Funeral in Berlin.

Review #2562: Funeral in Berlin.

Cast: 
Michael Caine (Harry Palmer), Paul Hubschmid (Johnny Vulkan/Paul Louis Broum), Oskar Homolka (Colonel Stok), Eva Renzi (Samantha Steel), Guy Doleman (Colonel Ross), Hugh Burden (Hallam), Heinz Schubert (Aaron Levine), Wolfgang Völz (Werner), Thomas Holtzmann (Reinhardt), Sarah Brackett (Babcock), Günter Meisner (Otto Kreutzman), and Herbert Fux (Artur) Directed by Guy Hamilton  (#280 - Diamonds Are Forever, #289 - The Man with the Golden Gun, #291 - Goldfinger, #293 - Live and Let Die, #612 - The Devil's Disciple, #2019 - The Ringer [1952])

Review: 

Yes, I suppose it makes sense that Guy Hamilton would be brought in to do work on a Harry Saltzman production with Funeral in Berlin (as based on the Len Deighton book of the same name), which was released the year after the success of The Ipcress File (1965), which Sidney J. Furie had managed to craft a pretty decent spy movie. And yet, Salesman apparently didn't like what Furie did to the point where he went with a familiar face to deliver another Palmer movie. In his 1993 autobiography, Caine described the movie as one where he doubted that the filmmakers managed to capture the "special atmosphere" of the city of Berlin, stating that Hamilton seemed more at home with the Bond movies (hey, I think Goldfinger was the best of the first few of the movies, at least until say, 1969) rather than the "gritty realism" attempted with the Palmer movies*. From 1964 to 1974, Hamilton worked with Saltzman on six films (The Party's Over, released in 1965, was the lone exception of that time period). Interestingly, Hamilton actually had served in a secret unit of the 15th Motor Gunboat Flotilla that brought over agents into France and send down pilots back to England in the second World War (for which he went through certain danger on one occasion) The screenplay was written by Evan Jones, who previously had adapted works into film with The Damned (1962) and Modesty Blaise (1966). The third and final feature film with Caine as Palmer came out with Billion Dollar Brain (as directed by Ken Russell) the following year.

There are aspects that are pretty interesting in dry charm, at least. Sure, it has pretty evident charms and flaws, but it is fairly likable with Caine at the helm with a locale in Berlin that at least seems like a useful capsule for its time. Undeniably, the movie is plagued by basically being a cipher in actually getting to the point of the "intrigue", because it muddles itself for 102 minutes with only a moderately interesting supporting cast and motivations that just aren't as sleek or as icily effective from before. So, what's it all about? Well, through a bit of loitering in the streets of Berlin, one sees an array of not-quite defections, Israeli agents* on a trail, and a motivation to keep some things buried from the light (the title here refers to the would-be smuggling scheme: getting out of East Berlin in a coffin). Caine coasts with the irreverent mannerism of coasting through the machinations of people who all look to get one over another (as if the spy game really is just a game of cons). This was the international debut for Renzi (cast over Anjanette Comer, apparently), who had one other film credit (Playgirl [1966]) to her name, but apparently she was dubbed. So it goes, I guess, because she basically drifts through the film anyway*. Homolka might actually be the most interesting presence in the exuberant, seasoned presence (sure, it's not his story, but, well...). Hubschmid is probably the bigger cipher of the film, trying to be elusive to hide the movie eventually getting to the point (Germans) that is only mildly interesting when paired with Caine. The movie sometimes is interesting with its locale and the bleak scenarios that creep around the corner for a feel that you just wish was a bit tighter with its globe-trot in Berlin. You just want a little more energy amidst the gloom, as one basically drifts through it all. However, if you prefer to see what a spy movie from Hamilton looked like that wasn't merely James Bond, this might be up your alley.

 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*Caine also noted in one instance that they were filming near the Wall on a sunny day and border guards with nothing better to do shone mirrors in the lenses that led to the filmmakers moving somewhere else.

*Israeli agent, you say? Don't worry, I don't think I would say anything that would get someone to whine about anti-semitism. Free Palestine?

*Comer married Hubschmid the following year but didn't exactly take off as an actress, even rejecting a role in You Only Live Twice.

The Man Who Would Be King.

Review #2488: The Man Who Would Be King.

Cast: 

Sean Connery (Daniel Dravot), Michael Caine (Peachy Carnehan), Christopher Plummer (Rudyard Kipling), Saeed Jaffrey (Machendra Bahadur Gurung aka "Billy Fish"), Shakira Caine (Roxanne), Doghmi Larbi (Ootah), Jack May (District Commissioner), Karroom Ben Bouih (Kafu Selim), Mohammad Shamsi (Babu), and lbert Moses (Ghulam) Directed by John Huston (#081 - The Maltese Falcon [1941], #094 - The Misfits, #224 - Casino Royale [1967], #419 - Key Largo, #1379 - The African Queen, #1622 - Beat the Devil)

Review: 

Once ago, there was a short story by Rudyard Kipling about kings of Kafiristan, a historical region in what is now Afghanistan. It was called "The Man Who Would Be King" and it was first published as part of the anthology The Phantom 'Rickshaw and Other Tales in 1888 that may or may not have been inspired by a handful of real adventurers ranging from Alexander Gardner to Frederick "Pahari" Wilson to Adolf Schlagintweit. John Huston was probably the ideal person to want to make a film based in adventure because of his already busy life. He dabbled in boxing, training for opera singing, serving as a member in the Mexican cavalry before actually dabbling in screenwriting and directing. Intrigued by the story from childhood, was fascinated by the idea of doing a feature film based on the story, initially targeting Clark Gable and Humphrey Bogart for the lead roles in the late 1950s that saw both actors die before it could get off the ground. Further years saw other names floated around from Richard Burton to even American actors (Paul Newman advised keeping it a British affair) before it finally came around to Sean Connery and Michael Caine. Huston co-adapted the story with Gladys Hill (a longtime assistant to Huston who had previously co-written Reflections in a Golden Eye [1967] and The Kremlin Letter [1970]. The movie was shot in locations around France, Morocco and at Pinewood Studios. Premiering in November 1975 before a general release on the week before Christmas, the film was a decent hit with audiences at the time while both Connery and Caine described it as one of their favorite film experiences. The fifth of John Huston's six films directed in the 1970s, he returned four years later with Wise Blood (1979). The next film to take loose inspiration from the Kipling story was The Road to El Dorado (2000).

 

The big thing about the movie is the fact that it manages to be such a fun adventure within the bounds of the thing that binds them most of all: greed. Sure, there is some brotherhood and charm within the characters played by Connery and Caine, but really it all boils down to wanting to matter as people beyond wearing some garb and getting called a god or a king of something. All fall at the end with their titles or classifications laid bare, some do it faster than others and some don't even have their story told to actually tell anyone. The inevitable peril that comes in trying to become a name among men in a world one is ravaging with their own imperial desire is still a fun one, of course, because who can resist scoundrels in adventure? Undeniably, Connery gets the better of the two roles in terms of the most curious in plundering adventure: self-mythologizing within the foundation of one who actually is quite pathetic when you get down to it. Actually, both actors are being sly in playing pathetic types because of how well we engage with them even with how we come to view them, and they are dynamite together. Plummer still makes his mark in making his role dignified even with most of it being opposite Caine. They never really become men of the people, merely just ones who believe they have them right where they want them as tools, which really could play today with how we still underestimate the spirit and belief of "the other". Jaffrey accompanies Caine and Connery with devoted energy that makes for a quality tragic figure. The 129-minute runtime rolls along with little to get in the way of its charm within the harrowing inevitability of when men try to become more than plundering conquerors. Apparently, Huston once said that he read so much of Kipling that it was in his unconscious, one that he understood in terms of a world that was different from the one we know now in terms of how we perceive places apart from us, the honor, and so on and so forth. The Man Who Would Be King is a good time for all in terms of its entertainment and its execution of adventure and tension.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

1,826 days later, it's the 15th anniversary of Movie Night originally being a thing. Sure, it started as ramblings on an online game before it became an actual blog, but the last couple of years (one that has seen at least ten reviews a month for over six years) have arguably seen it hit its stride for actual productiveness that I hope you've enjoyed. More to come in December.

