Postal.

Review #2479: Postal.

Cast: 

Zack Ward (The Postal Dude), Dave Foley (Uncle Dave), Chris Coppola (Richard), Jackie Tohn (Faith), J. K. Simmons (Candidate Eugene Welles), Verne Troyer (himself), Larry Thomas (Osama bin Laden), David Huddleston (Peter), Seymour Cassel (Paul), Ralf Moeller (Officer John Mann), Chris Spencer (Officer Greg Sharp), Michael Paré (Panhandler), Erick Avari (Habib), Lindsay Hollister (Recorder), Brent Mendenhall (George W. Bush), Rick Hoffman (Mr. Cornelius Blither), with Michael Benyaer (Mohammed), and Uwe Boll (himself) Directed by Uwe Boll (#1765 - In the Name of the King, #1924 - Alone in the Dark, #2144 - House of the Dead, #2317 - BloodRayne)

Review: 

"The lessons I have learned from my live-action adaptations of video game franchises have shaped my growth as a filmmaker. While there are areas where I would have approached things differently in hindsight, I am grateful for the opportunities to bring these beloved games to the big screen and to continue evolving and pushing boundaries in the world of film."

Oh go figure, another Uwe Boll video-game movie. You might call it low hanging fruit, but there is a curiosity to what Boll does so weirdly in trying to adapt material in his own vision for audiences. The basis for this film is Postal, a 1997 top-down shooter game developed by Running with Scissors (as founded by Vince Desiderio). Whichever game one played (the first was isometric, the second was first-person and open-world), you went around encountering the town of Paradise and shooting things (the first was probably a bit controversial, it featured an attempted shooting of a school). Apparently, the German fan club of the game contacted Uwe Boll and asked him about doing a film based on the game. Boll contacted Desiderio and got the rights to do a film as long as the company had involvement with the production. Apparently, Desiderio did have a dark and gritty script in mind with Steve Wik (who was involved with the two games) but Boll instead went with a script he wrote with assistant director Bryan C. Knight that had "satire". After all, his first film (German Fried Movie) was a comedy. Apparently, there are two versions of the film, one that is 100 minutes and a "Director's Cut" of 114 minutes (which did have a festival screening); inquire further here. Although there were ideas of doing a wide release...distributors balked to where it had a release to four screens on opening week in America. The movie was shot in September/October 2006, roughly around the same time that Boll had a series of boxing matches against alleged online critics of his films (for whatever reason, one of the DVDs included footage from said fight as a bonus feature). Boll didn't take certain reviews well, but your milage may vary. Boll tried to do a Kickstarter for a sequel in 2013 to raise $500,000 but dropped out after it raised less than seven percent of its goal. Boll was involved in a few more sequels to his video game films with BloodRayne and In the Name of the King, albeit for the video market. Postal is the penultimate feature film adaptation of a game that Boll did, with the last one being Far Cry (2008).

