Showing posts with label Carol Kane. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Carol Kane. Show all posts

September 1, 2025

Caught Stealing.

Review #2418: Caught Stealing.

Cast: 
Austin Butler (Henry "Hank" Thompson), Regina King (Det. Elise Roman), Zoë Kravitz (Yvonne), Matt Smith (Russ), Liev Schreiber (Lipa Drucker), Vincent D'Onofrio (Shmully Drucker), Benito A Martínez Ocasio (Colorado), Griffin Dunne (Paul), Carol Kane (Bubbe), Yuri Kolokolnikov (Aleksei), and Nikita Kukushkin (Pavel) Directed by Darren Aronofsky (#1112 - Pi, #1580 - mother!)

Review: 
Sure, this is the new film from director Darren Aronofsky, but I'll be honest, the reason I picked the movie is that it seemed like the kind of movie that would slip through the cracks if I didn't act quickly. Honestly, I think I saw exactly one trailer for the movie, but I'm sure this was going to be something fitting of the guy who did Pi (1998) rather than say, the guy who did mother! (2017). So, what is the movie? Well, it is based on the 2004 novel of the same name (the first of three books involving the character, as followed by Six Bad Things and A Dangerous Man) by Charlie Huston, who wrote the screenplay for this film, which is the ninth feature film by Aronofsky. You might think is a caper with a few bits of humor. Well...it is technically a funny movie, but you sure will get some whiplash by the stuff that happens with this movie (as set in 1998, specifically late September in New York) which features a handful of characters that get killed for 107 minutes (horror movies wish they had that kind of body count). Omen or not, I saw the movie on a Thursday night to about three other people (my kind of audience, at least when it comes to ill-timed laughs). 

I did enjoy the movie, albeit one that sure takes its time to really get going in a tightly wound thriller about one man who is having an increasingly bad week, as one does when engulfed in trying to think quick for a myriad of tough decisions beyond "oh, I have a cat to take care of". But really, it is a funny movie even with such squeamish moments, mostly because I did get a kick out of the ways one is wriggled in and out of chaos: some may call it whiplash, but I lied, it really is just mayhem and I think some people prefer to shudder at it rather than admit that there was some sort of perverse enjoyment to be had (sure, there is some violence that might be too much, but, well, too bad). It does help to have a pretty neat lead behind it all with Butler, who maneuvers vulnerability (past and current) and a general sense of charm that we get behind pretty quickly in the expanding-and-shrinking scenario that comes with people and surprises at every corner. He has a certain natural attitude that just clicks to what we are seeing without seeming like just being an impersonation of say, Steve McQueen. His demons are ones that we understand when it goes from a path of realization in, well, not turning away from their problems. The cast around him is fairly quirky in their machinations of mayhem (with a cat involved, naturally), whether that involves the coarse King or the delightful rat in the coming-and-going Smith or the late favorite in friendly neighborhood killer pair in Schreiber and D'Onofrio. There are plenty of little sequences to highlight within the ever-growing pulse of terror of someone who isn't exactly gripped in calm/normal reality to begin with, and I think the ending is a pretty apt one in laying out that being on the beach may not be all it looks to be in "peace". It basically is a movie close to the sights and sounds you might have found in old fashioned chase movies, one that might be better with multiple rewatches down the road, suffice to say. I just wish I liked it more, mostly because there is a fewling this could have gone even murkier, but I guess people would have gotten up in arms more (to say nothing of its one big shock). As a whole, if you want a slap-bang film that is reasonably engaged with its late 1990s setting, you might find something worth getting into here. It has enough of a rumble in its execution to make it probably worth a watch, squeamish or not.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.
Movie Night is taking a few days off, just for the record.

Foolishly, I forgot to detail my shortlist of stuff I forgot to review for August, so here it was: Frankenstein vs. Baragon, Gamera vs. Gyaos, 1941, Don Q, Son of Zorro / Mask of Zorro / Zorro, The Gay Blade, But I'm a Cheerleader, City Heat, The Black Swan.

