Born on the Fourth of July.

Review #2031: Born on the Fourth of July.

Cast: 

Tom Cruise (Sergeant Ron Kovic; Bryan Larkin as Young Ron), Willem Dafoe (Charlie), Kyra Sedgwick (Donna; Jessica Prunell as Young Donna), Raymond J. Barry (Mr. Kovic), Jerry Levine (Steve Boyer), Frank Whaley (Timmy), Caroline Kava (Mrs. Kovic), Cordelia Gonzalez (Maria Elena - Villa Dulce), Ed Lauter (Legion Commander), John Getz (Marine Major - Vietnam), Beau Starr (Man #2 - Arthur's Bar), and Michael Wincott (Vet #3 - Villa Dulce) Directed by Oliver Stone (#095 - Wall Street, #1090 - Platoon, #1265 - Natural Born Killers, #1523 - Any Given Sunday, and #1595 - Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps)

Review: 

“I’m puzzled by life, horrified by the daily newspaper. The only sane response is re-creation, drama . . . an ordered series of events that arouse pity and terror, to paraphrase Aristotle. Making movies is my way of exorcising demons, of creating an ethos, a philosophy of life. I’d go crazy without fantasy.”

Every so often, I am reminded that my father was a war veteran. I don't have many memories of him talking about his service in Vietnam, aside from once seeing his dog tags and remembering his burial a couple of years ago at a cemetery for veterans. But men are not defined only by if they served for their country or not, they are served by who they are for those who end up alive to talk about it. One such man who found meaning in the (difficult) time that came after his service was Ron Kovic. After he graduated from Massapequa High School in New York (where he was raised to a family of Croatian & Irish ancestry), he quickly volunteered to serve in Vietnam in 1965. He was a member of the United States Marines, for which he made two tours of duty. It was on January 20, 1968, that he was shot and severely wounded that resulted in him being paralyzed from the waist down. After intensive recovery led to his arrival back home, Kovic found curiosity within peace demonstrations, starting in 1970. This happened not long after the events of May 1970 that had seen numerous student protests in universities such as Kent State University and Jackson State University, for which each saw anti-war demonstrators killed (the former by Ohio National Guard, the latter by local patrolmen). Kovic wrote Born on the Fourth of July in the span of over a month in 1974 that was published in 1976 that he stated was written to show people about the "hospitals and the enema room, about why I had become opposed to the war, why I had grown more and more committed to peace and nonviolence." Not long after, Kovic gave a speech at the Democratic National Convention, four years after him and other members of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War had protested the Republican Convention (the war did not end until 1975). Even now, with his 77th birthday, Kovic serves as a constant anti-war presence. Cruise, Stone, and Kovic were each nominated for Academy Awards that year for this film (Best Actor, Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Picture), with Stone winning for his efforts in direction (don't ask who won Best Picture). Stone would do one further film in what was later called his trilogy of Vietnam War films with Heaven & Earth (1993).