Technically speaking, this is his best video game movie. Go figure, the one where he tried to do jokes on purpose is almost an actual movie. The opening scene may or may not set your expectations a bit too differently from the actual film: it starts with a debate from two terrorists flying a plane over just how many virgins they will get for the attack they will do before the plane. When they don't like the answer and try to abandon the mission, the passengers end up breaking into the cockpit right as the plane crashes into a tower. So, there's that. For all of the controversy one could have about making light of a certain plane crash, the real issue of the film is that it only works on a basic level of humor that barely rises above juvenile at times because of the assortment of jokes that basically come off as ones done based on what irritates Boll or what might get the most jollies, whether that involves male nudity (don't ask who), bad women drivers getting shot up, annoying panhandlers that won't leave you alone (okay that one is relatable) fat people antics involving food or sex, a lead character wearing a "Peace" shirt when shooting people, depicting Osama bin Laden and Bush as buddies, and so on. Boll claims that various actors (Foley, Troyer, Simmons) wanted to be in the film against the wishes of their agents. Sure. Some of the cast do better in timing than others, probably best served with Foley, who seems to practically glide in playing sleaze for over-the-top amusement. Ward (who apparently would be a featured option in the next two Postal games) has a few effective moments in timing where life is basically hell around him, one where basically regrets are for lesser people, as evidenced by the scene where he tries to get a better numbered ticket while a rampage is going down at the unemployment office. Boll must've at least had a tiny bit of glee to play a fictionalized version of himself here: he gets to make an Auschwitz joke and tell folks that he hates video games. The gallows humor basically works best when it seems to deal with how violence begets more violence as opposed to say, Verne Troyer getting penetrated by monkeys or a ridiculously complicated plan about trying to steal dolls. The violence is about as stock as it can be and the timing of the jokes may or may not be the result of having just a few takes to do them for "freshness". The film can't quite achieve the humor it yearns to have and instead is a bit too goofy to actually click on a consistent level, but I did at least enjoy a chunk of its simmering annoyance at human foibles. As a whole, Boll clearly wanted to make a broad satire about violence or something about political anarchy that might as well be a poor man's Dr. Strangelove. Is it successful? No, it is full of crude hits-and-miss moments, but it definitely is watchable enough to at least make you believe Boll has potential as a filmmaker beyond calling him one of the worst. Pick your poison. 

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Saturday: Double feature.

Convoy (1978).

Review #2252: Convoy (1978).

Cast: 

Kris Kristofferson (Martin "Rubber Duck" Penwald), Ali MacGraw (Melissa), Ernest Borgnine (Sheriff Lyle "Cottonmouth" Wallace), Burt Young ("Love Machine" / "Pig Pen"), Madge Sinclair (Widow Woman), Franklyn Ajaye (Spider Mike), Brian Davies (Chuck Arnoldi), Seymour Cassel (Governor Jerry Haskins), Cassie Yates (Violet), Walter Kelley (Federal Agent Hamilton), Billy Hughes (Pack Rat), and Jorge Russek (Texas Sheriff Tiny Alvarez) Directed by Sam Peckinpah (#590 - Ride the High Country, #591 - The Wild Bunch, #944 - Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, #1439 - Straw Dogs, #1685 - The Deadly Companions, #1936 - The Getaway)

Review: 

Sure, one might think of Smokey and the Bandit (1977) first when they wonder about Convoy. But actually, there is a tiny bit of things to think about beforehand. Bill Fries Jr was interested in music but more so in commercial art, which eventually lead to Bozell & Jacobs for art direction. In the 1970s, a character called "C. W. McCall" was created to aid in advertising for...bread, which because of the nature of transporting it through trucks, well, why not making a truck-themed ad and character. The ads (played by Jim Finlayson) were a hit, and Fries used it as a way to come up with a song, which he wrote with Chip Davis (with Donald Sears as producer). Played over the winter of 1975 and early 1976 to interested airwaves, the song (an ode to renegade truckers) was a hit to people in an era where CB radio and trucking were a thing to talk about (McCall wasn't exactly a one-hit wonder, he merely just found other things to do besides singing songs for long, which actually included being mayor of Ouray, Colorado for six years; he died in 2022 at the age of 93). I think you can understand how it might've made sense for United Artists to go out for a film based on the truck stuff. The film was written by B. W. L. Norton, who had wrote/directed Cisco Pike [1972], the somewhat noted cult classic that had starred Kristofferson in his first go at being an actor. Sam Peckinpah had directed these three films before this one: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (1974), The Killer Elite (1975), and Cross of Iron (1977). Suffice to say, he needed a hit, and he went with it while fiddling where he could in the script that found a bit of time to cast someone like Ajaye in an apparent attempt to add some social commentary. Apparently, he used James Coburn not so much just for second unit work but also to direct certain sequences due to his furthering addiction to drugs and alcohol. Evidently, the original cut of the film was over three hours long, but editing resulted in a 114-minute film, complete with a new rendition of McCall's "Convoy". The production of the film resulted in a commercial hit, but he did not direct for a while (doing second unit work on Jinxed! [1981] before his final film with The Osterman Weekend [1983]).