Interstellar.

Review #2322: Interstellar.

Cast: 

Matthew McConaughey (Joseph "Coop" Cooper), Anne Hathaway (Dr. Amelia Brand), Jessica Chastain (Murphy "Murph" Cooper; Mackenzie Foy as 10-year-old Murph; Ellen Burstyn as elderly Murph), John Lithgow (Donald), Michael Caine (Professor John Brand), Casey Affleck (Tom Cooper; Timothée Chalamet as 15-year-old Tom), Wes Bentley (Doyle), Bill Irwin (TARS - voice and puppetry and CASE puppetry), Topher Grace (Getty), David Gyasi (Professor Romilly), and Matt Damon (Dr. Mann) Directed by Christopher Nolan (#054 - The Dark Knight, #055 - Inception, #062 - Batman Begins, #980 - Dunkirk , #1562 - The Dark Knight Rises, #1618 - Tenet, #2050 - Oppenheimer)

Review: 

“It’s been a really interesting challenge. When you say you’re making a family film, it has all these pejorative connotations that it’ll be somehow soft. But when I was a kid, these were family films in the best sense, and they were as edgy and incisive and challenging as anything else on the blockbuster spectrum. I wanted to bring that back in some way.”

Honestly, the best way to talk about a movie like this is to just go with it. In 2006, Kip Thorne (a theoretical physicist, writer, and future Nobel Prize winner) and Lynda Obst had come up with trying to work with each other again, having previously collaborated on Contact (1997), in which Thorne's study of wormhole space travel had been incorporated into the screenplay (as written by Carl Sagan, a close friend of Obst). Thorne had theories involving “warped space-time" that eventually found Jonathan Nolan assigned to write that outline into a narrative. When the original director in mind (Steven Spielberg) had other ideas in mind to work on, Christopher Nolan expressed interest to direct and to incorporate his own ideas for the screenplay (evidently, the first hour of the film, set in the not-too distant future with inspiration taken from the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s, is pretty true to the original screenplay while one particular shape for the climax came from C.Nolan). Thorne had set out two guidelines for the Nolans in having a film that wouldn't "violate established physical laws" while having wild speculations spring in some sort of science. He later wrote a book on his experiences as a consultant on the film (The Science of Interstellar). The effects by Double Negative had the use of digital projectors to go along with miniature effects from other collaborators for spacecraft (incidentally, that one famous image of an actual black hole came out in 2019). Released in November of 2014, Interstellar was a pretty fair success in its time, with probably the visual effects receiving the most praise (for its 10th anniversary, select theaters showed the film again in 70mm IMAX).

I do wonder if I would like this film better on a re-watch a few years down the line. In fact, the reputation of the film suggests that, well, for all the engineer and craftmanship, the mysteries really can have love as one of the ways forward. It is worthy spectacle and also a mash of human interest for 169 minutes. Time is the important factor in the great vacant reaches of spaces that ultimately lend one to the immeasurable pull of hope in the strange margins. The best way to go with the movie is to watch with as little to really know about it as possible, one in which you don't look for tricks but just try to absorb the film piece by piece. It does not leave one impatient to get to space because of the general commitment shown by Nolan and company to let things breathe in a place filled with blighted surroundings (consider this is a film where textbooks talk about the Apollo missions as one of waste and elaborate conspiracy). In a film with plenty of worthwhile effects, it also happens to be a movie with a worthwhile cast to support it all, since it basically is a fable of people who have to learn to look up again, ones who cannot just be caretakers or "stay" where they are. McConaughey has the calm sense to make it all work in maneuvering charm that is worth playing out for a journey beyond the stars. That first third (rough estimate) in the fields of a blighted world with him and the on-screen youth in Foy and Chalamet to go along with Lithgow make for an earthy quartet to balance out the inevitable when one is brought into the mix of Caine (reciting one particular poem) and the reasoned grace from Hathaway. Of course, the other key is in the latecomer in Damon to round out a look on human nature in all of its facets when confronted with danger, loneliness, love, or the space between (of course, Irwin is there too to convey the robot voice and puppetry to really round out the highlights, I didn't forget that). The enjoyment of the film is in layers, really, managing to walk the frontier tightrope (as one might say) in drawing a sci-fi epic in the eyes of a family and where that leads for meaningful stakes in what really matters most when it comes to the immeasurable qualities of survival. There are plenty of moments that one will find astounding, such as say, the tidal wave sequence or the manual docking sequence to go along with the eventual "clicking together" moment that rewards the curious with threading the needle in not just being a cop out for the sake of sweeping it all up. In totality, it is a pretty neat movie when viewed all the way through in execution in ways that can only be understood for those with the patience to six through such a worthwhile journey. I can't call it my favorite Nolan movie, but it is worthwhile enough to recommend on the best screen possible to absorb for all that it brings beyond the stars. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Welcome again to December 20, the anniversary day for Movie Night, which is now 14 years old. I apologize for the lengthy delay between reviews, I simply wanted to take some time off to refresh myself so that I close out 2024 by not "phoning it in". Surprise: today is a doubleheader day.

The Ipcress File.

Review #2256: The Ipcress File.

Cast: 

Michael Caine (Harry Palmer), Guy Doleman (Colonel Ross), Nigel Green (Major Dalby), Sue Lloyd (Jean Courtney), Gordon Jackson (Jock Carswell), Aubrey Richards (Dr. Radcliffe), Frank Gatliff (Eric Grantby), Thomas Baptiste (Barney), Oliver MacGreevy (Housemartin), Freda Bamford (Alice), and Pauline Winter (Charlady) Directed by Sidney J. Furie (#787 - Superman IV: The Quest for Peace)

Review: 

"If you have a great story and you try to do all these different camera angles, you'll get away with it. But if you don't have a great story, they'll hit you hard. If you try to use the screen the way a painter uses a canvas, somehow it's not considered acceptable. The reason I did it for the first time on THE IPCRESS FILE was because we had a script and we hated it. What we did was we shot from the beginning and we rewrote as we went."

When it comes to spy features, it makes sense to eventually encounter this film. It is an adaptation roughly based on The IPCRESS File, a 1962 novel written by Len Deighton, who had been inspired by a neighbor he once had named Anna Wolkoff, a daughter of a czarist admiral and also a spy that ended up being arrested, which Deighton (a young boy living in central London when World War II started) witnessed. Interestingly enough, the ensuing film would be produced by Harry Saltzman, who had went from producing stuff such as Look Back in Anger (1958) to being a partner in producing the first couple of James Bond films (incidentally, Deighton was initially hired to write From Russia with Love [1963] and had even travelled with the crew but was eventually replaced). The director was the Canadian Sidney J. Furie, who had started his career in his native Canada in 1957 (turning a planned CBC project into his debut feature with A Dangerous Age) before moving to England and gradually rising up the ranks of small-scale stuff in horror, drama and musicals (most notably with Cliff Richard). Apparently, Harry Saltzman did not like Furie in production and even once claimed editor Peter R. Hunt (also a Bond alumni) was mostly involved in direction (he wasn't big on certain angles utilized in certain shots, but Hunt backed Furie). The film screenplay was credited to Bill Canaway to James Doran, although apparently Lionel Davidson, Johanna Harwood, Lukas Heller and Ken Hughes delivered uncredited work; according to Caine, Furie took a copy of the script on the first day he was on set and set it on fire, which meant that the film was basically being re-written as they shot it. Deighton wrote five further novels involving Harry Palmer (he wasn't named in the books, but, well, go with it) until 1974; two of those books were turned into films (Funeral in Berlin [1966] was directed by Guy Hamilton while Billion Dollar Brain [1967] was directed by Ken Russell) to go with two "TV films" that all had Caine as the lead. In 2022, The Ipcress File was adapted again as a six-episode TV miniseries.

