My Summer Story.

Review #1854: My Summer Story.

Cast: 

Charles Grodin (Mr. Parker, the Old Man), Mary Steenburgen (Mrs. Parker), Kieran Culkin (Ralphie Parker), Christian Culkin (Randy Parker), Whit Hertford ("Lug"), Chris Owen ("Scut" Farkus), Geoffrey Wigdor (Flick), David Zahorsky (Schwartz), Tedde Moore (Miss Shields), T.J. McInturff (Grover Dill), Glenn Shadix (Leopold Doppler, Manager of the Orpheum Theater), and Roy Brocksmith (Mr. Winchell, The Assessor) Directed by Bob Clark (#020 - A Christmas Story, #679 - Black Christmas, #1055 - Porky's)

Review: 

A Christmas Story (1983) was a loose working of two Jean Shepherd works: his 1966 book In God We Trust: All Others Pay Cash and his 1971 book Wanda Hickey's Night of Golden Memories And Other Disasters. Shepherd, along with Bob Clark and Leigh Brown (Shepherd's wife), wrote the screenplay for the movie. You might not know that Shepherd was the best man to serve as narrator, since the screenplay was based on a series of monologues that he had done on the radio (his broadcasts on the station WOR made him quite popular); he was known for his "interesting" manner of telling tales about his life that balanced the line of fact and fiction while saying that his work was "anti-sentimental". Shepherd had been born in Chicago, Illinois before being raised in Indiana (East Chicago along with Hammond, where he graduated). Clark, inspired by hearing one of Shepherd's stories being told to him on the radio, spent twelve years trying to make the movie, and a couple of Shepherd works had reached television (with him as narrator) before and after the release of this film, most notably with The Great American Fourth of July and Other Disasters (1982), a TV work with Matt Dillon as "Ralphie". The movie lessened the acid edge of the Shepherd stories, which he had envisioned as "Dickens’s Christmas Carol as retold by Scrooge.” At any rate, the moderate success of the film on release led to a plethora of television channels showing the movie on Christmas not long after it was released, and the popularity on the television circuit (rightfully) continues to this day. Shepherd, seeing the returns made from its showings on television, was inspired to try and make another movie based on his stories. Of course, it is also possible that Clark wanted to make a sure winner, since Clark directed these films after the release of A Christmas Story: Rhinestone (1984), Turk 182 (1985), From the Hip (1987), and Loose Cannons (1990). Somehow, idiotically, the movie was released as It Runs in the Family to tremendous empty returns. It was only after the movie had vanished from theaters that it was retitled My Summer Story, which is what you will see on video releases.

Of course, in waiting eleven years to make a movie with the same director and writing crew (along with being shot primarily in Cleveland), the main cast was entirely replaced. Oh, and now one is watching a series of vignettes that seem like an anthology rather than the offbeat material presented in the original, one that saw a handful of imagined scenes, such as our lead imagining himself as a hero stopping bandits from taking down his family (dressed up in frontier garb) with his imagined gun. So, instead of a movie where a kid's desire for a Red Ryder BB Gun that happens to feature little side stories in the spirit of Christmas, now one has a movie with small plots for the main family that has a central story of...super-duper tops along with a neighbor with hillbillies (or whatever you would call them). Of course, neither is really about the acquisition of an item as it is more about capturing the spirit of a time long ago told in engaging vision; Shepherd may think his stuff was anti-sentimental, but the heart of what made that movie work was how one confronts their childhood memories in its positives and negatives without being trapped by them. In other words: it was the experiences that stuck with one rather than some toy. Somehow, the movie just doesn't come together, proving that having the same crew behind a classic does not mean the next movie together will work out just the same. Simply put, putting a bunch of new faces will not make a winner when they can't quite live up to mildly interesting expectations that are flattened. Look, we all know that A Christmas Story can raise a distinct discussion when it comes to just how funny it actually is (spoiler: it is funny, no shit), but no one will really have that kind of discussion with My Summer Story, since it doesn't even reach half of the heights of amusement that the previous film had. Shepherd once stated that "The reality of what we really are is oftentimes found in the small snips way down at the bottom of things.” My Summer Story is basically the flattened expectations of what we thought summer was going to be...with life being like a series of ties. Who the hell would want that kind of movie? If Shepherd didn't care for the lightened touch of the original film, why go back with the original crew? And if he was fine with what was done before, why make a movie that seems thoroughly pale in spirit to the original?