Admittedly, you could probably say the film sure smells like it has a substance in its body with how it actually makes one appreciate the fine art of enjoying a dumb-as-hell movie. You thought Smokey was hokum? You haven't seen anything yet. It is the staging of chaos like you have probably seen before, but it is kinetic enjoyment (complete with stunts you can't quite tell are staged or just part of the "go with it" show) that I can't help but admire even in average enjoyment. Besides, the casual average qualities of his prior 70s work such as Straw Dogs and The Getaway make one appreciate the pedal-to-the-medal ridiculousness that looks like if a Western was deep-fried (what else could one say about a line in which Kristofferson refers to him and Borgnine as being part of the "there ain't many of us left" department). Kristofferson drifts in and out as the inadvertent hero for the people that you probably have seen before, but there is a lean confidence in his charm that you can practically have a beer with. MacGraw may have been fine for Peckinpah's Getaway, but she doesn't really have anything of note to do in this film (cut because of the edits or not, you decide)., particularly when one focuses more on the goofy dynamic between Kristofferson and Borgnine anyway,. There is something delightfully enjoyable about Borgnine in how he cuts through the film in terms of smarmy authority that is the kind of played-out entertainment worth sticking around for as the film gets further absurd with the introduction of a Governor character that really believes a convoy of truckers (comprised of a chunk of folks who probably don't even know why they are going along with it all) can be the key to reaching "the people", which is pretty amusing. Rounding out the interest is Ajaye and Young, who make quality character presences in the salt-of-the-earth nature that comes from people wrapped up in essentially the grind of their lives (the off-screen assault of the former in particular sticks out). The ending is probably easy to see coming when it comes to "man of the people!", but it does ring amusement in the actual reveal and lasting laugh, so that works out. The film is clearly not any better than the fried ridiculousness that arose in low-budget / B-movie enjoyment in its wake, but Peckinpah and company managed to grind out a curious movie filled with chaotic engagement anyways. It wouldn't be the first one to recommend in the work of Peckinpah, but it sure would garner curiosity for those who love to see vintage 1970s entertainment with the staging of real-scale effects and stunts to go with a catchy song.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Honeymoon in Vegas.

Review #1717: Honeymoon in Vegas.

Cast: 

James Caan (Tommy Korman), Nicolas Cage (Jack Singer), Sarah Jessica Parker (Betsy Nolan Singer/Donna Korman), Peter Boyle (Chief Orman), Seymour Cassel (Tony Cataracts), Pat Morita (Mahi Mahi), Johnny Williams (Johnny Sandwich), John Capodice (Sally Molars), and Robert Costanzo (Sidney Tomashefsky) Written and Directed by Andrew Bergman.

Review: 

"It wasn't based on anything. I wanted to do a boy-girl story, and in my perverse fashion, it turned out to be this."

One should have no real expectations with a movie that looks like a screwball comedy and moves exactly the way you might think it does. Does being a movie full of silly moments ripe for a romantic comedy excuse the easy lingering flaw that comes with just trying to be a silly little experience? This was the third directorial effort for Andrew Bergman. Once called the "The Unknown King of Comedy", Bergman (who had studied American history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison) was the originator of the script that became the film Blazing Saddles (1974), which went from a story outline meant to be developed by just himself into a collaboration with Mel Brooks and other writers. He continued to write while getting into directing with So Fine (1981), following it with scripts for stuff such as Fletch (1985) and Big Trouble (done in 1986 while having the dubious distinction of being replaced by John Cassavetes as director). Striptease (1996), for better or worse, is likely the most notable film of the six that he directed from 1981 to 2000.