There are a handful of people familiar with the James Bond films here, such as production designer Ken Adam, editor Peter R. Hunt and composer John Barry, but it doesn't mean one is watching a pastiche. Instead, one has a neat and compact feature that has a wonderfully dry Caine. The results matter most in a grounded and cynical feature that clearly reflects well upon its era with a craftsman and a worthy cast and crew to make entertainment in the art of the mundane for elite paranoia. There is a smoothness to the production that you can feel through its 109-minute runtime that has style even in the mask of realism. Even for his second big role in a film, one just sees Caine and understands just how he could be a star just like that, because his habits are ones that we quickly grow to know and love that goes from disregard for authority to appreciating the fine art of cooking. His wit is drier than say, a certain quippy film icon of the time, but it oozes a certain type of charm within the perception that just never fails. Doleman and Green provide worthwhile contrast to Caine in the general stiff-lipped sense of bureaucracy and stone-wall nature that is more unnerving than it seems (of course Doleman would end up being the only recurring actor besides Caine in the trilogy of feature films). Lloyd is soothing in that elusive tête-à-tête between her and Caine. When you think about it, it really isn't so much about the plot (although Gatliff is pretty unnerving when it comes to the brainwashing stuff) as it is about the vibes that arise from a camera that has you view the action as if you were the one staking out the characters. The atmosphere (complete with seemingly underrated John Barry doing the music) is one that is hard to match in carefully composed fun. The patience taken to watch it play all the way through leads to plenty of reward for the viewer that seeks it out.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Italian Job (1969)

Review #2221: The Italian Job (1969)

Cast: 
Michael Caine (Charlie Croker), Noël Coward (Mr. Bridger), Benny Hill (Professor Simon Peach), Raf Vallone (Altabani), Tony Beckley (Camp Freddie), Rossano Brazzi (Roger Beckerman), Maggie Blye (Lorna), Irene Handl (Miss Peach), John Le Mesurier (the Prison Governor), Fred Emney (Birkinshaw), and John Clive (Garage manager) Directed by Peter Collinson (#608 - Tomorrow Never Comes)

Review: 

There are plenty of summer movies that could be chosen to roll with the long hot days or just as warm nights, but it probably stands to reason that The Italian Job is a good choice to kick things off on its good side. The original idea was thought of by Ian Kennedy Martin (a writer generally known for his British television work) as a TV drama idea involving a robbery in a traffic jam in London. It didn't go anywhere, but his brother Troy (also noted for his TV work, such as Z-Cars) bought the idea and wanted to make a movie set in Italy, completely with Michael Caine envisioned as the lead. And so, he made his spec script that eventually got the attention of Paramount Pictures and to the attention of producer Michael Deeley. He made a suggestion for a bit lighter film in terms of a caper (in his memoirs, he described the first draft as a bit complicated in political emphasis). Paramount chose Peter Collinson to direct the film, which would come out after The Long Day's Dying (released in 1968 that had Deeley as producer, as he wanted to see how Collinson would handle a film production); he would be a steady director in the following decade before his untimely death in 1980 at the age of 44. It was Deeley who came up with the iconic ending of the film, which he conceived as a solution to the fact that the endings that Martin tried to come up to conclude the film because in his words, the endings thought of all seemed to fall under "Irving the Explainer", where dialogue ends up being the thing for the filmmaker to depend on to get out of a problem (as opposed to visual explanation); he also thought of the idea because, well, he had ideas of possibly doing a sequel. Shot mostly in Turin, Italy with a hodgepodge of cars and stunts, the film was a success in its native England (but not so much in America) that has achieved a fame not always seen by caper films, even inspiring a charity fundraising event that sees plenty of Minis driving around the United Kingdom and Italy. A remake (of sorts) was released in 2003.

It really is just one of those films that invites delight and wonder even if you've seen a good deal of these caper and chase films. It is a pretty efficient 99-minute film that delights itself as firmly British and yet firmly amusing to those who encounter it. It indulges the pleasures of building up a caper that lives well on the great charm that arises in bringing together Caine at the pinnacle of his 1960s sharpness alongside a few neat cars and locations. Caine always seemed to know just the right moment for timing and charm, whether that involves plans or in casual dialogue that goes to show one can make anything sound cool, I suppose. This was the last film appearance of Coward (famed playwright and president of the orphanage that Collinson had spent most of his childhood in), who had been suffering from arteriosclerosis prior to his subsequent death in 1973. It may not be a plentiful part (they had him for just a few days), but he has the dignity to keep the role from waffling into nothingness. He just has the look and aura to sound on point when it comes to using the time wisely for esteemed lords of the manor (whether jail or otherwise). There are a few names known for those familiar with television of the time (as stated by its producer), and it only makes sense that Hill was there in his ragged weirdness. Car commercial or not, it does make the Mini look like its own character when it comes to handling the action (amusingly, there was a shot scene that had a part of the car chase occur while an orchestra played "The Blue Danube" but it was deleted). The music score by Quincy Jones (such as say, "The Self Preservation Society song, as sung by the cast or the intro song as sung by Matt Monro) only adds to the comfortable nature of the film when it comes to general mood. It builds its setup and execution with worthwhile timing that has a nice balance of humor (that one line about doors is the easy one to go with), but undeniably it is the climax that makes me appreciate how it all goes together: it really is just better to have the film dangle right on the Alps. As a whole, it is pretty neat in engaging a clear caper with winning charm and commitment to make for a pretty good time. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Sleuth (1972).

Review #2204. Sleuth (1972).

Cast: 

Laurence Olivier (Andrew Wyke) and Michael Caine (Milo Tindle) Directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz (#750 - All About Eve, #1378 - People Will Talk, #1798 - No Way Out)

Review: 

In 1970, the play Sleuth came out to the stage to tremendous success as created by Anthony Shaffer. He had worked as a barrister and a copywriter before his calling as a writer. He based the play as a take on the mysteries written by author John Dickson Carr to go with inspiration from his friend Stephen Sondheim and his penchant for game-playing (incidentally, the first and only screenplay Sondheim wrote was done with Anthony Perkins involving mystery with The Last of Sheila (1973), as inspired by scavenger hunts that were done by who else but Sondheim and Perkin). The result was a Tony Award-winning play that had a variety of British actors playing the two roles, such as Anthony Quayle acting opposite Keith Baxter, with a run-on Broadway happening in the autumn of 1970. Two years later, he was brought on to write the screenplay for the film, one that has just two actors but had credits that listed fake names to fool the audience for a bit (the movie does the same thing). The film rights were purchased fairly quickly, and Shaffer expressed interest in Alan Bates to play opposite Anthony Quayle (who had played the Andrew role on stage originally) ...but when one finds Laurence Olivier, how does one say no? Through the rejection of actors such as Albert Finney and Bates came the bringing of Michael Caine to play opposite Olivier. Shaffer would be a bit busy as a writer, as his first screenplay went onto the screen in 1971 with Mr. Forbush and the Penguins before 1972 saw both Sleuth and Frenzy released. He wrote a handful of screenplays until 1993 that ranged from The Wicker Man (1973) to his last effort in Sommersby (1993).This was the 20th feature film directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Although he worked on the screenplay for a would-be adaptation of a novel called Jane in his later years, Sleuth ended up being his final film prior to his death in 1993 at the age of 83. In 2007, a new version of Sleuth was filmed that had Kenneth Branagh as director to go with Caine now the old pro playing against a younger one, this time playing against Jude Law in a movie that apparently didn't use any dialogue from Shaffer's original script. It probably didn't go as well as when Caine was in that other who-dun-it Deathtrap (as released in 1982, for which some have compared it to Sleuth, although really they arent that similar), that's for sure.