August 30, 2024

Ishtar.

Review #2248: Ishtar.

Cast: 
Dustin Hoffman (Chuck Clarke), Warren Beatty (Lyle Rogers), Isabelle Adjani (Shirra Assel), Charles Grodin (Jim Harrison), Jack Weston (Marty Freed), Carol Kane (Carol), Tess Harper (Willa Rogers), Aharon Ipalé (Emir Yousef), Fred Melamed (the Caid of Assari), Fuad Hageb (Abdul), David Margulies (Mr. Clarke) and Rose Arrick (Mrs. Clarke) Written and Directed by Elaine May.

Review: 
"Well, oddly enough when I made this movie, Ronald Reagan was president and there was Iran-Contra, we were supporting Iran and Iraq. We put in Saddam. We had taken out the Shah. Khomeini was there. I remember looking at Ronald Reagan and thinking—I’m qualifying this, this was just an idea, I didn’t really believe it—I thought, he’s from Hollywood, he’s a really nice man. It’s possible the only movie he’s ever seen about the Middle East are the road movies with Hope and Crosby, and I thought I would make that movie....If all of the people who hate Ishtar had seen it, I would be a rich woman today."

To put it mildly, Ishtar landed like a smelly fish being thrown onto a wedding party with audiences at large. There's plenty to say about Elaine May beyond just saying this is (currently) her last film as a feature director. The Philadelphia native was the child of actors that had their own Yiddish theater company. Not surprisingly, she got into acting, which eventually led her to meeting Mike Nichols. The two collaborated with each other in improvisational comedy that led to them doing their own standup team that ran for a few years (resulting in Grammy Awards) before they went their own ways. After a handful of years in acting and theatre work, May became a director with A New Leaf in 1971. The Heartbreak Kid (1972) is arguably her most noted film, but Micky and Nicky (1976) endured enough trouble that she did not have her cut of the film shown to the public until after the film already died in theaters. So, a decade later, May was essentially given a chance to direct again because of her help in writing on Heaven Can Wait (1978) and Reds (1981), which each had Warren Beatty as star and director. So yes, Beatty would produce the film (believing that May never had a good producer behind her) to go along with starring alongside Hoffman, who happened to have the help of May in (uncredited) work on Tootsie (1982) and eventually went along with being in the film despite his misgivings about the script (specifically when the film shifts from New York to Morocco for "these guys who think they're Simon and Garfunkel"). While the movie was a flop, May has continued to write (such as the 1996 Nichols comedy The Birdcage) and occasionally act into her nineties.

Maybe it works better for those more familiar with road movies. The film is basically a riff on the seven Road to... films that featured Bing Crosby, Bob Hope & Dorothy Lamour from 1940 to 1962. Those were comedies that were more about gags (and the occasional song) than plot (which could have differing professions from film to film such as sailor playboys on an island or inept vaudevillians dealing with evil hypnotists). Of course, maybe I'm not as familiar with Hoffman or Beatty in films. Maybe it just was a bit too subtle for its time. Maybe, maybe, maybe, nah, this movie just wasn't for me. Honestly, I tried to give the movie a fair shake, but really it just wasn't that funny. It lumbers in the time between the start and actually getting to Ishtar with songs that totally supposed to be funny by being terrible (as written by Paul Williams, who you would remember from stuff such as A Star Is Born [1976]). But all I see is a movie that drones and drones until the only thing that matters by the end of its time in the sand and bland is being thankful you aren't stuck watching it further. You can try to mine humor all one wants in uncomfortable neurotic weirdos, you just have to *be funny* about it. Strangely, it reminded me of Spies Like Us (released two years earlier as its own homage to the Road films, complete with having Hope in a cameo), which also wasn't exactly great in, well, the comedy (of course, it didn't stop others from making their own Road homages, as evidenced by The Road to El Dorado [2000]). Hoffman and Beatty have mostly stuck with the film in terms of defending it (for the most part) with the former calling it "a B-minus, C-plus comedy". And there are people that have raised the film up as not being just a noted flop that probably did find something worthwhile in its comedy involving second-rate musicians that fulfill themselves in their craft. The attempts at showing the "creative process" must be how people who don't care for watching movies about making movies feel.