Relating to all of this is the production struggle to get things moving, as there had been interest in doing a film from the very moment Kovic spoke at the DNC, specifically Al Pacino. Oliver Stone, who had served in the United States Army with service from 1967-68, was brought in to try and write for the screenplay in 1977. Incidentally, Kovic served as a consultant on Coming Home (1978), a film involving a disillusioned Vietnam War veteran left in a wheelchair. It was not until the success of Platoon (1986) that Stone could get the chance to write (alongside Kovic) and direct this film. With Platoon, one would find that it argued most that the first casualty in war was innocence. With this film, now one finds how it goes for those who have arrived home after said innocence was lost, not to a hero's welcome but a state of indifference. The illusion of going off to a just war to fight for your country has been shattered into one of unimaginable agony, one where a love of country is warped by some into the idea that they somehow don't love it just because they want to speak up (of course, there are many perspectives when it comes to returning home from war that would shudder at folks who seem to toil in "self-pity" or other characteristics, but that is a different can of worms). As Kovic once said, you aren't meant to avoid conflict and pain in life but instead shape it into something beneficial. So, one minute you may be on the side of wanting to yell folks to "love it or leave it" and the next you may find yourself looking along with Abbie Hoffman (he appears in the film for a moment in a film released months after his suicide at the age of 52). This is conveyed in a mostly factual tale (the character played by Sedgwick is a composite, for example) that is carried near wholesale by the performance of Cruise. The 145-minute runtime is his to carry alone in the odyssey from idealism to the road back from hell, one that requires an actor who can convey the gravity of the situation, and he does a tremendous job here, never striking a false note in those human moments. The burrowing of idealism is handled with honesty with such commitment that Kovic gave Cruise his Bronze Star Medal after filming. The rest of the cast do reasonably well in support from the bits and pieces that arise from before and after time of war, whether that involves protest in Sedgwick or familiarity with Whaley and vulnerable parenting in Barry and Kava. Dafoe actually doesn't show up in the film until the last third of the film (set in Mexico with prostitutes), but he is on point in those moments of animus that only he could bring in a scene where he and Cruise are bickering on a dirt road. As a whole, the movie is a general triumph in communicating what it means to see a person go through the fight of their lives in terms of withering innocence and conscience for what it all means when back home and not "out there". There is no one solution fit for all, but a level of understanding for who one is a virtue that all people can see as worthwhile, American or not. As such, it is a tough sit for audiences in the ways that matter, thanks to the efforts of Cruise, Stone & Kovic.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Happy Independence Day, folks.

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.

Review #1595: Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.

Cast:

Michael Douglas (Gordon Gekko), Shia LaBeouf (Jacob "Jake" Moore), Josh Brolin (Bretton James), Carey Mulligan (Winnie Gekko), Susan Sarandon (Sylvia Moore), Eli Wallach (Julius Steinhardt), Frank Langella (Louis Zabel), Austin Pendleton (Dr. Masters), Sylvia Miles (Dolores the Realtor), Vanessa Ferlito (Audrey), and John Buffalo Mailer (Robby) Directed by Oliver Stone (#095 - Wall Street, #1090 - Platoon, #1265 - Natural Born Killers, and #1523 - Any Given Sunday)

Review:

"When I made the movie I thought greed was NOT good. But I learned people really like money. They like to make money. They will even admire the villain with the money - even when he breaks the law."

What, another sequel to a film from the 1980s that came out over two decades later? Truly, we live in an age of the comeback. At least this time around it features the return of not only one of the main stars but also the director again in Oliver Stone. He has had a variety of stages to his filmmaking career that have distinct edges revolving from films involving Vietnam (such as Platoon) or his biographical dramas (such as Alexander), and this is his 18th feature effort along with his first-ever sequel. The original Wall Street (1987) film, which Stone co-wrote with Stanley Weiser with inspiration from Stone's father being a broker during the Great Depression. It was a film that raged against the excess of the times in greed and ambition (which owes to the inspiration drawn from several corporate raiders) that nevertheless inspired others to become stockbrokers themselves. The seduction of one into money seems to be limitless if one just slides under the lines of what we consider to be the rules of right and wrong, you might say. Honestly, I grew up with this film on my shelf as one I admired in curiosity, and I find that it still stands well in its staying power about greed and its acting from Michael Douglas alongside Charlie Sheen (since Stone has noted the latter as the one contributing the meat of the film, namely in the family dynamic with his father Martin). Stone wrote the original film with Stanley Weiser, but the sequel would be written by Allan Loeb and Stephen Schiff (whose last writing credits included The Switch (2010) and True Crime (1999), respectively)

