Manhunter.

Review #1713: Manhunter.

Cast: 

William Petersen (Will Graham), Kim Greist (Molly Graham), Joan Allen (Reba McClane), Brian Cox (Dr. Hannibal Lecktor), Dennis Farina (Jack Crawford), Tom Noonan (Francis Dollarhyde), Stephen Lang (Freddy Lounds), David Seaman (Kevin Graham), Benjamin Hendrickson (Dr. Frederick Chilton), Michael Talbott (Geehan), and Dan Butler (Jimmy Price) Written and Directed by Michael Mann (#1531 - Ali and #1631 - The Last of the Mohicans)

Review: 

It is odd to think that this film has only just reached its 35th anniversary today. The movie is an adaptation of Red Dragon, which was written by Thomas Harris in 1981 as his second novel (Black Sunday (1975) was his first, and that book was turned into a film two years later). He took a good deal of research into the novel that meant classes with the FBI Behavioral Science Unit in Quantico, Virginia. Stephen King, when asked about the book, gave notice to Harris for his "clean eye for prose and his impeccable choice of detail" alongside the great deal of suspense packed into the narrative. Of course, when one thinks of a producer to bring something big into theaters, you probably think of Dino De Laurentiis (and his wife Martha, who both would own the rights to the character of Lecter on film). Since he had experienced failure with Year of the Dragon (1985), this somehow meant that the title of this movie had to be Manhunter (no points as to who came up with adding a K to Lector's name). Of course, we all know what came to follow after the release of the book and the film adaptation. Harris wrote a second book involving Hannibal Lecter with The Silence of the Lambs in 1988 that was turned into a film three years later to near unanimous praise (featuring Anthony Hopkins as Lector over Cox); amusingly enough, the De Laurentiis couple allowed Orion Pictures to produce the film without their involvement, and obviously they were eager to find a way to see a new novel by Harris to adapt. One sequel book/film adaptation later, a second adaptation of Red Dragon followed in 2002 (with the De Laurentiis couple back as producers again, in probably one of the most befuddling distinctions ever in being behind two adaptations of the same book), which was directed by Brett Ratner with Edward Norton as Graham and Hopkins as Lector one more time.

Oddly enough, I am reminded of Mann's other most noted work in the decade with the television show Miami Vice, which he served as executive producer (mostly with the color palate, which had distinct touches in the early years) Granted, Manhunter is generally more consistent, but that detail of style seems apparent when talking about the film when it is paired with the intensity of the grim pursuit for a solid thriller. Undeniably, there is a good amount of folks that will encounter this after seeing the more famous Lector movie, and the differences between the two might surprise folks. It eschews attempts at going for levels of squeamishness that keep the manhunt at the forefront that makes one at least have some sort of shiver at what it takes to try and come back into getting into the the mindset of thinking like a killer with a distinct sense of voyeurism that keeps one on their toes. It makes sense to have Petersen there as your lead if only because one knows he already excelled with stuff like To Live and Die in L.A. (1985), which Mann saw footage of and liked enough to cast Petersen (he also had a small role in Mann's debut film Thief in 1981); as a whole, he proves quite curious, whether that means he is shown talking to home movies in pursuit of the mind or when trying to justify why he does the things he does.  It should be noted that Farina was a police officer for the Chicago Police Department for eighteen years before a chance role as a police consultant for Thief (1981) helped get him into moonlighting for Chicago-based movies and shows; incidentally, he would star in Crime Story (1986-88, which Mann served as executive producer and occasional writer/director) a month after this film premiered in theaters. Farina seems exactly at home here with solid procedural material, wrapped with tough energy that makes one at least wonder why they didn't keep him over Scott Glenn when it came time for the aforementioned next film. Greist has a few moments here and there with Petersen that go over okay, while Allen eventually gets to be paired with Noonan that ends up quite cursory. This was actually one of Lang's earliest roles, and while he may not have much to do besides play a pest, he does alright with generating a smarmy chuckle to what needs to happen. Cox is quite restrained here, but it makes sense for what happens here for a movie adaptation focused on the hunt of a different killer anyway. Hopkins would have more "meat" to chew on a few years later, but Cox sets his own stage nicely enough with a calm ooze. One doesn't need to really see him out of those bars to know that there is something dark lurking within a supposedly pathetic state. Besides, one knows the power that comes in making a fearful beast. He proves the highlight of the film, and he doesn't ever show up until nearly an hour in for a two-hour movie. Honestly, while it may be a bit too glossy for its own good at certain times, one can't say that it is a forgettable experience. It manages to keep you roped in to what is going to happen next with its pursuit with a fairly game cast and workable tension that still proves useful even after 35 years as a solid work from Mann.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Saving Private Ryan.

Review #1520: Saving Private Ryan.