It was a tough task to replace Peter Billingsley as the lead from the original, since he managed to cultivate an interesting lead presence in youthful charm. Culkin...doesn't really have that charm. One simply feels like they are watching a television product rather than something that reaches the level of film in conviction, which he just can't capture, and being paired with his brother doesn't lead to even a fraction of the brotherly amusement seen in the previous movie. I'm told that Grodin was actually a pretty funny actor with timing like no other in sardonic charm, even if his film choices were all over the place, ranging from The Heartbreak Kid (1972) to Beethoven (1992). Here, replacing Darren McGavin from the original, he just doesn't have what it takes to really capture the role from before, seeming more of an agitated father figure than the hardboiled tender role of the original. It probably doesn't help that he has an actual foil to deal with in the "Bumpus Family", which proves the case that you sometimes don't need to see something. Melinda Dillon held the original film pretty well in her timing that counteracted McGavin that practically resonated together with no effort needed. Steenbergen has the best timing of the main group here and is thus the only one to result in general charm, probably because her character arc is the most bewildering (read: interesting) of anyone in the movie, involving a bunch of gravy boats and irritated collectors, which she handles with semblances of laughs. The movie might prove fine for those who want something really average, since the technical aspects of its look and feel does at the very least seem adequate to anybody with the tiniest curiosity for the movie or to just spend 85 minutes. As a whole, the movie just seems lost in trying to capture the (ordinary) magic that had been seen a decade prior, one that was made too late to really have an impact while also serving as the strange cousin of future attempts at trying to cash in on the original movie that included a musical, a direct-to-video sequel, and even a live show. Sometimes the best thing to do is to just walk away and satisfy a different curiosity.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Demolition Man.

Review #1504: Demolition Man.

Cast: 
Sylvester Stallone (Sergeant John Spartan), Wesley Snipes (Simon Phoenix), Sandra Bullock (Lieutenant Lenina Huxley), Nigel Hawthorne (Doctor Raymond Cocteau), Benjamin Bratt (Officer Alfredo Garcia), Denis Leary (Edgar Friendly), Bill Cobbs (Zachary Lamb), Bob Gunton (Chief George Earle), and Glenn Shadix (Associate Bob) Directed by Marco Brambilla.

Review: 
"I'm not handsome in the classical sense. The eyes droop, the mouth is crooked, the teeth aren't straight, the voice sounds like a Mafioso pallbearer, but somehow it all works."

There is a strange undeniable appeal to the films of Sylvester Stallone, one must admit. No matter how good or bad the material is (star or director/writer), there is a certain appeal to how he handles himself that has made him an interesting presence in film for over four decades, with Rocky (1976) and First Blood (1982) proving to be highlights that hold iconic status that stand well for themselves despite varying quality of further sequels. To accompany him as the second lead is Wesley Snipes, who had first expressed an interest in theatre and dance before being discovered for acting, which led to his debut in Wildcats (1986) and an eventual breakthrough in Major League (1989). The genesis of the film came from first-time writer Peter M. Lenkov, who took inspiration from the Lethal Weapon films along with an interest in cryogenics to make a spec script that was originally just a straight action film pitch. Several other writers would come in to do re-writes (with three credited in Lenkov, Robert Reneau, and Daniel Waters, as the former two did the story and the screenplay alongside Waters), while others such as Fred Dekker did un-credited re-writes (such as suggesting the opening scene in the past); Waters (writer of the considerably inferior satire Heathers) worked a span of roughly over two weeks to shift it from straight-action to one with attempt at humor, and Brambilla joined in helping with the script after being brought in as director, which would be his first directorial effort in film after a career spent doing television commercials (although this is his only major production, he is generally known for his video art installations).