So here we are, with a film made on the heels of a generation growing up as essentially the children of Gordon Gekko. Stone wanted to make a film that is a reckoning about our obsession of money as a society. Honestly, the curiosity to do this film lurked in the shadows for years, and it only grew with the viewings of other movies about the financial crisis of 2008 in The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) and The Big Short (2015). While it may not be fair to compare this film to those subsequent ones, you could cite the fact that each of those subsequent works had come from books already published by 2010. It sure is a surprise to see the end-result from Stone: a soft, average production, more of a glossy puddle than anything, a middling movie in the parts that matter most: genuine interest. For 133 minutes, one wonders exactly where it is going to end up in terms of its supposed cat-and-mouse game between Douglas and LaBeouf, which only goes to show just how much more captivating it was the first time around. Simply put, the pulpit has been converted into a stool, with a sprinkling of financial information in trying to make speculation the curiosity to spring around with. It is just an empty experience, where one doesn't seem to really gain or lose much by viewing it and its details that seem more like a PowerPoint presentation relying on sprinkling of style (particularly with some choice editing, where one scene has a phone call and a bubble showing up) to make up for less passion. Even its attempt at promoting fusion energy come off as ridiculous, complete with a presentation about what it could be in potential for clean energy...sure. Its hostility is instead a bag of corn. Douglas is the most enjoyable part of the film, even if he is sprinkled throughout - for example, he shows up briefly in the opening before not showing up in full again until the 30 minute mark; honestly, he serves as the best part of the film, mostly in his molding of former nasty greed showman into buy-my-book showman that hasn't changed all of his spots. While his best moments might be in the latter half for empire building, there is at least a subtle joy to seeing one scene with Charlie Sheen again, mostly to see the tides of time pass by (the sprinkling of other cameos, including Stone himself, are probably not as effective). LaBeouf, freshly established in the past few years with franchises like Transformers and Indiana Jones (for better or worse) falls squarely in the middle ground of interest. He exists to do another game of pseudo son-father figure with Douglas and Brolin that is seems more in search of an idea than a real representation of anything. The melodrama with Mulligan (who is okay) reflects this especially, sopping wet in syrup that slows the film in its bewildering act of "I hate my dad, but I like someone who does things like him". Brolin makes what he can with a mild substance kind of adversary, packed with some slime to various effect. Did you know Sarandon is the film? Honestly, you might be able to forget she is even there with a whole two or three scenes spent in vagueness about the housing element that seems to need more desperation, honestly. Wallach, a veteran of stage and screen for 65 years, is quietly effective, moving along in the background with character presence and an improvised whistle while Langella is there for the first half to set the wheels of "payback" in motion. For me, the film is like assembling a game of Uno to play without all the cards present or a rulebook to properly play the game, which eventually results in a process of missing passion and ultimate disappointment. Others may find something more worthwhile despite is flaws, but it is easily more preferable to stick with the original Wall Street film instead.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Any Given Sunday.

Review #1523: Any Given Sunday.

Cast: 
Al Pacino (Tony D'Amato), Cameron Diaz (Christina Pagniacci), Dennis Quaid (Jack 'Cap' Rooney), James Woods (Dr. Harvey Mandrake), Jamie Foxx (Willie Beamen), LL Cool J (Julian Washington), Matthew Modine (Dr. Ollie Powers), Jim Brown (Montezuma Monroe), Lawrence Taylor (Luther 'Shark' Lavay), Bill Bellamy (Jimmy Sanderson), Andrew Bryniarski (Patrick 'Madman' Kelly), Lela Rochon (Vanessa Struthers), Lauren Holly (Cindy Rooney), Ann-Margret (Margaret Pagniacci), Aaron Eckhart (Nick Crozier) Directed by Oliver Stone (#095 - Wall Street, #1090 - Platoon, and #1265 - Natural Born Killers)

Review: 
"I love intelligent films that come at you fast. I don't have attention deficit disorder, my mind moves fast. There's a lot to deal with in my films. We had so many facts to go through, so the governing style was flash, cut, flash, repeat."

