Showing posts with label Albert Hall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Albert Hall. Show all posts

October 25, 2024

Cat People (1982).

Review #2290: Cat People (1982). 

Cast: 
Nastassja Kinski (Irena Gallier), Malcolm McDowell (Paul Gallier), John Heard (Oliver Yates), Annette O'Toole (Alice Perrin), Ruby Dee (Female), Ed Begley Jr (Joe Creigh), Scott Paulin (Bill Searle), Frankie Faison (Detective Brandt; dubbed by Albert Hall), Lynn Lowry (Ruthie), and John Larroquette (Bronte Judson) Directed by Paul Schrader.

Review: 
"Cat People wasn’t successful. It really fell between two stools: it was an attempt to have things both ways, which is to have a classy film and a horror film. Well, the horror audience went and said, ‘Hey, this doesn’t look like a horror film, it’s not for us’, and the sophisticated audience went and said, ‘Hey, this is just a horror film.’ So it wasn’t really satisfying to the audience."

Sure, give a few decades and you can just remake a movie right then and there. The 1942 Cat People had been a team effort that had DeWitt Bodeen write the screenplay as based in collaboration with producer Val Lewton, director Jacques Tourneur, and editor Mark Robson. The process of remaking the film was first brought up by Milton Subotsky before Universal Pictures eventually got the rights and made their own push that took several years of the 1970s (Robert Vadim was interested to direct at one point). You might recognize the screenwriter in Alan Ormsby, the co-director and writer of Deranged (1974) and a variety of other writing projects. Universal tapped Paul Schrader (who once labeled the 1942 rendition as one that he didn't find very good) to direct the film, with most knowing him for his work on scripts such as Taxi Driver (1976) before becoming a director with Blue Collar (1978); he claimed that he had contributed to the writing of the film in terms of its prologue and the ending to make it more distinct from the original, although Ormsby claims otherwise. The movie was a mild success with audiences at the time, or at the very least managed to accomplish the goal of not inspiring a filmmaker to try and do their own remake of a remake four decades later. Schrader has been quoted as saying that in his attempts to do a genre film as a "very salutary exercise" in not being about himself, he ended up making a movie that ranked up there as among his most personal.

The funny thing about the films is that it accomplishes one thing in particular: it sure is distinct on its own merit from the original that you won't mistake it as a copy because of its erotic elements within the perils of flesh. You might remember that the original dealt with a woman (played by Simone Simon) who thought they were descended from a tribe of, well, cat people that may or may not turn into black panthers when aroused (it basically had elements of the noir); the lady in that movie went the whole road to marriage without getting kissed. Here we have a woman who must confront the peril of really having a family tradition of were-cats that must kill in order to turn back. It just so happens to involve a few bits of skin and the mix of effects and cats in a movie best described as lurid curiosity for 118 minutes. If you asked me which movie called Cat People is the better among the two, I think I would throw my hands in the air and shrug at it basically being a dead heat because each are from accomplished filmmakers that represent their era quite well in overall enjoyment vs. rewarding the patience of those who are into what it is selling. Kinski practically lifts the film almost entirely to the realm of curious because of how she acts in the film without really even acting that much to begin with (apparently, she seemed to felt manipulated when it came to her assessment of the resulting film). Her grace really does have the instincts of a cat in frenzied timing that sells the plight of flesh. Whether you compare the two films or not, she sure exceeds Simon when it comes to worthwhile lead performances by a handy margin. McDowell may not be in the movie too long, but he sure is loopy enough to belong in weirdo enjoyment that he sells from the word "go", but I say that as someone who went with the film's peddling of ideas right then and there (you really should just see it right then and there rather than skimming the plot). Heard and O'Toole are fine, albeit on a smaller scale that only works some of the time in trying to do a would-be love triangle that only works for those who like the actors enough in the first place; Heard just happens to be the ideal guy to chase a girl like Kinski in strange pursuer/pursued, as opposed to the mild other. Besides, it is quite the curiosity to see Heard having to engage with the climax in a cathouse blues type of way that really will make or break the film for you when it comes to stupendous suspension of disbelief; I dont know if I would call the film "classy", but even "dedicated" is a better way to put it than,  say, "not fun horror". It is a movie that looks and sounds exactly on point of mystical curiosity, never turning itself off even when not going all-out for effects work (you get some blood anyway). As a whole, it is a strange sensual kind of sensationalism that one will either take right in for scintillating enjoyment or baffled disappointment. It feels good to be on the side of the former but have it your way among the creatures of the night.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

February 20, 2021

Malcolm X (1992).