Honestly, the quality of the movie depends on how much of its 96 minute run-time lands with a flimsy (but fairly human) premise (I mean the whole "son promises mom to not get married", not the "guy offers to pay someone to borrow their significant other for a while", which strangely was done again in a serious light with Indecent Proposal the following year). Besides, what honeymoon isn't complete with a plethora of Elvis Presley references and Elvis cover songs? Do you ever watch a movie and realize the quality in one's memory of it later on changed after you saw it? Work with me on this - sometimes a movie seems better or worse when one thinks about it after time passes from actually seeing it. Begrudgingly, I will admit this usually is more a negative sign than anything, as sometimes one thinks a movie was "not as good" as it originally seemed (hence why one should always take an opinion with a grain of salt). The funny thing is that sometimes it goes the other way around (depending, probably, if one likes to watch a movie with a triggered pause button or not). What I am trying to say is that eventually this movie won me over. Granted, I cannot in good conscience recommend it as any kind of great "hidden gem" or anything, but I can say that if one sees it they will likely be eventually convinced it is a worthy use of their time. Besides, with a dynamic trio like this, one can't go too far off the deep end of despair.

In a sense, you could argue that Cage was suited for comedy. He has a fluid presence that takes on a movie as if the role is a juicy piece of steak waiting to be devoured. Hell, how many of his action roles are just ones begging to be turned into comedies? Actually, while he does decent here in a role plagued by neurosis, one can't help but compare it to the other, more notable love triangle romcom with him in Moonstruck (1987), but that might be me just thinking out loud. At least when he starts shifting from neurotic to impatient it becomes a more interesting movie, because it also strangely times right to the point where the movie is trying to become interesting, such as venting about a long line at the airport. Caan might have picked a wide variety of movies to hit or miss with, but at least one can't see the desperation here (i.e. self-parody in annoying awareness). He makes a decent riff of the tough guy conman type with a brief amount of good humor that makes a worthy guy to contrast Cage. Sure, it eventually becomes a bit easy to see where it will really go (aside from the "look alike" thing, which seems like a gimmick ripped from something else), but at least it seems semi-interesting to sit with. Parker is exactly the warm presence required to balance these two folks out with fair chemistry between each that at least makes the momentum not stop as easily as it could. With a lesser actress (or perhaps one trying to hone on the sitcom touch), one would just see a mild one-sided romance. But she has the patience and spunk required to keep interest there without boredom, so that means there isn't a weak member of the main trio. Honestly, with all of the Elvis stuff (because if an Asian Elvis isn't enough, how about a kid Elvis?), I wish there was a bit more from the actual supporting cast, but having goofy stuff from Morita and Boyle kind of helps in passing the time for atmosphere of attempts in zany stuff (again, having a grouchy Cage helps). By the time it gets to the inevitable climax, at least one can welcome the attempts at going for a zany time while seeing a few interesting sights from Vegas or Hawaii every now and then. I kid you not, the lasting legacy of the movie is the fact that the movie was later turned into a musical, with Bergman collaborating with Jason Robert Brown (Bergman decided to try and develop it after he had open-heart surgery in 2001), with a premiere on Broadway in 2014 (which had the Caan role played by Tony Danza, no seriously). In the end, it all depends on how much one believes in the material when it comes to a useful experience at the movies, and I guess this manages to slip by with enough support in the right places to make an ordinary average movie that you could pick and not regret it too much. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Come one, come all for the doubleheader to close out Anniversary in August, which you will get to see this Monday. We started with...an interesting one-two punch of movies not regarded well by folks of the time (and not much else since)...so how about bookending it with two further films with distinct reputations? Saddle up.

Faces.

Review #1428: Faces.

Cast: 
John Marley (Richard Forst), Gena Rowlands (Jeannie Rapp), Lynn Carlin (Maria Forst), Seymour Cassel (Chet), Fred Draper (Freddie Draper), Val Avery (Jim McCarthy), Dorothy Gulliver (Florence), Joanne Moore Jordan (Louise Draper), Darlene Conley (Billy Mae) Written and Directed by John Cassavetes.

