Showing posts with label Juliette Lewis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Juliette Lewis. Show all posts

December 31, 2025

Strange Days.

Review #2494: Strange Days.

Cast: 
Ralph Fiennes (Lenny Nero), Angela Bassett (Lornette "Mace" Mason), Juliette Lewis (Faith Justin), Tom Sizemore (Max Peltier), Michael Wincott (Philo Gant), Vincent D'Onofrio (Burton Steckler), Glenn Plummer (Jeriko One), Brigitte Bako (Iris), Richard Edson (Tick), William Fichtner (Dwayne Engelman), and Josef Sommer (Palmer Strickland) Directed by Kathryn Bigelow (#1258 - K-19: The Widowmaker, #1548 - The Hurt Locker, #1820 - The Loveless#2188 - Near Dark#2361 - Blue Steel)

Review: 

Inadvertently, I stumbled onto this movie when looking around for further movies involving Kathryn Bigelow. This was her fifth film as a director that just happened to be in between Point Break (1991) and The Weight of Water (2000). It came around after years of script development from James Cameron, who first envisioned it in 1985 and apparently wrote it mind for Bigelow (incidentally, they were once married) to direct it. They then collaborated on working the elements that interested them into the film, with Bigelow striving for grit while Cameron strove for the romance that resulted in a treatment. The treatment was then worked by Jay Cocks into a script that happened to get developed around the time of the Rodney King beating and the L.A. riots (incidentally, Bigelow was involved with the city cleanup). Cameron was more involved with the effects than being on set as a producer (he noted he visited the set just twice as a co-producer), particularly with wondering how the opening scene would look like in showing someone being part of a robbery that sees them swarmed by cops to see one run up a staircase and then have a jump from a ledge that had special cameras and rigs for it. This film and True Lies (1994) were part of a deal between 20th Century Fox. Set in the then future year of 1999 on December 30 and December 31, the movie was released in October of 1995 and somehow flopped with audiences, making less than half of its $42 million budget*, but there is a slight cult audience for the film.
  
Okay, so here's one: an electronic device (SQUID: Superconducting QUantum Interference Device) that lets you experience recorded memories and physical sensations of other people that happens to have little discs for storage (older film lovers might remember that interfacing oneself to record their sensations on tape for others to experience came a bit earlier with Brainstorm [1983], although that dealt with the military trying to get their hands on it). Memories were meant to fade, particularly when doomsday or redemption is on the line. This is a fascinating film that is hard to really piece down as belonging to any one genre, mainly because it makes the mark for sci-fi thriller just as much as it does belong to the noir genre, complete with plenty to astound the audience with beyond its violence. Sure, maybe we aren't all looking upon the world with VR headsets, but our fascination with technology is a strange one when you consider where "parasocial" has evolved to in the last couple of years with how now we can see any type of "living" to stream on a phone you can hold in your hand. People probably are isolated now more than ever, particularly in what we "see" and "feel", and there is something amusing in parts for what the film shows in how people use and don't use SQUID, specifically with the lead two characters. Fiennes (cast in the wake of being nominated for an Academy Award for Schindler's List instead of Andy Garcia) makes for a fascinating conman, one who is particularly vulnerable and fascinating because of how he eventually lands up in the quest to do the hardest thing one might think of: learning to let the past go and actually move forward. There's more to life than being a two-bit pathetic person, and he makes it a curious one to actually emphasize with. Of course, it is Bassett who provides the key moral center of the film, one who is just as handy in asserting herself (such as with a fist) as she is someone clearly desiring to see someone actually make a leap forward with her (as one does with arguably the biggest hero of the film). Sizemore and Lewis might seem outmatched within the confines of basically being in a noir (right down to the latter singing like a femme fatale might do), but I liked both of them in what they provide in their odd duck qualities that think people can be used up just like a beverage to eventually see go by the wayside. The 145-minute runtime leads to plenty of buildup for what type of world would have such a device go around even if someone might use it on a person dying of sexual assault, for example (also disturbing is a scene showing someone going brain dead from amplified signals). Sure, it might hit a ray of hope for its climax that may only work best as if one was watching a fable close itself down, but there is something to be had about a movie that seems to want to remind us to actually get real beyond being looped in playback. As a whole, Strange Days is a curious film in its desire to show the weird world of voyeurism within the confines of a dystopian future that may very well seem a bit familiar to those viewing the world with their eyes and ears nowadays. It deserved better than where it landed in 1995 and should be looked at by all the curious ones out there for its dazzling execution.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

See you in 2026.