Review #1643: Malcolm X.

Cast: 
Denzel Washington (Malcolm X), Angela Bassett (Betty Shabazz), Albert Hall (Baines), Al Freeman Jr. (Elijah Muhammad), Delroy Lindo (West Indian Archie), Spike Lee (Shorty), Theresa Randle (Laura), Kate Vernon (Sophia), with Lonette McKee (Louise Little), Tommy Hollis (Earl Little), James McDaniel (Brother Earl), Ernest Thomas (Sidney), Jean-Claude La Marre (Benjamin 2X), and Christopher Plummer (Chaplain Gill) Directed by Spike Lee (#1255 - Do the Right Thing, and #1543 - Inside Man)

Review: 
"We declare our right on this earth to be a man, to be a human being, to be respected as a human being, to be given the rights of a human being in this society, on this earth, in this day, which we intend to bring into existence by any means necessary.” 

When it comes to biographical epics, the best of those type of films are the ones that have plenty of challenge to overcome to portray a human being with the right amount of detail and understanding required that will pack as much insight as it does interest in a depiction that will stand just as well as any documentary or book. This is more than necessary when it comes to the subject of Malcolm X, this much is true. It started with The Autobiography of Malcolm X (1965), which was a collaboration between X and journalist Alex Haley in a series of interviews (for which there were more than 50 done) that were done between 1963 until X's assassination in 1965. Haley was considered at the time to be a ghostwriter for his contribution, but later years have noted his crucial role in discretion with handling the manuscript, and the epilogue was written specifically by Haley as comments of his own on X (three chapters excised from the final version were eventually found and put up for sale years later). Its publication led to a lasting influence on readers and writers alike as the first of numerous works involving the subject of Malcolm X, with a few biographies coming out in the next few decades. For example, one released in 2011 won a Pulitzer Prize but also inspired a response book aimed at correcting it, while a diary of Malcolm X's time in 1964 was released in 2014. The most recent biography was The Dead Are Arising, written by Les and Tamara Payne that was published to noted reviews in 2020.

It should not be surprising that a film was in the development stage as early as 1968 with the sale of rights to filming the novel going to producer Marvin Worth. He had met X long ago in the streets of New York and he would spend nearly 25 years trying to get a film about him to the big screen, which started by hiring novelist and playwright James Baldwin to develop the initial script. Screenwriter Arnold Perl would also be brought in to write for the screenplay, doing so until his death in 1971. The screenplay devised by Baldwin and Perl would ultimately falter into development struggles, although Baldwin would write about X various times over the next few years (such as No Name in the Street (1972), which depicted him from Baldwin's perspective) before his death in 1987 (he described the experience of trying to write a Hollywood adaptation as less than if one was horsewhipped or jailed in Bellevue); Baldwin would not be credited for his work when it came time for this film, as per requested by Baldwin's surviving family. Worth and Perl would work together for a documentary on X that was released in 1972 (done instead of a drama due to a lack of cooperation from close figures to speak on camera), which was mostly constructed of his speeches and interviews with occasional narration and newsreel footage. As was the case two decades later, Betty Shabazz served as a consultant to the filmmakers, and each was distributed by Warner Bros with voice-over work by Ossie Davis (reciting words spoken at X's eulogy). Several writers and directors were considered through a span of two decades (with one potential idea having Richard Pryor as X), and it was the argument over the qualifications of a white man directing in Norman Jewison (director of films like In the Heat of the Night) to direct that led to the ultimate pick in Lee, who had wanted to make a film of X since college (for his part, he received a bit of heat from black nationalists and others like Amiri Baraka that thought it would be a middle-class rendition of X, and more can be found about it in the book Lee wrote of his experiences making the film). 