Review:
"My films are expressive of a culture that has had the possibility of attaining material fulfillment while at the same time finding itself unable to accomplish the simple business of conducting human lives. We have been sold a bill of goods as a substitute for life. What is needed is reassurance in human emotions; a re-evaluation of our emotional capacities.”

We all know important independence can be in life. It can also be important when it comes to film as well, which proves to be the case with actor and director-writer John Cassavetes, a pioneer of independent cinema. The son of Greek immigrants, he had graduated from the Academy of Dramatic Arts (New York) in 1950 and soon began acting in theater with small bits in film and television following not long after, with works such as The Night Holds Terror (1955) and Edge of the City (1957). He was a proponent of an alternative to method acting through his own workshop that he did in New York City. It was during an appearance on the radio show Night People (hosted by Jean Shepherd) to promote the latter film that he pondered over if someone could make a film about ordinary people (without all the Hollywood business interference). Funds from listeners of the show (which apparently totaled to over $2,000) along with raiding funds from family and friends led him to have a chance to make what he wanted. Over time, he would use funds garnered from acting gigs (with notable performances in films such as The Dirty Dozen (1967) and Rosemary's Baby (1968)) to help fund his films, not wanting to compromise his vision from producers who might have wanted to shift a project to something more "commercial" (although he did do a few films with involvement or distribution with studios, such as the two films before Faces in Two Late Blues and A Child is Waiting). He cultivated his films from his experiences with an fiercely independent streak who once stated that the only person less important than the director on a film set was a talent agent, since he felt a director should create their own material for their films. He was characterized for allowing a manner of improvisation for his actors through their delivery and interpretation of their character, which would shape the story (as opposed to the other way around). Ultimately, he would direct twelve films in a span of 27 years from Shadows (shot in 1957, previewed the following year and then reworked for release in 1959) to Big Trouble (1986, which he disowned) before his death in 1989 at the age of 59. One of his scripts would eventually be adapted into a film after his death with She's So Delovely (1997), directed by his son Nick (the first of Cassavetes' three children to turn to directing).

For this film (his fourth), he spent over six months with filming (most notably filming in the house of his mother-in-law alongside his own) and then three years to edit. The film runs at 130 minutes, but it had existed in numerous forms prior to general release, including an initial cut of six that reduced to four before a preview screening of a three hour version, and a 147 minute version was deposited for preservation at the Library of Congress.  One thing that is for certain is that the film is an interesting look upon communication and how few we really talk to each other. What one thought about communication when it comes to how passive and desperate we are to connect with our loved ones back in 1968 still resonates with how we are now, with Cassavetes managing to make an honest film that sets its own path of casual venom in examining communication with rawness. It can be an uncomfortable sit at times, lingering with conversations on their own terms that can test the patience at times but ultimately work itself out to discussion and curiosity worth having. Marley and Rowlands lead this ensemble (with five of the main six having starred in at least one Cassavetes film before this one) to curious heights, leading one's curiosity with a bit of sadness to it all, whether that means a working man trying to escape his empty love-life in a capable Marley (a character actor with plenty of film/TV credits) or a wiry and knowing performance from Rowlands (an actress of over six decades in film, stage, and television known for collaborations in her husband Cassavetes' films) that serves to drive the film's look at desperation to feel something with someone. Carlin, the secretary-turned-actress makes for a fair debut that captures a hollowed-out person of marriage with subtlety. Cassel shines in carefreeness that pulls you in when he shows himself to try and warm up the presence of desperation without becoming a caricature to laugh at. In the end, this is a bleak movie, but it is one that has a place for doing so on its own terms for its story and for its actors that shows the reflection on the mirror of the 1960s without flinching or making an easy out. It might not be for everybody, but it certainly has a place in inspiring curiosity for those who want something a bit different from the usual fare.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.