Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga.

Review #2216: Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga. 

Cast: 

Anya Taylor-Joy (Furiosa; Alyla Browne as young Furiosa), Chris Hemsworth (Dementus), Tom Burke (Praetorian Jack), Lachy Hulme (Immortan Joe), Nathan Jones (Rictus Erectus), Josh Helman (Scrotus), John Howard (The People Eater), Angus Sampson (The Organic Mechanic), and Charlee Fraser (Mary Jo Bassa) Directed by George Miller (#380 - Mad Max, #392 - Happy Feet, #493 - The Witches of Eastwick, #707 - Mad Max 2, #781 - Mad Max: Fury Road, #2026 - Twilight Zone: The Movie, #2215 - Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome)

Review: 

It seemed only yesterday that one was heralding the return of George Miller to directing a new Mad Max film, because the development of Fury Road (which in addition to having Tom Hardy as the title character had Charlize Theron co-starring as Furiosa, who if you remember had one grey arm and paint around the eyes) was one that took multiple decades to go from an idea of a continuous chase to something that resulted in plenty of stuff (as developed by Miller, Brendan McCarthy, and Nico Lathouris for the screenplay) that could've resulted in a whole other film (in fact, there was an idea to shoot back-to-back a Furiosa film with Fury Road, but, this did not pass). Long story short, years would pass before Miller got to make what he envisioned in a film that is both prequel to Fury Road and spinoff; there was an idea to use de-aging tech on Theron but instead Miller went with just casting a younger actress for this film (of course, in the segments of the film with a really young Furiosa, technology was used on the eyes to more resemble Taylor-Joy). Several members of the crew from the last film returned here (such as for production design, music, and, well Miller writing with Lathoruis for the screenplay). Evidently, it took over two months to shoot the big action sequence of the film (the longest of the films at 148 minutes). which is only the tip of the iceberg in rip-roaring interest before its climax. Plans are never set in stone, but Miller apparently has one idea in mind for another Mad Max film involving a Wasteland, but one never knows.

It is pretty amazing for a series like Mad Max to go five-for-five in quality entertainment. Miller wanted to make a movie that goes all in for action that lends its lead actor plenty to show in their eyes rather than copious amounts of dialogue (Miller has stated his longstanding passion for silent films) that also manages to look like something worth seeing in a theater for all of its spectacle. It manages to uphold what made Fury Road so special all those years ago that acts on instinct in a manner that makes for quite the accomplishment once again for primary Australian productions and Miller. You could highlight the opening chase sequence or the rig sequence for its execution of sound and not be wrong with either choice. The landscape always manages to make an impression on oneself when viewing it among the imagery in a way that makes the storytelling all the more effective in what gets conveyed within the selective dialogue used. Browne and Taylor-Joy each have their moments in the sun to express so much when it comes to having to make a place for themselves in a world that values resources above all (as evidenced by the fact that two of the main locations of the film are "Gastown" and "Bullet Farm"), particularly for someone like her that has plenty of suppression amid all of the mayhem. It isn't about the dialogue that matters so much to her journey as it is the way she maneuvers the surroundings that arise from such perils. The dynamic that arises from her and Burke in trying to carve a living while in a rig that doesn't seem to allow any thought of it is a curious one because of that understated charm that arises as if one was viewing a Western (again, it seems hard to have any sort of bond with people in a place full of nuts named "Immortan"). Hulme works well in fitting into the role as originally played by Hugh Keays-Byrne in terms of stature (as opposed to just calling him a creep for all of those wives, shall we say). However, it is Hemsworth who seems to stand out the best in the film because of how much he commands of the screen in his villainy. Far from just an inflated nose and other little things to spot in his features (and of course, the chariot), he cultivates a unnerving presence that is tremendously captivating within his brutality and chaotic nature (consider the group seen with him at the start as compared with how he stands at the end). He clearly relishes being in this role and the climactic scene with him and Taylor-Joy is especially helpful in understanding the nature of revenge versus fulfillment within one's soul. In general, this is the kind of film that gives a spark to make plans to watch alongside Fury Road and enjoy with complete fulfillment for all of the technical accomplishment that arises from each production in post-apocalyptic spectacle and mythmaking on the most interesting levels. I'm not sure where it ranks when compared to the other quality predecessors, but it is quite an odyssey to experience.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Philadelphia Story.

Review #1355: The Philadelphia Story.