Not many movies can say that they have pros for every cast member, but this is one of those times where the fun isn't so much just the mystery but the fact that you get 138 minutes of two absolutely invested actors in their element for a film that shows a relish for methodical entertainment. When it comes to cat-and-mouse games, it really doesn't get any better than this, and it does certainly lend itself to going into it with as little to know as possible besides the fact that one really can get too absorbed into one-upping the other person. When Olivier encountered Sondheim at the end of filming, he apparently stated that he based his performance off him. Olivier puts his best foot forward in that grand display that arises from an aristocratic display that could only be shown for all of its degrees of tone and reaction by a pro that knows it is the utmost importance to not have it seem like just a bit to play for the straight gag. For all the people that know (and knew) the power of Olivier in a role with meat to play, there are probably almost as many people who know how damn good Caine can make a role within the first few scenes he appears in. The differences between him and Olivier when it comes to curiosity and upbringing for the film make a compelling double act that lends each the chance to explore how far pride can go, particularly among the higher classes. Caine excels in those razor-sharp exchanges that become more and more predicated on the idea that if someone has to win, the loser is going to be buried one way or another. It is the kind of movie to sit back with a drink and just enjoy slowly over the course of the film. Even when one has an idea of where the film might go with its tête-à-tête, the ride never seems to loosen up, and this is for a film with plenty of scenes in a house with plenty of atmosphere and staging to spare (such as with its one particular laughing electronic toy). In the end, however one finds themselves watching this film in the progression of mystery and thrills, one will have plenty to enjoy within its contained dedication shown by all involved in its execution from its director right down to its actors for all that one could ever want.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Alfie (1966).

Review #2034: Alfie.

Cast: 

Michael Caine (Alfie Elkins), Shelley Winters (Ruby), Millicent Martin (Siddie), Vivien Merchant (Lily Clamacraft), Jane Asher (Annie), Julia Foster (Gilda), Shirley Anne Field (Carla), Eleanor Bron (the Doctor), Denholm Elliott (the Abortionist), Alfie Bass (Harry Clamacraft), Graham Stark (Humphrey), Murray Melvin (Nat), and Sydney Tafler (Frank) Produced and Directed by Lewis Gilbert (#292 - The Spy Who Loved Me, #338 - Moonraker, #354 - You Only Live Twice)

Review: 

"At that time, there had never been a cockney film. In cinema, the cockney was the man who said: "Guvnor, your car's outside." You never saw a cockney family with real problems. In the 60s, we were beginning to make films that reflected something of the British way of life. Before Alfie and its contemporaries, British film was all Noël Coward and drawing rooms."

The British can make for curious folks. Lewis Gilbert had a road fit for being involved in film business. He was the son of music hall performers and he first saw a film set in his childhood years. When World War II came, he served with the Royal Air Force in their film unit and later the First Motion Picture Unit of the U.S. Army Air Forces. He made documentary work for Gaumont British before going on to feature directing in 1947 with The Little Ballerina. Among the most noted films before Alfie involved ones based on historical events such as Reach for the Sky (1956) and Sink the Bismarck! (1960). He followed Alfie with a variety of dramas and adventures (most notably with three James Bond films) before his final film in 2002; he died in 2018 at the age of 97. The film is based on the play of the same name by Bill Naughton. He had originally come up with the idea with "Alfie Elkins and His Little Life" which was broadcast on the radio BBC Third Programme in 1962 before he was commissioned to turn it into a stage play that premiered the next year. A production on Broadway was done in 1964 with Terence Stamp as the star, but it lasted only a handful of performances. It was during these productions that Hydra Gilbert saw the production and recommended it to her husband Lewis. Naughton wrote the screenplay for this film, which was the first of three adaptations of Naughton's work that followed with The Family Way (1966) and Spring and Port Wine (1970), with Naughton writing the latter. Evidently, when it came to casting, Caine was not the first choice for the lead role nor even the second. Laurence Harvey was first considered but he did not want to play the role on Broadway, and Terence Stamp, just wasn't interested in playing the role again after the Broadway show. Incidentally, his roommate at the time was Michael Caine, who was best known for Zulu (1964) and The Ipcress File (1965); incidentally, James Booth, who starred with Caine in the aforementioned Zulu film, turned the role down. Caine got offered the role (Paramount Pictures, who distributed the film, didn't care much because the film was cheap anyway), went right in, and the rest is history. A "sequel" followed with Alfie Darling (1975) that had no Caine in the lead (Alan Price took over) and therefore no particular reason to see it before an inevitable remake was done in 2004 with Jude Law as star. 

The striking thing is that for a film of the Swingin' era of London, it actually is a pretty sobering comedy-drama film beneath the fourth wall posturing by Caine (as devised by Gilbert and company) that makes its mark in self-centered but aware amusement in what romance really means, particularly within "peace of mind". The performance of Caine carries the movie as far as you would possibly expect. He makes the exemplary example of a Casanova in all of the ways you hope to see in sad amusement. You can see how his Cockney accent and blustering attitude towards women make him more than a caricature or target for easy jokes, since all he really is one who knows only what he wants to know in pleasure without pain, one who changes partners like one changes socks that makes for a quality scoundrel. Winters is actually only in three scenes despite her billing, but she is still in good form here in terms of provocative enjoyment in taste. There is a distinct edge to how our lead treats each of the four women he tries to make a roll within Martin, Merchant, Asher, and Foster that they each handle with useful timing and pathos, right from the opening sequence where Caine is trying to explain pursuit with a married woman with the first chat he makes to the camera. Within the edges is the withering of Alfie's own life where he can't even see his own kid because of his own ways and even a bout at the sanitorium because of how he takes the news about shadows in lungs that is handled expertly. Of course, it also is a film that doesn't skimp on the key event that made the play a lightning rod for discussion: a character going through an abortion. Obviously, it isn't actually shown in either the play or the film, but the very fact it is mentioned at all was quite notable in its time. It isn't moral handwringing to say that certain actions have consequences, and it is seeing those up close that make it especially important to make a film effective, which I think is handled quite well within the time spent with Caine, Merchant, and Elliott. By the time the film ends on a last conversation to the fourth wall in "what's it all about?", you have a pretty good idea of just what it means to have seen someone look at their consequences in the face and come out still asking questions and all alone. As a whole, Alfie is a curious and suitable way to spend 114 minutes when it comes to saying something distinct about what it all means to try and play the master of all in something and end up as master of none in the home of one's mind, which makes for a pretty good comedy-drama.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

On Deadly Ground.

Review #1764: On Deadly Ground.

Cast: 

Steven Seagal (Forrest Taft), Michael Caine (Michael Jennings), Joan Chen (Masu), John C. McGinley (MacGruder), R. Lee Ermey (Stone), Shari Shattuck (Liles), Billy Bob Thornton (Homer Carlton), Richard Hamilton (Hugh Palmer), Chief Irvin Brink (Silook), John Trudell (Johnny Redfeather), Mike Starr (Big Mike), and Sven-Ole Thorsen (Otto) Directed by Steven Seagal.