The chemistry of the trio just isn't there to inspire anything on the level beyond looking at the sand and the ideas of trying to say something about the politics around the people thinking about the Middle East that just seems middling. Adjani bumbles around in a silly getup (get it? short hair?) that benefits no one in actual presence, and the only funny one really is Grodin, because he always seems on point for understated amusement (or Weston, who is seldom seen). Even at 107 minutes, it just feels hollow and middle-ground, never actually getting a rise by the time it goes to what surely seemed funny for its climax of essentially saying, yes, you too can sing all you want and be a name if you happen to have leverage. As a whole, the negative buzz around the film didn't lend it many favors back then, and maybe there really will be a push a few more years down the line to really rehabilitate the movie as a hidden gem, but I am not one of those people. Encounter at your own curiosity of a film that is not nearly what you might think it is, for better or worse.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.
Next up: let's do a second chance for something that actually is good...Hudson Hawk.

March 21, 2022

Hester Street.

Review #1818: Hester Street.

Cast: 
Steven Keats (Jake), Carol Kane (Gitl), Mel Howard (Bernstein), Dorrie Kavanaugh (Mamie), Doris Roberts (Mrs. Kavarsky), and Lauren Friedman (Fanny) Written and Directed by Joan Micklin Silver.

Review: 
"I came of age for film, at a time when the sexism was pretty strong. And although I could get work as a Writer, I couldn’t get work as a Director at all. And I had the experience of watching young men who had made shorts as I had, prize winning shorts, as I had, moving on to directing films and I couldn’t do it. And, and my husband, Ray, was… became angry, and he said, “You know, maybe you can do it, maybe you can’t, but everybody should have a chance to try for the brass ring.”

Joan Micklin Silver was born in Omaha, Nebraska in in 1935 to a family of Russian Jewish immigrants. In that sense, it only seems fitting that her first film would be one like this. She had graduated from Sarah Lawrence College before moving to Cleveland with her husband to teach music and write for the next eleven years. She continued her writing when she moved to New York City in 1967, where she would write for The Village Voice. She soon wrote scripts for educational films and found her way into directing within that area, which resulted in three works, most notably with "The Immigrant Experience", a short about Polish immigrants. Silver would end up directing for until 2003 with a handful of theatrical features (seven) and television work, with this and Crossing Delancey (1988) being her highlights (with each touching upon Jewish identity). The movie is an adaptation of the 1896 novella Yekl: A Tale of the New York Ghetto by Abraham Cahan; he was born in Lithuania before immigrating to New York City at the age of 21 that was part of the exodus of Jewish peoples from Eastern and Southern Europe to the States (roughly 2.8 million), and he is mostly known for his work within Yiddish language newspapers. A 19th century tale about Jewish people trying to assimilate in a newly adopted country for the 20th century surely would attract studio attention...it did not. A first-time director, particularly a woman, was felt to be "another problem" that studios did not want to fund; making independent movies had changed from decade to decade, but that didn't mean things would be easy, especially with a film with a handful of dialogue communicated in Yiddish with substitute. The film was funded by Raphael Silver, a real estate developer who saw his wife's trouble with getting a studio to produce the film and decided to pull roughly over $300,000 together to do it, complete with filming in New York (Hester Street, while located in the Lower East Side of Manhattan, was not used for filming). Distribution struggles ended with a run on the festival circuit that turned into a fair audience hit. 

