Showing posts with label Beau Starr. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Beau Starr. Show all posts

July 4, 2023

Born on the Fourth of July.

Review #2031: Born on the Fourth of July.

Cast: 
Tom Cruise (Sergeant Ron Kovic; Bryan Larkin as Young Ron), Willem Dafoe (Charlie), Kyra Sedgwick (Donna; Jessica Prunell as Young Donna), Raymond J. Barry (Mr. Kovic), Jerry Levine (Steve Boyer), Frank Whaley (Timmy), Caroline Kava (Mrs. Kovic), Cordelia Gonzalez (Maria Elena - Villa Dulce), Ed Lauter (Legion Commander), John Getz (Marine Major - Vietnam), Beau Starr (Man #2 - Arthur's Bar), and Michael Wincott (Vet #3 - Villa Dulce) Directed by Oliver Stone (#095 - Wall Street, #1090 - Platoon, #1265 - Natural Born Killers, #1523 - Any Given Sunday, and #1595 - Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps)

Review: 
“I’m puzzled by life, horrified by the daily newspaper. The only sane response is re-creation, drama . . . an ordered series of events that arouse pity and terror, to paraphrase Aristotle. Making movies is my way of exorcising demons, of creating an ethos, a philosophy of life. I’d go crazy without fantasy.”

Every so often, I am reminded that my father was a war veteran. I don't have many memories of him talking about his service in Vietnam, aside from once seeing his dog tags and remembering his burial a couple of years ago at a cemetery for veterans. But men are not defined only by if they served for their country or not, they are served by who they are for those who end up alive to talk about it. One such man who found meaning in the (difficult) time that came after his service was Ron Kovic. After he graduated from Massapequa High School in New York (where he was raised to a family of Croatian & Irish ancestry), he quickly volunteered to serve in Vietnam in 1965. He was a member of the United States Marines, for which he made two tours of duty. It was on January 20, 1968, that he was shot and severely wounded that resulted in him being paralyzed from the waist down. After intensive recovery led to his arrival back home, Kovic found curiosity within peace demonstrations, starting in 1970. This happened not long after the events of May 1970 that had seen numerous student protests in universities such as Kent State University and Jackson State University, for which each saw anti-war demonstrators killed (the former by Ohio National Guard, the latter by local patrolmen). Kovic wrote Born on the Fourth of July in the span of over a month in 1974 that was published in 1976 that he stated was written to show people about the "hospitals and the enema room, about why I had become opposed to the war, why I had grown more and more committed to peace and nonviolence." Not long after, Kovic gave a speech at the Democratic National Convention, four years after him and other members of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War had protested the Republican Convention (the war did not end until 1975). Even now, with his 77th birthday, Kovic serves as a constant anti-war presence. Cruise, Stone, and Kovic were each nominated for Academy Awards that year for this film (Best Actor, Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Picture), with Stone winning for his efforts in direction (don't ask who won Best Picture). Stone would do one further film in what was later called his trilogy of Vietnam War films with Heaven & Earth (1993).

Relating to all of this is the production struggle to get things moving, as there had been interest in doing a film from the very moment Kovic spoke at the DNC, specifically Al Pacino. Oliver Stone, who had served in the United States Army with service from 1967-68, was brought in to try and write for the screenplay in 1977. Incidentally, Kovic served as a consultant on Coming Home (1978), a film involving a disillusioned Vietnam War veteran left in a wheelchair. It was not until the success of Platoon (1986) that Stone could get the chance to write (alongside Kovic) and direct this film. With Platoon, one would find that it argued most that the first casualty in war was innocence. With this film, now one finds how it goes for those who have arrived home after said innocence was lost, not to a hero's welcome but a state of indifference. The illusion of going off to a just war to fight for your country has been shattered into one of unimaginable agony, one where a love of country is warped by some into the idea that they somehow don't love it just because they want to speak up (of course, there are many perspectives when it comes to returning home from war that would shudder at folks who seem to toil in "self-pity" or other characteristics, but that is a different can of worms). As Kovic once said, you aren't meant to avoid conflict and pain in life but instead shape it into something beneficial. So, one minute you may be on the side of wanting to yell folks to "love it or leave it" and the next you may find yourself looking along with Abbie Hoffman (he appears in the film for a moment in a film released months after his suicide at the age of 52). This is conveyed in a mostly factual tale (the character played by Sedgwick is a composite, for example) that is carried near wholesale by the performance of Cruise. The 145-minute runtime is his to carry alone in the odyssey from idealism to the road back from hell, one that requires an actor who can convey the gravity of the situation, and he does a tremendous job here, never striking a false note in those human moments. The burrowing of idealism is handled with honesty with such commitment that Kovic gave Cruise his Bronze Star Medal after filming. The rest of the cast do reasonably well in support from the bits and pieces that arise from before and after time of war, whether that involves protest in Sedgwick or familiarity with Whaley and vulnerable parenting in Barry and Kava. Dafoe actually doesn't show up in the film until the last third of the film (set in Mexico with prostitutes), but he is on point in those moments of animus that only he could bring in a scene where he and Cruise are bickering on a dirt road. As a whole, the movie is a general triumph in communicating what it means to see a person go through the fight of their lives in terms of withering innocence and conscience for what it all means when back home and not "out there". There is no one solution fit for all, but a level of understanding for who one is a virtue that all people can see as worthwhile, American or not. As such, it is a tough sit for audiences in the ways that matter, thanks to the efforts of Cruise, Stone & Kovic.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Happy Independence Day, folks.