Review: 

For a long time, I wondered exactly what to think about watching a movie featuring Steven Seagal. No, really. When one has seen countless action movies that have featured folks like Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Bruce Willis, or even folks outside the Hollywood system in the heyday of action films, one does eventually wonder just how green the grass is on the other side when it comes to folks with reputation that could be considered "boorish" or "different". Of course, let's start at the beginning. Born in Michigan but raised in California, he actually started his adult life as a martial arts instructor in Japan before returning back to run his own dojo (of course, he had made claims that he actually had an association with certain CIA agents during that time, but this is dubious). Eventually, he broke into films, although he started out as a coordinator for stunts and martial arts. At any rate, it was the help of an agent within Hollywood that got him into his first film role with Above the Law (1988), which he also co-produced and co-wrote. This would be followed by a string of action vehicles such as Hard to Kill (1990), Out for Justice (1991), and Under Siege (1992), with the latter generally being considered his most mainstream hit. Seagal still persists on as an actor in film roles, although generally they are either "direct-to-video" or "video-on-demand" or "well, he has a supporting role, but he is top-billed like some other action stars". At any rate, 1994 Seagal had star power that he could use for something meaningful in films and he clearly wanted to make a feature film with a message. As such, On Deadly Ground is his debut feature film as a director, done in a deal with Warner Bros. that in exchange for directing that he could star in Under Siege 2: Dark Territory for them the following year.

Oh, he was trying to be serious with this film. With lines such as ”What does it take to change the essence of a man?”, you better believe that the action star wanted to create something thoughtful. Of course, he was quoted as stating he did not consider himself a martial-arts star, as if he did not in fact want to be thought of as the next incarnation of folks like Chuck Norris (another time, another time). Indeed, Seagal can state that he directed a film for a major studio that other stars did not...and he inadvertently made one of the most unintentionally hilarious films of its time, a movie that waxes on about the environment and what must be done about it while being stuffed with a body-count akin to a horror movie, complete with giving an esteemed actor like Michael Caine an unsightly hairdo in a role likely up there in amusement with Jaws: The Revenge. You could actually cut the movie to make it look like Seagal is some sort of slasher character, since he runs the gamut of creative death sequences for the folks he takes down (who are as one dimensional as he is), which revolves from setting traps to dropping people into oil. But hey, let's briefly talk about the supporting folks first, because they sure are disposable enough to make fun of. Caine looks and sounds befuddled here, as if he was wondering where the "Captain Planet" voice booth was instead, and he is given exactly the amount of depth one would expect from a cardboard cutout villain. Chen is the accompanying leading lady with Seagal, and it is amusing to see the absolute zero chemistry between the two, which is made more amusing with her being present for a variety of death scenes that involve no reaction on her part. McGinley plays the toady role with cheese that at least looks like he is having an ounce of fun (one wonders how Thornton did with his small part in amusement). Ermey is technically meant to be the adversary to Seagal, but since our hero never experiences any real threat, he is more amusing than anything.

I strongly suspect that there would have better movies to watch Seagal in before I tried this one, because no one could be this wooden. He may have the physique for an action star, but he seems far too wrapped up in...whatever his attempt at charisma is. There are lines that sound like they should be funny, but it is the stuff that is supposed to be taken seriously (such as the aforementioned line I stated in the previous paragraph...which he speaks to a guy he just beat up after doing a slap hand game) that is more amusing, as if he was playing a killer without any awareness at all. To top it all off, Seagal spends the last couple of minutes talking about the environment (as if to the audience), which apparently was actually cut down from the request of Warner Bros. (since Seagal had a much longer plan); it might be appropriate for Greenpeace but otherwise it proves hysterical when it comes from a movie where a dude just destroyed a rig and dozens of people. At any rate, the movie (known first as "Rainbow Warrior" and "Spirit Warrior" before this title) involved a guy trying to rectify the wrongs of an oil company that plans to use their latest device to drill before the native Alaskans can retrieve the land back, a vision quest, and dozens of amusing moments. Oddly enough, the most equivalent film in that regard might be Billy Jack (1971), since that movie also features a hero that is friendly with the natives that likes to kick and kick before preaching about a certain message (which was pacifism, although that movie had plodding sequences with hippies). Honestly, more folks should probably check this one out for its sheer failure in message and execution, regardless of how it easy it seems to pick on Seagal these days. This is the one chance you have to see him as both star and director, and it all comes in a flop like this.

 

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Fate lends a hand and delivers In the Name of the King for Black Friday.

The Dark Knight Rises.

Review #1562: The Dark Knight Rises.

Cast: 
Christian Bale (Bruce Wayne / Batman), Michael Caine (Alfred Pennyworth), Gary Oldman (Commissioner James Gordon), Anne Hathaway (Selina Kyle / Catwoman), Tom Hardy (Bane), Marion Cotillard (Miranda Tate / Talia al Ghul), Joseph Gordon-Levitt (John Blake), Morgan Freeman (Lucius Fox), Matthew Modine (Foley), Ben Mendelsohn (John Daggett), Burn Gorman (Philip Stryver), Alon Aboutboul (Dr. Leonid Pavel), Juno Temple (Jen), Daniel Sunjata (Captain Jones), Chris Ellis (Father Reilly), Brett Cullen (Byron Gilley), Cillian Murphy (Dr. Jonathan Crane / Scarecrow), and Liam Neeson (Henri Ducard / Ra's al Ghul) Directed by Christopher Nolan (#054 - The Dark Knight, #055 - Inception, #062 - Batman Begins, and #980 - Dunkirk)

Review:
"For me, The Dark Knight Rises is specifically and definitely the end of the Batman story as I wanted to tell it, and the open-ended nature of the film is simply a very important thematic idea that we wanted to get into the movie, which is that Batman is a symbol. He can be anybody, and that was very important to us."

Auteur filmmakers can do any genre, as long as they manage to cultivate films that are of their own design with distinct style and interesting consistency to make it a worthwhile experience to look for time and time again. Christopher Nolan rose to that occasion, doing so under the inspiration of wanting to be a filmmaker since he was a child with influences like Ridley Scott and 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). A graduate of University College London, he started making his own short films by the time he was 19 and made his first feature with the independently made Following (1998) that was followed up with breakthroughs with Memento (2000) and Insomnia (2002) before being brought in to bring back Batman to the big screen. There must have been quite the high hype for a film like this, one that would prove the end of a trilogy of films that Nolan co-produced and co-wrote (with his brother Jonathan for the screenplay and David S. Goyer for the story) alongside direction (he has done writing for most of his features alongside directing, with this being his eighth feature film). Nolan was hesitant for a third film, only wanting to do one if it served satisfactory in its story (as opposed to being just a follow-up film). If the first film involved fear and the sequel involved chaos, Nolan wanted a film that would involve pain, and the main villain of each film seems to reflect that vision, which also seems to include making the films longer as well (if the first felt long at 140 minutes, try 165 with this one). Nolan was the second director to have directed an entire trilogy involving one superhero after Sam Raimi and his Spider-Man trilogy, and it is clear to mention the success that has been done in capturing an epic of sweeping realism that drew upon certain Batman stories (such as Year One or The Long Halloween) that proved distinct in what they did for superhero films when compared to the various ones that came around since 2005 (or even more so by 2012). There are various comic books from the Batman series that this takes inspiration from, such as "Knightfall" (which had Bane pushing Batman to his limits), The Dark Knight Returns (an aged Batman returning to Gotham after several years), and "No Man's Land" (where Gotham is cut off from the rest of the country due to violence), although one major influence on the story was actually Charles Dickens' 1859 novel A Tale of Two Cities (detailing revolution that also happens to borrow lines from it in one of the last scenes).