One needs to see a bit of distinct vision every now and then from a director, and Oliver Stone closed out his 20th century with another distinct focus in football. He had been a student at Yale University before doing service in Vietnam first through teaching students English in Saigon to wiping Merchant Marine ships to dropping out of Yale and enlisting in the United States Army. He went into New York University after that and graduated with a film degree in 1971. He made his first film as a director with the cheapie Seizure (1974) before getting the chance to write Midnight Express (1978), which resulted in an Academy Award for his script despite inaccuracies of the depiction of the real-life prison story. The Hand (1981) followed for Stone as a director, but the five years between this and his next was crucial, since he wrote Conan the Barbarian (1982) and Scarface (1983) in that time. He rocketed to further prominence with Platoon (1986) that kept him busy over the prevailing years, with this being his 15th as director/writer. He has touched subjects such as war with Salvador (1986), biopics with The Doors (1991), to crime with Natural Born Killers (1994), all seeming distinct in their provocative nature by Stone.

I wonder if Stone wanted to make the ultimate football film. What we have here is truly a hodgepodge of clichés and assumptions you can have in a sports film, right from an upstart rookie becoming a star and then needing to not become consumed in arrogance, a wearied wise coach (perhaps like Tom Landry?), action montages, and even having actual athletes as stars (of which there are several notable ones of the past like Lawrence Taylor or Johnny Unitas). Stone had first expressed an interest in a football project with an early 1980s script about an old linebacker he wrote in mind for Charles Bronson. Years later, he met journalist Richard Weiner. He had developed a script with former player Jamie Williams about a black quarterback. This would be combined with scripts done by John Logan and Daniel Pyne alongside inspiration from You're Okay, It's Just a Bruise by Robert Huzienga Jr (former team physician of the Los Angeles Raiders detailing player injuries); Stone and Logan would get screenplay credit while Pyne and Logan got story and Weiner and Williams were consultants. This frenzy also applies to editing, since there are four listed as part of the film. Stone clearly was under the mindset that football was somehow like war, particularly with how it marched on as a team together as opposed to individual only, while also seeing the other sides of football life (like the pain and egos). On a basic level, I would say that this is a decent movie, wrapped with making an involving film packing an ensemble worthy of carrying most of its weight that Stone wants to put on them on and off the field that can be fairly entertaining. Of course it also is considerably lengthy at 162 minutes (157 for the director's cut, in which twelve minutes were cut for pacing while adding six minutes of other scenes) with a self-importance like no other in its presentation of football players as the modern gladiator (complete with a brief flash of Ben-Hur to drive home the point) with all of the excesses that come from Stone's view on the matter. It is firmly a film of the 1990s in all the right and weird ways, one that I chuck a smile at when it stops doing flashes of editing and focuses on just the basics.

Pacino does quite well with the material required in garnering a leader one could rally around in all of the moods required, whether that involves weary loneliness or stubborn dominance that seems fairly convincing in rally curiosity. Diaz matches him in cleverness that never seems like a doorstep to forget about, a figure of new-school arrogance that does seem quite amusing. Quaid does fine with a man on his last leg of fame (and perhaps health) - respectable without being drowned in pity. Woods doesn't have too much to really do, but he is quite a conniving figure behind the lines that has one really good scene to munch on involving him being caught in a lie about the health of the players. Foxx (picked after Sean Combs lost the role apparently because he couldn't throw a football) captures the bravado of a rising star and all that comes with it in good detail, whether that involves brimming confidence or sparring words with anyone. Others such as Cool J and Taylor make the best of their time on screen in charm and coarse acting that resonate the siding of the football action in its business and excess. It can't quite keep every thread going without being a bit lost, but at least its numerous showing of games do look fairly convincing (hits and all) within a fictionalized football league (in the year 2001 no less). It still has a punch when it comes to the TV-infected sensationalism and other various topics, and it definitely seems willing enough to want to inspire a thought without bashing your head with it. On the whole, it lumbers to points about football gladiators and its exploitation a bit too much, but it does work itself enough to win out in the end.

Next Time: We venture into the 21st century.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

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.

Platoon.

Review #1090: Platoon.