It figures that a film involving peace without expression could prove so amusing. We aren't exactly living in a society like the one presented in the film, but there sure are a few itching similarities, particularly when it comes to the way we treat expression and government overreach (thankfully we have not done something as drastic and possibly ill-advised as trying to defund the police-I mean reduce them to not deal with violent crime), although at least spicy foods being banned is something I can live with. How could I resist such a strange little action film like this? It might prove as one of the best dumbest films one could ever watch, making a spectacle of itself within the confines of interesting action films from the era that work far better than it should because of its cast and execution. Stallone seems quite at home within the confines of a macho fish-out-of-water hero that rises above what might have been a leaded block of wood with a lesser actor (after all, Steven Seagal was originally thought of for the role) with a decent sense of timing and energy that one could expect from him. Snipes proves just as worthy as the other side of the coin, confident in madcap anarchy that is given time to let himself out of control with zippy lines. Bullock proves worthy in a early prominent role that lends a bit of cheeriness as the nostalgia-struck counterpart to Stallone that lends a hand for a few amusing moments. Hawthorne is adequate as the carefully-controlled peace man for the film while Leary proves exactly what one could expect of a cynic with the world on his mind. It has a decent pace of 115 minute that balances a wry sense of the future with some fun action moments that never seems dated or out-of-step with delivering entertainment worthy of curiosity as a feature of the time for another time.

Overall, I give it 8 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.

Movie Night: The Nightmare Before Christmas.

Review #391: The Nightmare Before Christmas.

Cast
Chris Sarandon (Jack Skellington), Danny Elfman (Barrel, and the singing voice of Jack Skellington), Catherine O'Hara (Sally, Shock), William Hickey (Doctor Finklestein), Glenn Shadix (Mayor of Halloween Town), Ken Page (Oogie Boogie), Ed Ivory (Santa Claus), and Paul Reubens (Lock) Directed by Henry Selick (#189 - Coraline)

Review
It's a Tim Burton film without Tim Burton, and yet it manages to be a Halloween and a a Christmas film, along with creating a imaginative world that is also a good enough musical. It is original enough to overcome any "doubts" over a film such as this. Sarandon and Elfman do good, and after a while, the actor and singer combine to just be one single character, and it is excellent. O'Hara does good as well acting, and she is a good pair with Sarandon, which makes for a stronger film. The songs work well, and it helps that animation is top notch, which makes a dynamic film. That, and Oogie Boogie is a good, if not...awesome character. Delectably evil, and yet still with a aura of coolness, which contributes to the dark, but somewhat cheerful tone. It's a film that knows what it wants to do, and it fulfills it to the easiest extent, brilliantly and effectively. Countdown to 400 Reviews: 10, 9...

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Beetlejuice.

Review #107: Beetlejuice.

Cast
Michael Keaton (Betelgeuse), Alec Baldwin (Adam Maitland), Geena Davis (Barbara Maitland), Winona Ryder (Lydia Deetz), Catherine O'Hara (Delia Deetz), Jeffrey Jones (Charles Deetz), Annie McEnroe (Jane Butterfield), Glenn Shadix (Otho), Sylvia Sidney (Juno), Robert Goulet (Maxie Dean), Maree Cheatham (Sarah Dean), Dick Cavett (Bernard), and Susan Kellermann (Grace) Directed by Tim Burton (#040 - Batman )

Review
The film razzles and dazzles with an interesting story that evolves into a fest of effects and comedy, yet still making the film enjoyable. It's fun to watch anytime, especially in the nighttime. Keaton and Ryder stand out with their acting, with Keaton playing Beetlejuice so crazy and so good. Ryder plays the strange and Gothic Lydia (better then other goth girls in other films) who is impressive in this role (doing more roles in later life). The film is likeable and it makes you watch, not being a bore once. This will always be a classic for years and years to come...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.