I will admit that Nolan has done a well-placed achievement in his career, a definitive end to a series in its own vision of what Batman is as the last leg of an epic series that achieves most of what it sets out to do with scope and gravitas that ties as many ends as it does invite further discussion over the nature of such an extraordinary figure in an ordinary world that have villains that aren't necessarily just big foils to defeat but instead are ones that get under one's skin with coherence. I don't think of it as the best of the three films (The Dark Knight is inevitably an indelible achievement to surpass), but it definitely serves as one of the most interesting films of its year (or if one is more bold, its decade, which had a considerable amount of films based on comic books, but not many better than this). Bale certainly has come a long way in seven years in this role, one that requires an actor who can show numerous layers beyond just playing a millionaire playboy / dressing up as a bat and fighting crime in a deep voice. While it might have seemed a bit silly-sounding at first, I have warmed up to it because Bale does so well in pulling off this dual person that actually seems like three acts when faced with who he is to his close friends, the public at large, and perhaps his real self as Batman. He captures the struggle that comes with continuing to be defined by pain and loss to its logical conclusion with the time that he balances well on screen, where one doesn't really need too much of Batman to still be captivated by what it means to find one self again and become a knight of a city that needs it as opposed to a false ideal or kowtowing to fear or apathy. Caine lends the dutiful hand with sharp elegance and usefulness as one should expect from an anchor of sensibility like him. Oldman carries a mix of honesty with guilt and weariness that still reflects the sense of right and wrong and the choices that come in trying to fitting those goals for better or worse. Hathaway does fine with her role, reflecting differently from the others that had portrayed the role before her in past films with playful care that she modelled after the initial inspiration for the character in Hedy Lamarr. Hardy based his accent on a Romani gypsy (named Bartley Gorman), and it seems well-suited for one meant to be a sort of liberator of pain, one that ultimately does just well enough with serving the film in generating interest as a test of strength and mind, which I think works itself out really well despite maybe one small misgiving about the way the climax handles him; this plays into the other adversary lurking in plain sight that connects itself right back to the first film - Cotillard is a decent actress here and it is a decent twist, but it all somehow feels a bit too convenient to really close everything out neatly. Gordon-Levitt does fine here with generating idealism with instinct that never sparks a false note or seems too off for what is needed to set the film on course when with paired with Bale or Oldman. Freeman and the rest round out a useful cast that do what is needed in filling the depth of characters needed to fill the depth of the city or plot detailing. The film packs quite a wallop in action, executing itself with balance and consistency for capable action in such a distinct atmosphere that keeps itself on the edge with numerous situations and weaving of plot that keeps itself on track despite a length that could've proven bloated with a lesser director of style and substance. While it doesn't reach all the heights imposed by the first sequel to Batman Begins, it seals its legend of Batman as a symbol with conviction as a testament for practicality within the margins of comic book adaptation that honors its source material while closing the book with its own exclamation points as a useful story for the ages.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.

Review #1489: Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.

Cast:
Steve Martin (Freddy Benson), Michael Caine (Lawrence Jamieson), Glenne Headly (Janet Colgate), Anton Rodgers (Inspector Andre), Barbara Harris (Fanny Eubanks), Ian McDiarmid (Arthur), Dana Ivey (Mrs. Reed), and Meagen Fay (Miss Trumble) Directed by Frank Oz (#521 - The Muppets Take Manhattan, #795 - Bowfinger, #1468 - The Dark Crystal, and #1482 - Little Shop of Horrors)

Review: 
"The greatest thing you can do is surprise yourself."
"I love comedy. I love to make people laugh. If I hadn't been an actor, or an architect, which I really wanted to be, I'd have been a stand-up comic."

To have a good duo film, you need a good pairing to begin with, particularly when it comes to a comedy since pairings really happen only once and just that nowadays. Steve Martin, for example, was a fairly established comedy star at the time, having gone from television writing (such as The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour) to stand-up (defined by self-referential riffs alongside banjo playing) and television work to eventually starring in his own films with The Jerk (1979). As for Michael Caine, he had done over a decade of work in films and television before coming to prominence in the late 1960s that included films such as The Ipcress File (1965) and The Italian Job (1969) that has continued with starring and character roles for over five decades. It is a remake of the 1964 film Bedtime Story, which had starred Marlon Brando and David Niven that had been written by Stanley Shapiro and Paul Henning. This time the two wrote the screenplay with Dale Launer. There were a few changes made while keeping the basic core of two con artists that bump into each other in the French Riveria that goes from apprenticeship to contest, most notably with the resolution (which had originally ended with one of the cons turning good and romancing the one being played...so I suppose that makes sense). This would serve the basis for a musical of the same name in 2004 (featuring John Lithgow) and another remake of the material was done in The Hustle (2019).

However one views the material, this is a fairly well-paired film. It makes for a good natured time with its balanced pair of timing and zippy lines in a relaxed setting that allows for chemistry between its actors without smothering them in complications. With a run-time of 110 minutes, the film runs fairly well for itself in staging amusing situations and bits for Caine and Martin to run free with (of sorts) making general humor that is fairly cheerful in making a decent setup. Martin is quite enjoyable here, jumping at the chance of playing off Caine with enthusiastic contrast that leads to quite a handful of moments to look upon him and laugh, whether that involves him struggling for a name or trying to scare off someone for an act (including a corked fork). Caine proves just as handy for generating snappy charisma and quick chemistry with Martin that does manners on the fly that seems fairly effortless, whether to ladies or gentlemen. Headly makes for a fair foil between the two, not quite too assuming nor too much of a mark to forget in the background, particularly for the last scene together. In general, if you like the movie enough, the last scene helps seal the deal in a charmer (if not however, welp). The supporting cast is a mix of dupers and dupes that do just fine, such as a subtle Rodgers. What we have here is a clever game of tricks and humor that generally work out well in pace and buildup with two likable scoundrels that maneuver gags with reasonable timing that seems well-suited for its era as a fine time for all and a fair piece for both Martin and Caine to have fun with along with a good show for Oz as well.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Deathtrap.

Review #1065: Deathtrap.

Cast: 
Michael Caine (Sidney Bruhl), Christopher Reeve (Clifford Anderson), Dyan Cannon (Myra Bruhl), Irene Worth (Helga Ten Dorp), Henry Jones (Porter Milgrim), and Joe Silver (Seymour Starger) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men, #036 - Network, and #404 - The Anderson Tapes)

Review: 
Deathtrap was adapted from the play of the same name by Ira Levin, which had run from 1978 to 1982 on Broadway, holding the record for the longest running comedy-thriller on Broadway. The original play comprised of two acts with one set and five characters. and it is easy to say that the transition to film went smoothly, with the only thing added being scenes set in the theater that bookend the movie - along with a few other small changes. Quite simply, this is an effective comedy-thriller, balancing its elements handily along with having a fine pair in Caine and Reeve. The film takes its time to get interesting, but it never comes off as boring nor stale, although I find that the second half of the movie is where it really gets itself into gear. Caine excels in his role, having the right kind of frantic and resourceful nature that makes him fun to watch on screen, particularly with the snappy dialogue that works with his dry tone. Reeve delivers an entertaining performance, managing to balance a boyish charm and unpredictability quite nicely. Cannon is the weak link in the main cast, coming off a bit annoying at points, with her shrieking being a bit tiresome to hear, although she can come off as endearing for others. Worth is fairly amusing in the parts that she is in, playing her eccentric nature with the right kind of conviction and energy that never rattles too much off the deep end. The movie doesn't elicit too much in terms of scares, but it does manage to elicit excitement from its main two actors in the finale to make up for it. The movie has often been compared to Sleuth (1972), which also featured Caine; I can't say how my opinion would've changed had I seen the other film before this one, but I would hope that the viewing experience for either film isn't bent too much because of any kind of comparison-making. The movie manages to run itself fairly well at 116 minutes, never becoming tedious with its twists nor lengthening itself to ridiculous heights, having fun with the ways it moves the pieces of its jigsaw puzzle kind of plot (which you should see for yourself) handily. This is a fine gem that has some dark humor to go along with its clever nature that works in the places it needs to the most with its cast and arrangements that is interesting enough to recommend.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Kingsman: The Secret Service.