Perhaps it was fate that Washington would play this role on film. Eleven years earlier, back when Washington was just a struggling actor, he was cast as Malcolm X in an Off Broadway production "When the Chickens Came Home to Roost"; when preparing for the role, he read the autobiography along with tapes and books and was struck by what he saw that he described as being like "heavy, mean stuff...helping me get some things off my chest." Even having Washington cast in the lead role and Lee as director didn't mean an easy production, which would experience immense pressure from community leaders (who feared a film with too much focus on his life before becoming X) to financiers (who aspired for a budget less than $30 million), for which donations were made by several prominent individuals that ranged from Michael Jordan to Prince. In essence, one could sum the feeling generated by the film through its last few spoken words, spoken through archival footage of X himself: "by whatever means necessary." It is the story of a man who forged a path of self-determination that lent clear expression to the frustrations expressed by crowds of people in America with a multi-faceted look at just who he was in the eyes of those who saw him (whether that meant the streets, jail, or on the podium) that makes a portrayal of legacy come through with fiery tension for all of what it wants to say in truths and about what endures about the man in the decades after his death. As X once stated, his life never stayed fixed in one place for too long, and this rings true here. Washington is asked to do a tremendous task of showing this one man go through the stages of life with diverse power that cannot waver, whether as "Red" or as the reborn X. He does a tremendous job here, towering over the other folks with mindset of eyes ready to open to speak of responsibility but also find his eyes open for himself to learn as well as teach as a man with no fear. Through the course of roughly two decades, we see the folks around him that make up three distinct periods of his life with varying effect and a distinct look from cinematographer Ernest B. Dickerson (in his last collaboration with Lee), and a student of history or knowing faces will see a few familiar ones along the way (such as Karen Allen or Bobby Seale, for example). The first spends time with Harlem and Boston with actors such as Lindo, Lee, Randle and Vernon. In those sequences, Washington sells the hustle and bustle of what is needed in tandem with Lindo, who is just as charismatic without having even half the time required, while Lee and the others do just fine. In the next time of focus, one focuses on Washington alongside Hall with a cameo from Plummer (playing self-righteousness with ease). Washington undergoes a new phase with awakening that is helped by Hall and his solemn conviction. The next one is distilled in two forms, involving Bassett and Freeman alongside supporting stuff from Thomas. Freeman does his part in wisdom alongside hypocrisy (a further look into him reveals more than just infidelity, let us say) while Bassett follows with Washington in well enough moments, and they have their part to play when it comes to that fateful climax.

Maneuvering the waters of adapting X to the screen meant a few moments of narrative reconciliation, even with a run time of 201 minutes. For instance, the character of Baines was actually a composite of X's siblings in respect to their role in the redemption of X while in prison. X's pilgrimage to Mecca (which was the first American feature to ever film there, although Lee had to hire a second unit crew to get permission...and Warner Bros actually thought of just doing it in New Jersey) was actually funded by his half sister Ella (also not mentioned), which is interesting considering that it is the last known surviving home of Malcolm in his childhood (he lived there with her for five years). There is one prominent figure absent in the story of the Nation of Islam, one with a legacy stoked with plenty of controversy (you might recognize him as the man behind the Million Man March alongside plenty of controversial remarks thought of as anti-Semitic or homophobic) that reportedly threatened Lee; it is disputed how much involvement the NOI may have had over the assassination even to this day. The film touches on the provocative from start to finish with its ties to the present day, most notably with the appearance of Nelson Mandela, reciting Malcolm's own words to a group of schoolchildren. In short, what we have is a film packed with a great deal of words to say about its subject then and now that generally hits the mark in stoking a statement about what he was to those that saw him in all of his forms, whether that means a kid born into tragedy, or a shaken upbringing into trouble, or a hardened man seeking light, or a man who found himself on a much bigger journey than himself. It could only end with the eulogy given by Davis, with his spoken words reaching ever still even with the passage of 27 years since he gave the words at X's funeral, one that described him as a prince that "didn't hesitate to die, because he loved us so." One could only aspire to live a life worth discussion over rhetoric and actions (controversy be damned) like X, and it is one's privilege to seek out the film for its shining performance in Washington that serves as one of his best alongside a director worthy of capturing it and everything that comes with it in all of its detail that makes it as worthy to see on one's shelf as much as something like Lawrence of Arabia (1962), where the three hours spent are good ones to spend with their eyes open.

Next Time: A television star goes to the director's chair with Once Upon a Time...When We Were Colored.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

June 29, 2020

Apocalypse Now.

Review #1460: Apocalypse Now.

Cast: 
Marlon Brando (Colonel Walter E. Kurtz), Martin Sheen (Captain Benjamin L. Willard), Robert Duvall (Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore), Frederic Forrest (Jay 'Chef' Hicks), Sam Bottoms (Lance B. Johnson), Laurence Fishburne (Tyrone 'Clean' Miller), Albert Hall (Chief Phillips), Harrison Ford (Colonel Lucas), Dennis Hopper (Photojournalist), G.D. Spradlin (General R. Corman), Jerry Ziesmer (Jerry, Civilian), and Scott Glenn (Lieutenant Richard M. Colby) Directed by Francis Ford Coppola (#592 - Dementia 13 and #1139 - Supernova)

