school students). His short subject Amblin' (1968) impressed numerous people and led to a deal at Universal in their television department, with the most notable contribution being the second segment of the 1969 Night Gallery pilot "Eyes", and he spent four years doing direction in television, with his theatrical debut being a expanded version of his TV film Duel (1971). Over the course of the next couple of years, Spielberg would generate success in captivating entertainment such as Jaws (1975, often cited as the first blockbuster), Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977, his first sci-fi feature that he also wrote), and Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981, likely one of the greatest adventure films). The two people who helped bring the film to attention and convince Spielberg to do the film was Kathleen Kennedy (who brought the book to his attention) and composer legend Quincy Jones, who helped produced the film with Spielberg, Kennedy, and Frank Marshall while also doing the music composition (however, a dispute came about with certain music aspects that led to eleven musicians being listed as score contributors when it came to a nomination for its score at the Academy Awards). The film was adapted to the screen by Menno Meyjes from the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel of the same name that had been written by Alice Walker in 1982 (I remember Walker from her short story "Everyday Use", which I read in college).

It is a film of resilience and humanity through and through a story that spans several years that features numerous distinct characters that we find quite a bit to resonate with, even with how tragic it might get, a film involving discussion upon race, gender, and class that eventually leads to hope. It makes the most of its 153 minutes in capturing a tale of adversity with a worthy cast. The one who deserves the most credit for making the film come alive on screen is Goldberg, making her second film appearance after having been noticed by Spielberg because of her one-woman Broadway show (1984-85), and she had written a letter to Walker upon reading the novel about appearing in a film version. It is evident from the very first scene she appears on screen that she is going to deliver a touching performance. There is something about her that strikes at our soul with how true the performance seems in running the gamut of developing inner strength with a fully-fledged performance of conviction. Glover, a city administrator-turned-actor in an early prominent role before appearing in further celebrated films, proves just as tremendous on the other side of the coin, one with stark presence of oppression and fear that manages to not escalate into full caricature. News anchor-turned talk show host Winfrey proves just as worthy in striking power, which also applies to the free-spirited and clever Avery in generating riveting moments. Others to appreciate include the distinct Caesar and an interesting Pugh.

It was a film that attracted controversy because of percieved stereotypes against African Americans (which can come from people who either can't or won't face reality when it comes to perceived slights without reading the film further). There were others who thought that the relationship between Shug and Celie was not given enough emphasis, to which the easiest statement to make to that is this: It was 1985, and one can only do so much in a PG-13 film, and it isn't like the two don't kiss or anything (heaven forbid someone try to do subtlely without needing to go explicit). We are talking about a film (and book) that involves pedophilia, incest, and spousal violence, for God's sake - we may not wish to ever have to deal with these problems, but they exist for all races that we as a society have to still confront, with film being an interesting medium to show these problems in a meaningful way. In that sense, I believe the film does fine with making an interesting story about race and gender without falling prey to too much sentimentalism or heavy-handedness. It never feels too long for its own good, instead moving with poetic pace that earns its many moments, with the climatic reunion being especially well done in emotion.

Walker, when asked about the film, generally has stated that while it may not follow her vision, it does have "its own gift", while noting the differences in translation from novel to book, such as the reduced elements of the lesbian relationship of Celie and Shug or with its tinkering of certain elements of its ending. Spielberg himself noted the fact that he was "shy" about depicting some of the aspects of the Shug-Celie relationship without alienating audiences, saying that he may have been the wrong director to do their encounters. I suppose one could also note that the novel was also turned into a musical two decades later, having two runs on Broadway. For what it is worth, while it is not a perfect film, it generally reaches the heights it sets out to do with a stark tale of hope within a period drama that has a captivating cast alongside music and directing that make the grandest of ventures worth seeking out as a fascinating drama that holds its heart strong in what matters most: hope of the human spirit.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.