*In comparison, in its first full week (it was limited on the first week) of release, the movie was beaten out by newcomers such as Jade and the Scarlet Letter to go along with the popular movie of the week again with Seven. And yeah, Get Shorty was the week after that.

October 15, 2022

From Dusk till Dawn.

Review #1903: From Dusk till Dawn.

Cast: 
Harvey Keitel (Jacob Fuller), George Clooney (Seth Gecko), Quentin Tarantino (Richard 'Richie' Gecko), Juliette Lewis (Katherine 'Kate' Fuller), Ernest Liu (Scott Fuller), Salma Hayek (Santanico Pandemonium), Cheech Marin (Border Guard / Chet Pussy / Carlos), Tom Savini (Sex Machine), Fred Williamson (Frost), Michael Parks (Texas Ranger Earl McGraw), Kelly Preston (Newscaster Kelly Houge), John Saxon (FBI Agent Stanley Chase), Danny Trejo (Razor Charlie), Brenda Hillhouse (Hostage Gloria Hill), and Marc Lawrence (Old Timer Motel Owner) Directed by Robert Rodriguez (#1193 - Alita: Battle Angel)

Review: 
The vampire movie has many forms besides Dracula, but I am sure you already have figured that out. You could look at it from a number of ways, particularly in the 1990s, which saw films by Francis Ford Coppola (you know, that mediocre Dracula adaptation) and John Carpenter (Vampires). So yes, an action horror movie with Robert Rodriguez is certainly an interesting idea. This was the third feature film by Rodriguez as a director, who made his feature debut with El Mariachi (1992) that led into more success with Desperado (1995). The story was done by Robert Kurtzman (a co-creator of the KNB EFX Group, which was behind the effects of this film) while the screenplay was done by Quentin Tarantino (the third and last film he wrote without directing after True Romance (1993) and Natural Born Killers (1994)). Rodriguez and Tarantino, best friends since the 1990s, would collaborate with each other eleven years after the release of this film with the double-feature Grindhouse (Planet Terror / Death Proof). The film was followed by two direct-to-video sequels that were produced by Rodriguez, and he would develop a television series based on the feature in 2014.

Admittedly, the enjoyment of the film will depend on how big one is in a film that tries to blend action and horror with measured patience - it is action all the way, but at least the horror is fun. The first hour is all about the set-up in what you might see coming from the action cliches that Tarantino clearly has an interest in (he likened the film to The Desperate Hours (1955) but with a supernatural twist), complete with having a core group of characters that have useful rapport with each other. Watching a movie with killers that have a bit of charm does seem a bit familiar if you've seen some of Tarantino's work, but of course it also probably goes hand in hand with Rodriguez in terms of kinetic enjoyment (like many of his films, he served as editor). So yes, it is essentially like having a sandwich of two favorable elements packed together (say, peanut butter and jelly), if it works well for you, go right on ahead, because it will satisfy the B-movie dreams one could go for, complete with green blood splatter. It may be a movie of the macabre, but it is one with a good-natured smirk to things, which works just enough in trying to make one believe in the horror of a bar that offers both pretty women and vampires. This was the first major film role for Clooney, previously best known for his run on the TV series ER. He does pretty well here, wrapped in plenty of confidence and devilish charm that is interesting to see play out against both the action element and the eventual horror that clearly would suit him for future films. Tarantino must have been interested in following the tradition of other director-turned-actors like John Huston when it came to playing a role opposite Clooney. They share a decent rapport together in brotherly cohesion that holds enough weight to make him more than just being the lesser of the key quartet. Keitel makes it worth his while in reserved dignity in religious dilemma, but Lewis is the quiet leader in her offbeat charms that proves quite natural for all the turns required. The small moments with others is fun for those who like recognizable faces and names, such as Trejo (Rodriguez's second cousin), Savini & Williamson or with the triple cameos by Marin, which all have charm that invite a bit of imagination of their stories besides this one, and Hayek makes the most of her time on stage with allure - so yes, it is a fun little time for those into its spirit (oh, there are others who come and go like Liu or Saxon, which is whatever, and that is a sad thing from someone who digs Saxon but still thinks the movie is fine). The mayhem is plentiful that makes the 108-minute run-time go with clear enjoyment for making schlock to enjoy taking the cliches from the book and putting them in the grinder. You have a movie where a gun is on a man's crotch to go with brains being stabbed by a pencil and kids getting chomped by vampires - it all works out. As a whole, the action and horror elements done by Rodriguez and company make an interesting result, serving as a slightly more expensive B-movie that could please both genre lovers if in the right mindset for it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