I'm sure you are familiar with films made as a passion project. Of course, certain movies made in the memory of others didn't have to deal with funding difficulties or being thought of as too "ethnic". For what Silver wanted to achieve in making a tale involving the clash of traditionalism versus assimilation, I would say that the movie is a fair success, one that doesn't serving as a judging ground for what kind of life seems best. With its black-and-white photography, one gets the feeling of watching an old photograph that seems aptly appropriate for the film, which utilizes limited settings to show the assimilation from each angle to useful effect, which naturally ends with one famed custom in the religion: A get (divorce), which is done tastefully. This would end up one of Kane's first shining roles, and it earned her an Academy Award nomination (losing to Louise Fletcher is not a shame). At any point, when she does finally arrive on screen, she makes the most of it with earthy patience. It doesn't require great monologues to see a performance built on observation and immense struggle for charm. Keats proves suitable as the other side of assimilation, in the classic hustling sense. There is a man in there, it just happens to have a bit of ooze for a few amusing moments when it comes to seeing just what one would do to be thought of as something else besides what they are, whether that involves cheating on women or trying to change a name. Howard patiently makes his mark in dutiful patience, while Kavanaugh pairs well with Keats. Roberts proves sound with careful charm that serves as a helping hand to Kane. The movie does fair in showing a way of life in its drama without hesitation or melodrama that makes a useful 90-minute curiosity. For the independent circuit, this is a movie that I would recommend for what Silver managed to do with a tale that will prove rewarding in interest for its audience without compromises.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
Next Time: The Life and Times of Rosie the Riveter (1980).

June 19, 2020

Dog Day Afternoon.

Review #1450: Dog Day Afternoon.

Cast: 
Al Pacino (Sonny Wortzik), John Cazale (Salvatore "Sal" Naturale), Charles Durning (Sergeant Eugene Moretti), James Broderick (Agent Sheldon), Lance Henriksen (Agent Murphy), Chris Sarandon (Leon Shermer), Penelope Allen (Sylvia), Sully Boyar (Mulvaney), Susan Peretz (Angela Wortzik), and Carol Kane (Jenny) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men, #036 - Network, #404 - The Anderson Tapes, #1065 - Deathtrap, and #1446 - Murder on the Orient Express)

Review: 
"I don't think of myself as anything but an actor struggling to find the next role and when I do get the role to try and see if I can find any way into it."

"While the goal of all movies is to entertain, the kind of film is which I believe goes one step further. It compels the spectator to examine one facet or another of his own conscience. It stimulates thought and sets the mental juices flowing."

How can one talk about esteemed method actors and not think about Al Pacino? Although Pacino had ambitions of baseball as a teenager, he soon shifted focus to acting, for which he would have to take modest-paying jobs to help finance study, with one job being a mailroom employee for the magazine Commentary. He acted in small plays in New York, but he wasn't accepted into the Actors Studio when applying as a teen (he would attend the HB Studio for four years until being accepted into the Actors Studio). He cited Lee Strasberg and the Studio as a key effect on his future career in putting all of his focus into acting, and the two would even appear in films together in later years (most notably with The Godfather Part II). He soon shifted to stage work (which he has continued to make on-and-off star appearances), performing for the first time in 1967, with his debut in Broadway coming two years later. That same year, he also made his first appearance in film with Me, Natalie. The 1970s proved to be a tremendous decade for Pacino, starting with notice in The Panic in Needle Park (1971), and it helped him get attention for his next role: The Godfather (1972), for which he was picked over prominent other choices. One of the eight films in the decade Pacino did was Serpico (1973), which he did with Lumet to tremendous success (including an Academy Award nomination, which he received four other times in the decade). Lumet was known for his distinct prolific work over a lengthy career in films (over 40 in a half century starting with 12 Angry Men) and television (primarily doing work in television in the fifties), noted for their social realism and naturalism while mostly set in New York (where he grew up after being born in Philadelphia) that served him well as someone labeled an "actor's director".