Cast: 
Tom Hanks (Captain John H. Miller), Edward Burns (Private Richard Reiben), Matt Damon (Private James Francis Ryan), Tom Sizemore (Sergeant Mike Horvath), Jeremy Davies (Corporal Timothy Upham), Vin Diesel (Private Adrian Caparzo), Adam Goldberg (Private Stanley Mellish), Barry Pepper (Private Daniel Jackson), Giovanni Ribisi (Medic Irwin Wade), Ted Danson (Captain Fred Hamill), Paul Giamatti (Sergeant William Hill), Dennis Farina (Lieutenant Colonel Walter Anderson), Joerg Stadler (Steamboat Willie), Max Martini (Corporal Henderson), and Nathan Fillion (Private James Frederick Ryan) 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, #1305 - Catch Me If You Can, and #1478 - The Color Purple)

Review: 
"What Steven wanted to do from the get-go was to use all of his magic, and all of the tools that existed in cinema as of 1997, and make a war movie that was going to break every one of the tropes, visually and cinematically, that all war movies had"

The 1990s were an interesting time for films, with Steven Spielberg being a significant contributor to that distinction through six films, which primarily resulted in audience attention, a studio that he helped to establish in DreamWorks Pictures, and three Academy Awards. Within those films are a mix of both adventure and historical drama, although this would be his first epic war film since Empire of the Sun (1987). The genesis for the script by Robert Rodat came from inspiration over the Niland brothers while reading Stephen Ambrose's book about D-Day (Ambrose's other book in Band of Brothers would later be turned into a miniseries by Spielberg and Hanks). There were four brothers in the family that served in World War II, with three of them fighting in the Normandy campaign. The surviving brother was believed to be the only Niland left, and he was shipped back to the United States to complete his service (however his oldest brother, a member of the Army Air Forces captured in a POW camp, was eventually liberated before the end of the war). The script appealed to Spielberg and his interest in the war, which he once described as "the most significant event of the last 100 years", one in which his father had served in as a member of the Army Air Corps, with the younger Spielberg being fascinated with the war due to his father's stories and recollections and what was depicted of it on American television; some of his early short films were combat ones inspired by his father. It shouldn't be surprising that the actors seem up to what is required in depicting combat with respect, since the main stars all endured a mini-session of boot camp led by Marine Dale Dye, who you might hear about as a trainer for other military-themed films.

The film opens and ends at the same place that seems interesting for an epic war film: the Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial, with Harrison Young as our first focus as a certain veteran here to pay his respects. I found these sequences to be fairly well-done in setting the film on pace for the thought that occurs after war when it comes to sacrifice in the horrors of war. And then of course there is the second sequence of the film, likely one of the best ever put to film that involves the landing on Omaha Beach in Normandy, France, with over a thousand extras used within a recreation of the beach shot in Ireland. There is nothing quite like it in such devastating power as it moves across the killing field with tactile precision that makes for a harrowing experience for its viewers (who can feel every little moment of spilled seasickness and various other things) to set in and feel immediately without pretense. Soldiers being taken down before they hit the sand is still a striking image to dwell on. It has been a point of debate over the idea of said battle being the "peak" moment of the film. To me, that's pretty ridiculous, because that seems to imply that the rest of the film isn't as maintained in heightened fear or well-executed in discipline. If the D-Day sequence was at the end, would we being saying the same thing? Of course I also don't find the film drowns in maudlin nature unlike others - it grips me and keeps that grip firm and steady. I found that the film worked just as well in building its conflict within its mission that makes the inevitable fates all the more successful. One doesn't bat an eye much at the 169 minute run-time because of how well-involved it is when relaying the sacrifices made in the name of war. The film does its best work in depicting the fears and instincts that made up the men to fight without becoming a caricature, the absolute best in uncompromising epics for what Spielberg wanted to do.

But enough about details, there has to be a cast to go with it. Hanks proves quite resilient in displaying the humane side of persisting onward with what he must do regardless of the reasons or consequences, one who maintains himself with range that stands on his own terms as a useful lead to follow without becoming swept up in platitudes. Damon, showing himself past the halfway point does well with role filled in reluctance and care apart from the main group that does what is needed. Burns (in his first role that he also did not direct/write/produce, as he debuted with The Brothers McMullen three years prior) and Sizemore both do well with simmering intensity that carry the film in moving with the tides of weariness that doesn't seem wavering. Davies works well with unassuming quiver that we observe in the contrast between combat in translation and non-combat in translation a different way that sells that harrowing last shot of him worth it. Another filmmaker featured in this film Diesel, who had previously made two low-budget films of his own (as writer, director, producer, and star), and it was his short in Strays (1997) that impressed Spielberg to wedge his way into this film, and Diesel makes the most of it with some of the hard-edged charisma that would later make him a star. The others that are peppered through the film work handily in keeping the candor efficient from its journey across the fields of war with care, whether that involves folks like Goldberg or smaller turns for Danson and Giamatti. As a film that set itself on garnering more realism from what had come from war films in the previous decades (which featured films such as The Longest Day), Saving Private Ryan packs enough a wallop in its initial setup of harrowing bloodshed to make its resulting story a stirring experience that leaves its audience something it cannot forget about as just entertainment when it ends.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

You Kill Me.

Review #1269: You Kill Me.