August 26, 2019

Natural Born Killers.

Review #1265: Natural Born Killers.

Cast: 
Woody Harrelson (Mickey Knox), Juliette Lewis (Mallory Wilson Knox), Robert Downey, Jr. (Wayne Gale), Tom Sizemore (Detective Jack Scagnetti), Tommy Lee Jones (Warden Dwight McClusky), Rodney Dangerfield (Ed Wilson), Edie McClurg (Mrs. Wilson), Sean Stone (Kevin Wilson), Russell Means (Warren Red Cloud, Sr), Lanny Flaherty (Earl), and Evan Handler (David) Directed by Oliver Stone (#095 - Wall Street and #1090 - Platoon)

Review: 
It is interesting to look upon this film today, 25 years after its release. It is a notoriously famous kind of film, one that was modified from its original script by Quentin Tarantino (the second of two scripts he had sold, with the other being True Romance) to the point where he was given a story credit while screenplay credit went to Richard Rutowski, Oliver Stone, and David Veloz. Tarantino wasn't a big fan of the final product, and the film is certainly an easy one to rage/rave about. The resulting film is one that is bold in its violence and its attempts to make a statement about society and so on and so on while also serving as a twisted romance - two hours of chaotic energy that is frantic, satirical, and a bit of a mess. Honestly, it must be real hard to fall along the middle ground with this particular film: One can appreciate the technical aspects of the film and yet still take issue with its approach for the message it wants, or one can really, really feel that it is a tiresome and ridiculously shameless attempt at satire that goes over the top to where it hits the moon with jagged edge front and center. One film that came in mind when viewing this was Bonnie and Clyde (1967), which in itself was a controversial film for its violence with its lead characters while being a seminal film for a burgeoning generation. This is definitely a film that is trying to be the kind of thing for its type of audience, with its decade certainly being a polarizing one in terms of the landscape of media and the world as a whole. One can certainly see that effect today, for better or worse (the less said about quote-unquote fake news, the better). It is the kind of loud film that probably seems right at home with the loudness that can accompany our lives if one allows it (or even if they don't).

No one seems to be safe from Stone's grip on message-making, or his grip on spectacle violence (or whatever you really want to call it), and they make for a cumbersome cocktail that when sipped manages to hit the consumer on the head and make for a fuzzy feeling all at once. This is especially apparent with the editing (which took eleven months as opposed to the shoot taking just 56 days) and look of the film, which can go from color to monochrome or just be filmed with a dutch angle (or most notably superimposing images of the 20th century in the background). Am I watching an crime movie or an art film? Really, you could say it is a bit of both. Does it go over the line when it comes to actually making a point? Sure, and it does that with no real sort of regrets, much in the same way a shock jock can hammer the hot take home till the cows come home to call the complaint hotlines. For me, it is a well made film that comes off okay with its approach while scoring points for capable film-making (moreso in the first half than the second) and its cast. Each of the core five has some sort of oddity to them (the headlining couple need no explanation), where being over-the-top is more like being over the rails and into the weird aisle, which generally works out fine in showing some ooze. Harrelson and Lewis are a dementedly successful duo when it comes to performances. One always wants to know what they will prove to do, whether with each other or with someone else, a sort of hypnotic feeling really. Much like the others in the film, one can't help it. Downey Jr plays his role of prowler for the attention machine (or however one would describe a tabloid TV host who happens to have an Australian accent) with effectiveness, where one can see the thirst for something deep in us (or what have you) that manifest in a wildly weird climax. Sizemore surely proves to task with his unconventional conventional role, where you can see the powder keg show its cracks from time to time. Jones hams it up (this is apparent with the hairstyle), and it works itself out for a few laughs at a man meant to have control yet can't even control himself. Special scene-stealing consideration goes to Dangerfield, who actually wrote his lines for his dark part that is perfectly horrific for what is needed. In the long run, this is a movie that roars itself from the very beginning with an ax to grind about its topic of conversation that swings for the trees and manages to cut down the entire forest while also setting it ablaze. Its fury can prove a bit too much after a while when it comes to actually trying to contain itself to one frenzy at a time. It can prove to be a horrific, biting, infuriating, frustrating, or rewarding experience, depending on how one looks into it. It is a controversial film for a reason, but the curious film mind will certainly have quite the time with it, that much is for sure.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