The film is very loosely based on real-life events that occurred on August 22, 1972, where failed bank robbers John Wojtowicz and Salvatore Naturale held nine bank employees hostage for 14 hours in attempts to take money for an sex change operation for the former's lover, which resulted in one death and 20 years for Wojtowicz. The exploits of the robbery were covered in an article ("The Boys in the Bank" by P. F. Kluge) for Life magazine, and while writer Frank Pierson wanted to interview Wojtowicz personally in prison, an agreement couldn't be reached about how much to pay for the story. Wojtowicz would later state that only 30% of the film was accurate, although he did find that Pacino and Sarandon were captured accurately (the actual amount robbed was over 37 thousand in cash and over 175 thousand in traveler's checks, and this doesn't even count the allegations from anonymous sources that it was actually organized by a Mafia family). For an biographical film (of sorts), it is interesting to note the improvisations done through the dialogue at times (which keep with the structure of Pierson's screenplay), since Lumet encouraged the actors to show spontaneity when it came to rehearsals (a hallmark of his when it came to establishing trust with his actors) that would help in making lines come out naturally (the famed Attica! line was improvised, for example).

One always seems to feel on the edge when it comes to a film like this, where you can feel every little moment of tension and furor that is headlined by a tremendous performance from Pacino. He molds himself into a frantic pace in a tour-de-force achievement of wired hysteria that we cannot take our eyes of, where our view of him through the film and the people that see him through their television or right in front of their eyes seem to muddle each other into something worth pondering about. The 1970s were certainly a divergent time for America, particularly in light of what people saw on their television screens or in the streets, and seeing someone holding a bank hostage isn't too different. Even now the film proves relevant because of the nature of fame (or infamy) in the eyes of a curious audience looking for some sort of person to relate to or stand with (regardless of how one feels about glorifying/boosting certain actions) in social media. The others prove just as well in following along on a natural tense pace, such as Cazale (who did over a decade of work in the theater before making his first of five film appearances in The Godfather) and his well-placed subtlety as the lead man to a situation that gets worse and worse by the minute. Durning proves resilient with growing tension through some bluster that takes a good chunk of the first half more so than the second for effect. Broderick and Henriksen fill the screen nicely, while Sarandon delivers well in evoking curiosity and humanity for the second half of the film, particularly through the phone call sequence with Pacino. When the film opens itself up in tension and details, we care to see where it all may lea to without too much judgement or impatience. On the whole, while it may prove a bit too much to hold for all of its 125 minute run-time, this is a film worth checking out to see the raw spirit of the times play out in fascinating detail from Pacino, who makes for a frantic yet always interesting presence worth viewing to the bitter end.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

November 4, 2017

Annie Hall.


Review #1005: Annie Hall.

Cast: 
Woody Allen (Alvy "Max" Singer), Diane Keaton (Annie Hall), Tony Roberts (Rob), Carol Kane (Allison Portchnik), Paul Simon (Tony Lacey), Janet Margolin (Robin), Shelley Duvall (Pam), Christopher Walken (Duane Hall), Colleen Dewhurst (Mrs. Hall), and Donald Symington (Mr. Hall) Directed by Woody Allen.

Review: 
Let's get this out of the way, the film was the winner of four Academy Awards: Best Picture, Director (Woody Allen), Actress (Keaton) and Original Screenplay (Allen and Marshall Brickman) Whether one finds the film to be deserving of its accolades or not, it's evident to see the amount of love the film received (and still receives) from audiences. For me, the turnout was almost exactly what I thought it would be: it was a good movie, but I didn't exactly find it to be anything too greatly special. I can at least appreciate it during its amusing moments. I will state that it does have some interesting techniques (such as split-screen), and it definitely is a film worth watching at least once, whether one is a fan of Allen or not (I fall into the category of "un-experienced"). The highlight of the movie turns out to be Keaton and her performance, mainly because of how charming and effective she proves herself to be, like when she sings, and she has interesting chemistry with Allen at times, which can be amusing.