Review: 
"We were in the jungle, there were too many of us, we had access to too much money, too much equipment, and little by little we went insane"

The 1970s were a tremendous decade for Francis Ford Coppola, so it only makes sense to cover the last film of that era, one characterized by the highs and lows of the "New Hollywood" movement.
He had a hand in six films for the decade: Patton (1970, co-wrote the screenplay), The Godfather (1972, director and co-writer), The Conversation (1974, as writer, producer, and director), The Great Gatsby (1974, screenplay), and The Godfather Part II (1974, co-writer, director, producer), and this film. Coppola was born in Detroit but raised in Queens, New York as the son of music composer Carmine Coppola (who would work with his son on a couple of his films). He graduated from both Hofstra University and the UCLA Film School (the former in theater arts and the latter in film), with one notable influence on Coppola being Dorothy Arzner, a former film director who was on the staff at the time. Coppola's career in film started in 1962 with three films: The Bellboy and the Playgirls, Tonight for Sure, and Battle Beyond the Sun (the first and latter were English edits), with his next feature being the cult classic Dementia 13 (1963). He spent the next few years doing a few scripts and further directorial efforts (such as the hit You're a Big Boy Now) before the aforementioned luck in the 1970s, where he won a total of five Academy Awards on fourteen nominations.

This was inspired by Joseph Conrad's novella Heart of Darkness, written in 1899 under the inspiration of his travels on a river steamer sailing up the Congo River (both focus on a character named Kurtz). The screenplay was written by John Milius and Coppola, with narration by Michael Herr (a war correspondent most known for his book Dispatches that detailed his experiences in Vietnam). The initial director in mind to do the film was George Lucas. He worked for years with Milius to develop the project while busy with other scripts, and he had wanted to do it after THX 1138 (1971) with the intent to shoot in both California and South Vietnam on a modest budget of $2 million with 16mm cameras and real soldiers, although this did not come to pass. Coppola was eventually drawn to the script and initially aimed to produce the film before eventually pressing on to do it himself, which he had described as a "comedy and a terrifying psychological horror story". It would take years to ultimately plan and shoot the film, since it was originally set to be a four month shoot in the Philippines for release in 1977. There were of course a few obstacles that made this impossible. The original choice for the Willard character was Harvey Keitel (since others like Steve McQueen did not want to leave America for a significant amount of time), but Coppola soon found that Keitel was not quite right for the role, which led to Sheen being brought in. Describing the amount of production quirks almost sounds like a routine of dark humor. A typhoon wrecked a majority of the sets not long after production started. Sheen had a heart attack that took him off filming for a month (with his brother Joe filling in as a double and voice over at times). Brando showed up to the set severely overweight and hadn't read the script or the book. The film premiered in May 1979 at the Cannes Film Festival while not fully finished at three hours (where Coppola famously stated that his film was not about Vietnam but rather was Vietnam). Nowadays there are multiple editions to possibly view, such as the original 153 minute version, Apocalypse Now Redux (2001, which re-inserted deleted footage that runs at 196 minutes), and Apocalypse Now Final Cut (2017, which was trimmed to 183 minutes).

For a film that runs at a significant length and with such production quirks, it is amazing how well the film works as a look upon the dark parts of a man's soul when it comes to the horrors of war with such tenacity and depth to make for one of the most seminal films of its era and for epic war films as a whole. It is an experience like no other in ways that other films could only dream to do in terms of haunting timelessness, because it is something that can linger in our mind now more than ever. For a man who had his quarrels with Coppola and takes his time to show up in full detail, Brando generates a tremendous performance of stature, a poet warrior's voice from the dark that is intently fascinating to view in those moments for the clear-minded-but-darkened-soul that doesn't have to say much (Coppola edited down a rambling monologue by Brando to only a few minutes) to generate awe. Sheen follows along with great ambiguity, a passive presence that we have absolutely no trouble in following along with in a path of weariness as a changed man of war, right from the very first scene where he punches a mirror with his bare hand. Duvall makes for quite a fanatical presence in such a quick amount of time, a man that we can smell the napalm with in clear detail. The others in the cast prove worthy to travel along with, including a young Fishburne and a dazed Bottoms to go with the eccentrically on-point Hopper and bit highlights for Spradlin and Ziesmer. This is not a film that tests one's patience as much as it is one that probes into your patience, filled with a tremendous look by Vittorio Storaro in cinematography that makes a devastating classic worth checking out as a portrait of what can drive a man to certain actions in war under the guise of morality that leaves its audience fully stunned and ultimately satisfied for having watched it.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.