Review #993: Kingsman: The Secret Service.

Cast: 
Colin Firth (Harry Hart / Galahad), Samuel L. Jackson (Richmond Valentine), Mark Strong (Merlin), Taron Egerton (Gary "Eggsy" Unwin), Michael Caine (Chester King / Arthur), Sophie Cookson (Roxanne "Roxy" Morton / Lancelot), Sofia Boutella (Gazelle), Samantha Womack (Michelle Unwin), Geoff Bell (Dean), Edward Holcroft (Charles "Charlie" Hesketh), Mark Hamill (Professor James Arnold), Jack Davenport (James Spencer / Lancelot), Jack Cutmore-Scott (Rufus Saville), Lily Travers (Lady Sophie), Hanna Alström (Princess Tilde), and Bjørn Floberg (Scandinavian Prime Minister) Directed by Matthew Vaughn (#042 - X-Men: First Class)

Review: 
It is evident early on to see the influence the James Bond films had in making this movie (based on the comic book series The Secret Service): specifically, the Roger Moore films. Granted, this is certainly more stylized in its action (and decidedly more violent) than those films, but this is a movie that is fairly enjoyable entertainment that will fill some people's taste significantly better than others. The best parts of the film involve either Firth and Egerton together on screen, or Jackson. The mentor-trainee aspects aren't particularly new (you could take your pick on what it reminds you, my pick would be Men in Black - #211), but they certainly are enjoyable to watch along with being capable heroes in their own right. Jackson does a capable job in part because he seems so comfortable with the role he is playing on screen, with a good sense of humor and self-awareness (which the film has a good deal of already) that is fairly entertaining; his supervillain plot is certainly an interesting one, resembling something one of the Moore Bond films would've done, reminding me a bit of Moonraker (minus the space parts, naturally) that certainly might seem a bit odd with its implications if deep thought was put into it, though what spy flick doesn't have that kind of quirk? The rest of the cast is fairly enjoyable and capable at their roles, such as Strong and Cookson, with Boutella proving to be a fairly useful (and thrilling) henchwoman.

The movie certainly has a useful sense of humor to it that hits more than it misses when required, fitting with the tone of the film for the most part. The action sequences are interesting to watch to be executed on screen, never really seeming to miss a beat nor feel too murky (with the easiest standout being at the church); the violence might prove to be a bit graphic for some, but I generally thought that it worked finely enough to the movie's advantage, for better or for worse. Ultimately, the enjoyment one gets from this movie comes from how they feel about the action and the way the movie goes about with getting to the highs (and slight lows) that it does. Take it for what it is worth, and you get a movie that has something to like (or watch) for most people, for better or for worse.

I don't usually get to say exactly what is next up on Movie Night, but here's a rare exception.
Next Review: Kingsman: The Golden Circle. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Cars 2.

Review #730: Cars 2.

Cast
Larry the Cable Guy (Mater), Owen Wilson (Lightning McQueen), Michael Caine (Finn McMissile), Emily Mortimer (Holley Shiftwell), John Turturro (Francesco Bernoulli), Eddie Izzard (Sir Miles Axlerod), Thomas Kretschmann (Professor Zündapp), Joe Mantegna (Grem), Peter Jacobson (Acer), Tony Shalhoub (Luigi), Jason Isaacs (Siddeley/Leland Turbo), and Stanley Townsend (Vladimir Trunkov/Ivan/Victor Hugo), Directed by John Lasseter (#440 - Toy Story, #441 - Toy Story 2, #539 - A Bug's Life, and #729 - Cars)

Review
The first Cars was okay. In the sense that when compared to other Pixar movies, it suffered under comparison, but the movie along was fine. This? Meh. Remember how passion made Cars into something to credit? With this, it should've been buried in a box and never opened. Ultimately the problems all come down to the focus changing from McQueen...to Mater. Look, I don't hate Larry the Cable Guy, but after a while, I started to just loathe Mater. He worked better in the first movie because of the small town atmosphere the first movie had, where Mater wasn't with spies and inferior cars trying to ruin a Prix. When did we go from small town memories to SPY FLICK? That would be like if Toy Story 2 was instead a cyberpunk opera. Actually, that would've been better than this. McQueen and Mater's bonding was actually more interesting than Mater being a spy, because I wasn't yelling at the screen, waiting for the movie to get to the point. It's something when you want to see cars racing each other more than spies. At least the rest of the cast is alright, even if there are dozens of characters (and cameos). Admittedly, it's a good looking movie in terms of animation, especially nighttime shots, with the glow of the lights. Mater drags on your nerves, especially if you have little patience. It could be argued that he is up to the level of annoyance that Jar Jar Binks was in The Phantom Menace, though at least Mater saves the day. I like the idea of McQueen going to race in a Prix around the world, to see other cultures and other racers, now that the town is well off. Instead, it's a look into how silly Mater can be in other cultures, right down to swallowing a bunch of wasabi. I wonder if it would've been funnier in live action, with real people. Of course, if I wanted to, I could watch it on the Internet.

The "be yourself" theme works in theory, unless of course you meet someone who doesn't like you, or is a bully. Yes, even when you are being beaten up, at least you can be comforted in that they were being themselves. The idea that cars can apparently kill other cars is a bit strange, though this works into my idea that the cars secretly took over the Earth and just became sentient, disguising their act by acting as friendly as possible. The movie is good for younger audiences, at least, but it should strive better. We could get into the "animation shouldn't be just for kids" argument, but there are better movies to watch. The depth of the movie is lacking with regards to other Pixar movies, but maybe that was a part of the disappointment with me. Pixar is a pinnacle of great quality animated movies, before (Toy Story, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo) and after (Ratatouille, WALL-E, Up, Inside Out) this movie. If you have younger relatives, they might like it. But only if there are no other options. None.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Jaws: The Revenge.

Review #557: Jaws: The Revenge.

Cast
Lorraine Gary (Ellen Brody), Lance Guest (Michael Brody), Mario Van Peebles (Jake), Karen Young (Carla Brody), Michael Caine (Hoagie Newcombe), Judith Barsi (Thea Brody), Lynn Whitfield (Louisa), and Mitchell Anderson (Sean Brody) Directed by Joseph Sargent.

Review
Who's getting revenge? How did the filmmakers get Michael Caine to star? How can a shark travel from cold water Amity to the warm water Bahamas? How can sharks get revenge? Why is it that the actors who play the Brody children in these film are never consistent? All these questions and more will not be answered by the time you finish this movie. Lorraine Gary returns to star, and she does a decent job, in a film as illogical as this. So yeah, how are the shark effects? Pretty bad, but my "favorite" scene is at the end, where the shark explodes. Why? Because without knowing what's going on beforehand, the climatic ending is incomprehensible to watch. It's hard to tell what's going on because flashbacks from Jaws are cut into the climax, and suddenly a stick goes into the shark, and it explodes for some reason. This is a movie that make little sense, that makes Jaws 3-D look tolerable, and most importantly, puts the final nail in the coffin for the Jaws franchise. I do wonder if Jaws 19 will come out next year like Back to the Future Part II predicted. I guess I'll find out on my hover board (I'd love to see the Cubs win the World Series, though), as it can't be as lame as this movie is.

Overall, I give it 2 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Muppet Christmas Carol.