October 24, 2013

Movie Night: Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers.


Review #473: Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers.

Cast
Donald Pleasence (Dr. Samuel Loomis), Danielle Harris (Jamie Lloyd), Beau Starr (Sheriff Ben Meeker), Wendy Kaplan (Tina Williams), Tamara Glynn (Samantha Thomas), Ellie Cornell (Rachel Carruthers), Jeffrey Landman (Billy Hill), Jonathan Chapin (Mikey), Matthew Walker (Spitz), Betty Carvalho (Nurse Patsey), and Don Shanks (Michael Myers/Man In Black) Directed by Dominique Othenin-Girard.

Review
Quite literally, you could use this quote (said by the producer, Mousatapha Akkad) to describe this film: "Drunk off the success of Halloween 4, we began production on Halloween 5." Barely a year apart from the previous film, this film didn't even have a complete script. Danielle Harris' character was meant to be more serious, as evidenced in the fourth film's ending, which wasn't even followed up in the next. It might've worked well, as evidenced by Harris' enthusiasm: "The way Halloween 4 ended, I thought I was going to be the killer. I thought it would have been fun to come back as the killer, or Michael's sidekick. Scary, but fun." Instead of a unique twist, we get...lousy side characters who "scare" each other, a mostly mute Harris, and...a fairly decent Pleasence performance.

The side characters even ruin any chances of actual scares, like when Myers is apparently chasing a girl in a haystack...only to reveal it's not Myers, and it's laughed off like nothing. I don't know why, but the idea of Michael driving is more amusing then it is scary, but at least he isn't riding a bicycle or a pogo stick. Pleasence seems tired, though I attribute that to his characterization in the film, or maybe he's tired of the script, I don't know. Harris is mute for a good portion of the film, which is sad, because I actually did like Harris' performance in the previous film, but now I'm seeming picky. The scares are mediocre, though the side characters' attempts at scaring each other ruin the chances. And yes, the Myers house is shown for the first time since the original...looking nothing like it, but I suppose it was a stylistic choice. That or a ton of redecorating, because it is a giant house with many windows. Their is a scene involving Michael and Jamie in which...Michael sheds a tear and a barely visible shot of his face...which isn't burned, even though he was burned in the second film, which is evident in his hands, but not the face. The ending seems all fine and dandy, except...it's not. It ends on a cliffhanger, and a pretty lame one. It could've worked as a way to explain his return in the next film...which took 6 years to be released. All in all, this is a rushed production with barely there scares, okay performances, and a lackluster continuation of the series. But at least, I can rest from this franchise, and focus on something different, like this film with all but the letter A scratched out...

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

October 21, 2013

Movie Night: Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers.


Review #471: Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers.

Cast
Donald Pleasence (Dr. Samuel Loomis), Ellie Cornell (Rachel Carruthers), Danielle Harris (Jamie Lloyd), George P. Wilbur (Michael Myers), Michael Pataki (Dr. Hoffman), Beau Starr (Sheriff Ben Meeker), Sasha Jenson (Brady), Kathleen Kinmont (Kelly Meeker), Gene Ross (Earl), and Carmen Filpi (Jackson P. Sayer) Directed by Dwight H. Little.

Review
I've reviewed Halloween films in the past, the first three in a connected trilogy (#068, #268, and #275), with John Carpenter being involved in all three films, directing and writing the first film, and producing the second and third films. Halloween III was a mediocre attempt at trying something new with a sad attempt to make a sensible plot, which audiences seemed to hate because of the lack of Michael. So, after 6 years, Halloween 4 was made to bring Myers back. And literally on the 25th Anniversary of this film., I've decided to watch to continue my saga with Halloween.

So...how do they revive Michael Myers after his near death in the 2nd film? A hand wave. Quite literally, they say he nearly burned to death, and that the doctors have kept him alive for 10 years, which is either the most bizarre way to explain his persistent living or the most contrived. At least Loomis is back, though even those burns on his face can't make me forget he survived an fiery explosion, without even being in a coma. There are scenes in which people don't believe that Michael's back, which is odd given it's only been 10 years since Myers terrorized the town. It's a tired tradition in horror films, where people don't believe that the monster has returned, I suppose. Sometimes the film can have good chills, like when Jamie tries to run from Michael in the school, but then there's unintentionally funny scenes, when Loomis is thrown through a window...by a blonde haired Michael Myers. (This being due to a previous mask being used before the decision to change it) The new build of Myers is a bit odd, he's more shaped like Jason Voorhees and has a new mask, which is either not as threatening as the previous mask or just plain silly. The actors are alright, and Pleasence is probably the best actor in the film. The film isn't as frightening as Halloween or even Halloween II, and while it feels unnecessary, it's still an okay slasher film.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.