December 22, 2015

National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation.


Review #771: National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation.

Cast
Chevy Chase (Clark Griswold, Jr), Beverly D'Angelo (Ellen Griswold), Randy Quaid (Cousin Eddie), Juliette Lewis (Audrey Griswold), Johnny Galecki (Rusty Griswold), John Randolph (Clark Griswold, Sr), Diane Ladd (Nora Griswold), E. G. Marshall (Art Smith), Doris Roberts (Frances Smith), Miriam Flynn (Cousin Catherine), Cody Burger (Cousin Rocky), Nicholas Guest (Todd Chester), Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Margo Chester), and Brian Doyle-Murray (Frank Shirley) Directed by Jeremiah Chechik.

Review
Please forgive me for not having watched the two Vacation films released before this one. They (along with Vegas Vacation) will be reviewed in 2016. Probably.

Ah Christmas. It's a time of year in which families try to eat food and get along with each other...and other stuff, because I usually just stay home. But I can relate to at least a few things in the movie, particularly the sticky sap tree, and trying to get a collection of lights to work...though I can't say I ever had that many lights (of course I keep my lights on the tree). The characters are pretty much what you probably have in your own family (no I won't reuse this line later) on Christmas, from over-determined to...bighearted to (insert number) degree of grumpy relatives. Chase certainly sells Griswold's lingering madness well. D'Angelo (along with Lewis and Galecki) certainly make for a good cinema family. My favorite scene with them is the opening scene, especially the part about getting a big ol' Christmas tree in the forest. The buildup to it is pretty enjoyable as well (I can relate in a sense to dealing with drivers from the past with my dad). Sure, there are moments when bitterness and circumstance get in the way, but in the end, it's all full of cheer.

In the pile of Christmas films (which apparently is almost 40) I've reviewed in five years, Christmas Vacation has moments of hilarity, but the movie's real strength is the seasonal charm that the movie evokes, especially the enthusiasm of the main character. It's interesting how comedies like this can be christened Christmas classics, but I can see why. It's not a perfect movie, but it just fits the bill of being a Christmas movie that one can accept.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

March 23, 2014

Movie Night: Starsky & Hutch.


Review #564: Starsky & Hutch.

Cast
Ben Stiller (David Starsky), Owen Wilson (Ken "Hutch" Hutchinson), Vince Vaughn (Reese Feldman), Snoop Dogg (Huggy Bear Brown), Jason Bateman (Kevin Jutsum), Fred Williamson (Captain Doby), Will Ferrell (Big Earl), Amy Smart (Holly Monk), Carmen Electra (Stacey Haack), and Juliette Lewis (Kitty) Directed by Todd Phillips.

Review
This is a hard movie to rate, the movie does have its moments of highlights, but other times, the movie just falls flat. Stiller and Wilson are at best an okay duo, the movie works best in the first half because by the time the movie ends, it's already worn out its welcome. Vaughn is an okay villain, he doesn't really make much of an impression, but it could've been much more forgettable. I'm actually surprised the original Starsky and Hutch (David Soul and Paul Michael Glaser) made cameos, it doesn't help or hurt the movie, but it is noteworthy. The best character in this movie is played by Snoop Dogg. Why? While his character doesn't have too much screen time, he generates laughs and is a pretty fun guy to watch. The movie isn't awful but it doesn't really rise above mediocrity. It's probably best to rent the movie and make your own conclusions, but it could be worse.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.