Review #498: The Muppet Christmas Carol.

Cast
Michael Caine (Ebenezer Scrooge), Dave Goelz (The Great Gonzo as Charles Dickens, Waldorf as Robert Marley, Dr. Bunsen Honeydew, and Betina Cratchit), Steve Whitmire (Kermit the Frog as Bob Cratchit, Rizzo the Rat, Beaker, Bean Bunny, Belinda Cratchit, Beetle, and Lips), Jerry Nelson (Tiny Tim Cratchit, Statler as Jacob Marley, Ma Bear as Ma Fozziwig, Ghost of Christmas Present, Lew Zealand, and Mr. Applegate), Frank Oz (Miss Piggy as Emily Cratchit, Fozzie Bear as Fozziewig, Sam the Eagle as Headmaster of Junior High Graduates, Animal and George the Janitor), David Rudman (Peter Cratchit, Old Joe, Swedish Chef), Jessica Fox (Ghost of Christmas Past) and Steven Mackintosh (Fred) Directed by Brian Henson.

Review
I've reviewed movies based on the story A Christmas Carol (#076 - Scrooge (1951) and #079 - A Christmas Carol (1984)) before, but this one is a little different, as the Muppets (Last seen by me in #377 - Muppets from Space) intervene in the process, certainly making for a unique adaptation. Michael Caine, while not as good as say George C. Scott, does make a decent Scrooge who is entertaining enough, and he pairs off well with the Muppets. Speaking of which, the Muppets are really entertaining, especially The Great Gonzo and Rizzo, who pair well off each other all throughout the film. The story flows well and the characters are all fine and dandy, and this certainly is a fine way to spend a weekend near Christmastime. Countdown to 500 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Wrong Box.

Review #429: The Wrong Box.

Cast
John Mills (Masterman Finsbury), Ralph Richardson (Joseph Finsbury), Michael Caine (Michael Finsbury), Peter Cook (Morris Finsbury), Dudley Moore (John Finsbury), Nanette Newman (Julia Finsbury), Peter Sellers (Dr. Pratt), Tony Hancock (Detective), and Wilfrid Lawson (Peacock) Directed by Bryan Forbes.

Review
The Wrong Box has oddball moments, notable late comedians and some laughs, and while sometimes it could be better, this is a tour de force of 60's star power, which either gives it appeal or makes it a bit dated. Anyway, the film does have its moments with some of the demises of the characters, one involving a duel that let's just say turns incredibly wrong. The main two actors are fine and Caine is good as always, but Cook and Moore steal the show, they bring an aura, a certain sort of bizarre charm, and it has a well effect indeed. The gags in the film are alright and while some might miss, there are some that hit the mark even to the day, not being that dated.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Secondhand Lions.

Review #385: Secondhand Lions.

Cast
Haley Joel Osment (Walter Caldwell), Michael Caine (Garth McCann), Robert Duvall (Hub McCann), Kyra Sedgwick (Mae Caldwell), Nicky Katt (Stan), Josh Lucas (Adult Walter Caldwell), Michael O'Neill (Ralph), Deirdre O'Connell (Helen), Christian Kane (Young Hub), Daniel Brooks (Sheik's Great-Grandson), Kevin Haberer (Young Garth), Eric Balfour (Sheik's grandson), Emmanuelle Vaugier (Jasmine), and Adam Ozturk (The Sheik) Directed by Tim McCanlies.

Review
When I watched this earlier today, I had...never heard of this. Yeah, a film made 10 years ago (in a decade where I've reviewed 85 of them), and yet has Michael Caine (#054 - The Dark Knight, #055 - Inception, #062 - Batman Begins, #134 - Austin Powers in Goldmember) and Robert Duvall (#036 - Network, #116 - To Kill a Mockingbird, #191 - The 6th Day, #383 - The Natural) in it. Is it any good? Sure. Some might find it "schmaltzy", I find it to be good. Sometimes a film is just fun for what it has, and this has a wholesome heart and a lot of fun to it. Caine and Duvall play off each other well, with Duvall being the breakout star who steals the show, and this being a good thing. While Caine may seem off cast (Trying to portray a Texan), he still manages to do a fine enough job. Osment is allright, not too bad, for a...teen actor I suppose. The film starts off fine and gets better as it goes along. It has its moments and it does entertain for the most part. It has adventure, excitement, and a lot of fun to go with it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Austin Powers in Goldmember.

Review #134: Austin Powers in Goldmember.

Cast
Mike Myers (Austin Powers, Dr. Evil, Goldmember, Fat Bastard), Beyoncé Knowles (Foxxy Cleopatra), Michael Caine (Nigel Powers), Seth Green (Scott Evil), and Verne Troyer (Mini-Me), Michael York (Basil Exposition), Robert Wagner (Number 2), Mindy Sterling (Frau Farbissina), and Fred Savage (Number 3/Mole) Directed by Jay Roach.

Review
It might interest you to know that the first Austin Powers film was released on May 2, 1997 (15 years Wednesday) Anyway, this film is not as good as the second or the first. The jokes are alright, except that some of them are recycled from the last one (Even pointed out by the Osbournes of all people) Even the new ones feel a bit off, as the film wants to do more of the sense of plot, but it just doesn't feel right (One thing to note that they literally reverse the polarity in one scene) The film has a plot twist in the end which is right out of left field, which makes you wonder how the film wasn't as good as the second. It has decent acting, but it just doesn't measure up as well. And that's the 20th Review of this month, the most since July 2011 (Which had 21)

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Batman Begins.

Review #062: Batman Begins.

Cast
Christian Bale (Bruce Wayne / Batman), Michael Caine (Alfred Pennyworth), Liam Neeson (Henri Ducard/Ra's al Ghul), Katie Holmes (Rachel Dawes), Gary Oldman (Jim Gordon), Cillian Murphy (Dr. Jonathan Crane), Tom Wilkinson (Carmine Falcone), Rutger Hauer (Earle), Ken Watanabe (decoy Ra's Al Ghul), Mark Boone Junior (Flass), Linus Roache (Thomas Wayne), and Morgan Freeman (Lucius Fox) Directed by Christopher Nolan (#054 - The Dark Knight and #055 - Inception)

Review
I find that this film is pretty good, for the most part. It successfully reboots the franchise (which died after the 1997 bomb Batman and Robin) with an origin story that reintroduces people to him, and sets the ball in motion for the sequel. I felt the acting was good, but there were some little gripes. For one, I found the coveted "throat voice" of Christian Bale very, very unconvincing (what's next, Superman having the voice to disguise himself? It would be better then his glasses trick...). I also felt the action was jumbled, so you couldn't really tell what was going on. Scarecrow actually doesn't get a lot of screen time, and he's taken down so easily. And my final little gripe is how the Tumbler looks so...ugly. Is this the Batmobile, or a tank? Look I know there's a scene that says its a tank, but how is this a "mobile"? But nonetheless, the film is good, for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Inception.

Review #055: Inception.

Cast
Leonardo DiCaprio (Dom Cobb), Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Arthur), Ellen Page (Ariadne), Tom Hardy (Eames), Ken Watanabe (Mr. Saito), Dileep Rao (Yusuf), Cillian Murphy (Robert Fischer), Tom Berenger (Peter Browning), Marion Cotillard (Mal Cobb), Pete Postlethwaite (Maurice Fischer), and Michael Caine (Professor Stephen Miles) Directed by Christopher Nolan (#054 - The Dark Knight)

Review
The film is...Weird. It's creative yes, but I just couldn't get into it enough. I felt the film wanted to bore me so I literally could dream. At roughly two-and-a-half hours long, it's difficult to watch all of it. I give marks for solid acting and good action though.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.