Cast: 
Ben Kingsley (Frank Falenczyk), Téa Leoni (Laurel Pearson), Luke Wilson (Tom), Dennis Farina (Edward O'Leary), Philip Baker Hall (Roman Krzeminski), Bill Pullman (Dave), Marcus Thomas (Stef Krzeminski), and Jayne Eastwood (Kathleen Fitzgerald) Directed by John Dahl.

Review: 
One wonders what makes someone look up a film like this. This is an indie film, made on a budget of $4 million. It happens to be the writing work of Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, , who are likely more known for their work on The Chronicles of Narnia film series along with certain Marvel films such as Avengers: Endgame (2019) while having a cast-list that seems ripe for a few laughs. So what's the holdup in actually delivering laughs? The resulting film is one that is dry in most of the places that matter most, a movie too mild to actually work as either a crime or comedy film for its 93 minute run-time, especially one about a hit-man who undergoes Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and works at a mortuary. One really can't say its the fault of the actors, who sit there and say these milquetoast lines that don't impact as much as they should, as if eccentricity was nowhere to be found. It even finds time to be bland when it tries its hand at romantic moments (with a 23 year age difference, no less) between Kingsley and Leoni that falls down the stairs and never gets up. I feel like I really should care about an alcoholic hitman trying to adjust to AA meetings, and Kingsley seems game to make for deadpan fun, but it seems more like deadpan sleepwalking, which could also ring reluctantly true for Leoni as well. Less can be given for the rest of its cast, an utterly disappointing thing to say that starts with Wilson and ends with a lack of any true mob presence, where Farina and Hall can't even chew scenery properly. At least Pullman is fun to stick around with for a few minutes around and around. The film certainly has its own kind look it wants to go with, even if it sometimes seem a bit fake (such as its snow or its lone gun battle) to really make me think I'm watching a movie. It never sells its motivation (if it has one) to drive things along, slowing down in the middle and sticking in neutral for its climax, which ends about as convincingly as it began - with a great big meh. An imaginary point could also be subtracted for spending far more time in San Francisco than Buffalo than needed (sorry, let me fix that, a film set there but filmed mostly in Canada with occasional shots elsewhere). Is this a joke? Am I being pranked by a film that sticks itself in mud after taking too much of its own medicine, or does one need to pick more obvious comedy? In this case, it is preferable to pick something else. A walk in the park at night might give you more danger, but you surely will have more to talk about than if you sat through this average one.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: What Happens in Vegas.

Review #685: What Happens in Vegas.

Cast
Ashton Kutcher (Jack Fuller), Cameron Diaz (Joy MacNally), Rob Corddry (Hater Lewis), Lake Bell (Tipper Saxson), Dennis Farina (Richard Banger), Queen Latifah (Dr. Twitchell), and Dennis Miller (Judge Whopper) Directed by Tom Vaughan.

Review
Oh look, today's December 30th, the day before New Year's Eve. In honor of that, I decided to watch a movie that I had watched when I was young...by which I mean when I was 14. Yes, I remember watching this way back before this show was even created, because the movie was loaned to us by a friend. I watched it once, and then we loaned it back to them. The only thing I can remember from the movie was that Dennis Farina was in it, who I loved watching on Law and Order, which was a thing I used to watch a little, or maybe because I was bored. Either way, I remember him and his distinctive voice and not remember the plot. So...yeah, what about this movie? Meh. Looking at my old house on Google Maps would've been a better revisiting of my past than this. This is at best a boring movie filled with characters who are as stale as waffles somewhere on your couch that decided to get married to the scissors also lost in the couch. Actually, it would be more beneficial for me to clean my couch and do winter homework than to watch this movie, or to try my fedora over and over again. The main problem with the movie is that it's just not funny, being more tedious than endearing. Maybe it's just me, but going to Las Vegas after being fired (by your dad, no less) is a bad idea. Then again, nicknaming one of your characters "Hater" is also a terrible idea. It's pretty sad when I can't make a Dennis Miller joke because I honestly had never heard of Miller prior to this movie and probably won't mention him again. The characters do change, but it's too little too late by that point as I realize I wasted my time and realized that I had a better time feeding my dog while on a break from this movie. Goldie is such a nice dog, though. Nicer than this movie.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Get Shorty.

Review #005: Get Shorty.

Cast
John Travolta (Chili Palmer), Gene Hackman (Harry Zimm), Rene Russo (Karen Flores), Danny DeVito (Martin Weir), Dennis Farina (Ray "Bones" Barbone), Bette Midler (Doris Saffrin), Delroy Lindo (Bo Catlett), and James Gandolfini (Bear) Directed by Barry Sonnenfeld.

Review
This film is smart, engaging, interesting, useful, and more. The characters are interesting, with Travolta and DeVito being the best standouts, as the film also has a comedic touch to it, making it feel excellent in many ways. It feels like one of those classics from the old classic times that make you feel right at home, with each scene do a great job in style. Believe or not, there was a sequel to this, but I have not watched it. It took 512 reviews and over three years, but I finally got to the sequel.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.