Cast: 
Charlie Sheen (Chris), Tom Berenger (Sgt. Barnes), Keith David (King), Willem Dafoe (Sgt. Elias), Forest Whitaker (Big Harold), Francesco Quinn (Rhah), Kevin Dillon (Bunny), John C. McGinley (Sgt. O'Neill), Mark Moses (Lt. Wolfe), Corey Glover (Francis), Johnny Depp (Lerner), and Chris Pedersen (Crawford) Directed by Oliver Stone (#095 - Wall Street)

Review: 
Platoon is a movie that is clear in what it wants to portray and show without feeling inauthentic in its depiction of battle, showing war as only a veteran like Stone would do. After serving a tour of duty in Vietnam in 1967-68, he had written a screenplay that had elements based on his experiences in the war (which he referred to as Break). Although the screenplay ended up not being produced, it served the basis for what became this film. Prior to directing this movie, he had served as screenwriter for films such as Midnight Express (1978) and Conan the Barbarian (1982), winning an Oscar for the former work while also directing films such as Salvador (1986). In any case, this movie was made in the Philippines on a budget of $6.5 million, with the main crew going through a two week basic training under Dale Dye, who served as military adviser for the production. It is evident from the first twenty minutes that this type of dedication helped in making for an authentic experience, with the actors showing signs of burn out and weariness that aligns perfectly with Stone's intent.

Even when Platoon has narration parts with Sheen, there isn't a time when the movie seems like it is using cliche parts just to make an everyday war movie, having a tone and pace that feels consistent in its two hour length. This is a harrowing film to watch, and it is the performances from its main cast that elevates the material, particularly from Berenger and Dafoe. Berenger shows a raw intensity to his portrayal that has a ruthlessness is relentlessly compelling, right down to the major face scar. Dafoe does a fine job with lending this character some compassion and straight edged nature that makes him easy to follow through with in his time on screen. Nearly lost in the shuffle is Sheen, who delivers a decent performance that serves as our face to watch act in an environment as frenzied as this without becoming just a face in the crowd. The other actors do fine jobs in the time they are on screen, such as David and his level-headed nature, Whitaker and his big-hearted but fitting essence, or McGinley and his weariness. The cinematography by Robert Richardson is also a fine standout, looking right for the film with its depiction of battle without being needlessly bright or dark. The film has a share of music it uses for good effect, such as Jefferson Airplane's "White Rabbit", but also most notably Samuel Barber's "Adagio for Strings", which is used to great effect anytime it is heard on screen, such as during the iconic death sequence with the raised hands, which one can even see on DVD covers for the movie. There is a certain kind of nightmare quality to it that this film evokes that makes it captivating to watch in seeing the depiction of war through the prism of what Stone showcases that seems to burn into one's memory every minute it is on screen. The movie was winner of four Academy Awards, winning for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Film Editing and Best Sound, and it isn't hard to see why that is the case, as this is a fine piece of work that has an honest hard edge to what it depicts without any shred of cliche nature.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Wall Street.

Review #095: Wall Street.

Cast
Michael Douglas (Gordon Gekko), Charlie Sheen (Bud Fox), Daryl Hannah (Darien Taylor), Martin Sheen (Carl Fox), John C. McGinley (Marvin), Terence Stamp (Sir Larry Wildman), James Karen (Harry Lynch), Hal Holbrook (Lou Mannheim), Sean Young (Kate Gekko), and James Spader (Roger Barnes) Directed by Oliver Stone.

Review
This film is a classic, pure and simple. Sheen and Douglas play each other off so well, with Douglas being the main man here, doing an excellent job, especially with his "Greed is good" Stone mixes so many things from different periods of time to get them all matched into respective characters. The one single flaw is Daryl Hannah. I don't know why, but her acting here is...Dull. I know she plays basically a lackey to Gekko, but couldn't they at least make her do a better job at it? The film is excellent in value that makes you interested and a little bit smarter at the end. We are close to 100 Reviews. Countdown: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.