It's a bit hard for me to say my thoughts on Allen's performance in the film, seeing how he also wrote and directed the film as well. On the one hand, the film is capably directed and fairly constructed. On the other hand, his character (full of neurosis and eccentric quirks) can prove grating at times, particularly if you don't have patience. I just couldn't get into (or care) about this character and his characteristics, but at least I can say that the basic story about love and memory is interesting enough that he doesn't completely make this insufferable. Others may find him or the film easier to relate to, but I can't really embrace what the film goes for, like how a Texan can't simply just be a fan of things from New York (or vice versa). This is likely a film that would work best on a second (or third) watch, but I can't really bring myself to do that as much as I probably would do for other films. That's not to say that it is unwatchable, it's just not something I think I'll find myself wanting to look over again and again (though if you do find yourself doing that, I don't blame you). Roberts is fairly interesting, and the rest of the cast (including one scene appearances from Duvall and Walken) serve their purpose well, with one notable cameo from Marshall McLuhan being somewhat amusing. By the time the film ends, there is some sort of satisfaction in having seen how the film plays itself out through its 93 minute run-time and how it works pretty well as a romantic comedy that isn't too boring or too sappy. Simply put, this is a film that I expected to be just fine, and I got what I wanted, for the most part. Take the film for what it is, and you'll probably get something out of it.

If you didn't already know, my Houston Astros won the World Series a few days ago. As a native Texan, it is a joy to say those words at long last. This was a great (if not stressful) World Series that had two great teams that pushed the boundaries of sanity in terms of fun. In the end, it was all worth it, and I finally get to see the World Series title come to Texas.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

August 31, 2012

Movie Night: The Princess Bride.

Review #232: The Princess Bride.

Cast
Cary Elwes (Westly), Robin Wright (Princess Buttercup), Mandy Patinkin (Inigo Montoya), Chris Sarandon (Prince Humperdinck), André the Giant (Fezzik), Christopher Guest (Count Tyrone Rugen), Peter Falk (The Grandfather/Narrator), Fred Savage (The Grandson), Wallace Shawn (Vizzini), Billy Crystal (Miracle Max), Carol Kane (Valerie), and Peter Cook (The Impressive Clergyman) Directed by Rob Reiner (This Is Spinal Tap - #108)

Review
To begin with, I'd like to say a few words: My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die. The whole cast and their characters (even the short ones) are memorable to the very end. It's been said before by others, and I'll say it here, this film is funny. But it isn't one of those films that simply just have good funny lines and just that, it is a combination of adventure, romance, and comedy which works out well for everyone. It is fitting that the person who wrote the screenplay also wrote the book that this is adapted from, which keeps the films roots close together (Kind of like what happened with Holes) 25 years after this film's original release it still leaves an impressive mark that will last forever. But of course that might be inconceivable for some. As you wish, everyone.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

November 30, 2011

Movie Night: Scrooged.

Review #075: Scrooged.

Cast
Bill Murray (Francis Xavier "Frank" Cross), Karen Allen (Claire Phillips), John Forsythe (Lew Hayward), John Glover (Brice Cummings), Alfre Woodard (Grace Cooley), Bobcat Goldthwait (Eliot Loudermilk), David Johansen (the Ghost of Christmas Past), Carol Kane (the Ghost of Christmas Present), Robert Mitchum (Preston Rhinelander), Nicholas Phillips (Calvin Cooley), and Michael J. Pollard (Herman) Directed by Richard Donner.

Review
This film is a humorous take on the classic Charles Dickens tale, A Christmas Carol. It is a decent flick that makes sure that it doesn't do bad in its job. Murray does a good preformance. This film isn't exactly a good film in the sense that it doesn't really do much other then what it's supposed to do (It decides to pick this theme rather then another), but it at least tried to be entertaining, and while it may not have been as funny as it could've been, it at least tried.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.