Cast: 
Cary Grant (C.K. Dexter Haven), Katharine Hepburn (Tracy Samantha Lord), James Stewart (Macaulay "Mike" Connor), Ruth Hussey (Elizabeth Imbrie), John Howard (George Kittredge), Roland Young (William Q. Tracy), John Halliday (Seth Lord), Mary Nash (Margaret Lord), Virginia Weidler (Dinah Lord), and Henry Daniell (Sidney Kidd) Directed by George Cukor (#479 - Travels with My Aunt and #974 - A Star is Born)

Review: 
There are films that are born to be classics. This is one of those movies, pure and simple. Who better to headline this film than three prime stars of Hollywood's Golden Age: Grant, Hepburn, and Stewart. Each had their own way of finding success, which they would utilize for several decades, with a combined five Academy Awards on 18 nominations between them, with the latter two receiving the most benefit from the film in their own ways. had found herself drawn to acting while in college, with her debut in theater occurring in 1928. She spent four years with mostly small roles, but she was noticed in The Warrior's Husband by a scout that led to subsequent screen-testing for RKO for A Bill of Divorcement (1932). Director George Cukor was impressed, and the two would become friends that would do ten films together. She proved a success with the film, and she subsequently won an Academy Award for her third film in Morning Glory (1933). However, her career soon went through a series of setbacks in terms of audience appeal (both in film and theater) that would enclose the rest of the decade, which led her to be dubbed "Box office poison" in one film journal. There were a few moderate successes among slight flops, with a good deal of those films now being held in better respect, such as Mary of Scotland (1936) and Bringing Up Baby (1938). In 1939, she starred in the comic play The Philadelphia Story by Philip Barry. Inspired by the antics of socialite Helen Hope Montgomery Scott, Barry wrote the play directly for Hepburn, who took on the lead role alongside funding it, which ran for over a year to success. When it came to film rights, Hepburn was given the films rights as a gift by Howard Hughes, which she soon sold to Metro Goldwyn Mayer for the chance to star and choose her own team to direct, write and star. This led to the hiring of Cukor, Donald Ogden Stewart (with un-credited help for the award winning work by Waldo Salt), and the aforementioned two sides of the dynamic triangle for the film in Grant and Stewart, who had just found success in leading roles through You Can't Take It With You (1938) and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939).

It is easy to see why this proved to be Hepburn's resurgent comeback. Beyond the fact that she has two dynamic leads to go alongside a game script, she proves her ground with allure, where one sees her vulnerability alongside a good sense of humor that has tremendous chemistry with the other leads. Grant does just as well, having a good sense of timing and debonair nature. Stewart provides some offbeat everyman charm that generates the kind of warmth one would expect from him while delivering a few laughs in one notable scene where he is carrying Hepburn home after a midnight dip, while singing bits of "Somewhere over the Rainbow". Hussey and Howard also prove to be quite interesting in comparison to the others, both lending their own kind of depth (whether fawning or cynical, respectively) that keep them from being just in the background. Young, Nash, and Weidler also keep the support moving with their contribution to the depth the film has in compelling entertainment. The film is generally listed under the genre of romantic comedy with the subgenre of "comedy of remarriage", in which a couple divorces and flirts with others before remarrying (in a time where affairs were not allowed by the Production Code). It has plenty of passion along with moments of amusement, starting right from the opening scene, with an friendly exchange of broken golf clubs and a shove to the ground from the newly divorced leads. Cukor is certainly the right director for this kind of material, one that is smart with where it wants go in romance and amusement, keeping a steady pace of 112 minutes with plenty of heart that makes it a seminal picture of its genre and for the decade as a whole. It is a tremendous achievement for its iconic stars and its director that is definitely worth a look anytime.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Experiment Alcatraz.

Review #560: Experiment Alcatraz.

Cast
John Howard (Dr. Ross Williams), Joan Dixon (Lt. Joan McKenna), Walter Kingsford (Dr. J.P. Finley), Lynne Carter (Ethel Ganz), Robert Shayne (Barry Morgan), Kim Spalding (Duke Shaw), Sam Scar (Eddie Ganz), and Kenneth MacDonald (Col. Harris) Directed by Edward L. Cahn (#331 - It! The Terror From Beyond Space)

Review
Experiment Alcatraz was one of the many B-movies made by Edward L. Cahn, also notable for directing Our Gang shorts in the late 1930s. So how is this B-movie? For all of its limitations, this is a pretty okay film. My expectations weren't high, it's a b-movie about injecting radiation into prisoners that turns into a mystery. The actors are alright, they keep the movie going without much flaws. The action is okay, not too bad, typical, but you get what you want. The plot is not that bad, it has a few twists along the way, and the movie runs okay, it runs about an hour, so it's a real easy breeze, a mostly typical b-movie good enough to pass the time.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.