Airheads.

Review #2566: Airheads.

Cast: 

Brendan Fraser (Chester "Chazz Darby" Ogilvie), Steve Buscemi (Rex), Adam Sandler (Pip), Chris Farley (Officer Wilson), Michael McKean (Milo Jackson), Judd Nelson (Jimmie Wing), Ernie Hudson (Sergeant O'Malley), Amy Locane (Kayla), Michael Richards (Doug Beech), Joe Mantegna (Ian "The Shark"), Nina Siemaszko (Suzzi), Marshall Bell (Carl Mace), Reg E. Cathey (Marcus), David Arquette (Carter), Michelle Hurst (Yvonne), and Harold Ramis (Chris Moore) Directed by Michael Lehmann (#307 - Hudson Hawk, #1490 - Heathers)

Review:

"My feeling was that I had never done something like this. I was a young filmmaker. I had done a couple of independent movies that were really liked and out of the mainstream. And then I did Hudson Hawk, where definitely the sensibility was a little out of the mainstream and it didn’t play that well out of the mainstream. But I still hadn’t learned my lesson, thankfully, and I thought, I’m going to get people in this movie that you wouldn’t expect to see in a movie like this and that’s going to make it more like something I want to see."

You'll never believe this: an ensemble movie with a bit of music and plenty of attempts at comedy that didn't exactly gel with audiences. The script was done by Rich Wilkes, who had been inspired by a movie he loved with Dog Day Afternoon (1975), specifically in doing a comedic rendition that involved rock and roll. He had done music journalism and interviews prior to writing the spec script that eventually went from Island Pictures to 20th Century Fox. Apparently, Lehmann was the first choice in mind for the movie, with Airheads being his fourth movie as a director, after Heathers (1988), Meet the Applegates (1990), and Hudson Hawk (1991)*. While the studio and Lehmann traded disagreements that resulted in a PG-13 movie rather than, say, the R-rated one he hoped to do, at least the studio did not win the request before production where they wanted to have a comedian to "do a pass on the script" (according to Wilkes, Dennis Miller was that guy). As it happened, Wilkes was involved in two film productions in the year of 1994: The Stone Age, which he co-wrote with James Melkonian that was released in February, and this film, which came out in August. Released in the first week of August alongside such films as Clear and Present Danger and The Little Rascals (with The Mask being a few days beforehand), Airheads was not a financial hit, making barely a third of its reported $15 million budget. Lehmann carried along as a director, with his next movie being The Truth About Cats & Dogs (1996) and the reputation of the movie has probably increased in recent years if it inspired people to talk about it for, say, an anniversary retrospective (link here).

For whatever reason, there were actual critiques about the movie either not being an outright comedy or a "satire". Now, I'll level with you: do you really care about "satires"? Do you really care about being subtle in a comedy? Do you really care about anything other than the rockin' beat of a song? Does knowing the "scene" of music such as alternative rock truly matter? Some of those answers are "yes", some of those answers are "no", but I was fine with the overall trip as a whole (besides, it can alway be worse with insulting music, just as The Big Lebowski and that stupid Eagles joke). Sure, it works best when cribbing from The Blues Brothers (1980) rather than Dog Day Afternoon, but it is a neat little movie. It's kind of funny to look at a cast like this and say, yes, one of these folks ended up winning an Academy Award years later.  You've got a little cameo for Harold Ramis (and Lemmy, because hell yeah), Arquette mostly being in the background, three Saturday Night Live guys of the time (Sandler, McKean, and Farley*), a Mike Judge cameo (who among us?), Richards lurking around in his giant frame, but most importantly: a lovable trio of goofballs with Fraser, Buscemi, and Sandler. They have a type of charm that can only come from people wrapped in enough confidence to believe that they really could just waltz in and become rock stars because their stuff is totally the stuff "for the '90s" (not being to actually listen to their songs, for the most part, is kinda funny). They make for quite the trio together in timing, toeing the line in amusement where one likes to see where they go rather than say, laughing at their dream. Sure, I could take it or leave it with Locane* or Farley, but the supporting folks that go around the film such as McKean and his delightfully rat finky performance (less so from Nelson and his attempt to match) or Mantegna and his wannabee Howard Stern* act. I'm a sucker for the people and voices that pop in and out as a time capsule for its time (I imagine that over 30 years, Marky Mark does still suck, although the jury is probably still out on the "Rodney King" chant). For a 92-minute ride, it's a neat comfort movie for those who buy into what it is selling in goofy enthusiasm that likes its folks and likes the scene enough to make it a movie that definitely deserved better.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

Next up: At last: Reynolds and Eastwood in City Heat.

*I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict that Applegates is probably the most mediocre of the first four Lehmann movies if only because it is highly unlikely that Heathers, a movie I didn't like that much, is lower than Hudson Hawk, Airheads, and also a movie about mutant shapeshifters from Brazil living in Ohio.

*Yes, Michael McKean was on Saturday Night Live as a 46-year-old. Also, that would be *future WCW Heavyweight Champion* David Arquette. Hey, I didn't really give that much of a shit about watching him in Scream, were you expecting me to actually cite that movie? By the way, if you read the retrospective link, you'll probably be shocked as I was in the following sentence: Kevin Spacey wanted to be in Airheads! Good lord, imagine that guy being in the movie, what a dodged bullet. 

*Can I state a small pet peeve? I love Ghostbusters (1984), but am I the only one who thinks Ernie Hudson doesn't get the credit he deserves for being a key part of that movie? It's a QUARTET team, not a trio. Hell, The Real Ghostbusters didn't even let him play Winston, what kind of dumbass show does that? I think at least one percent of folks forgetting about Winston in comparison to the others is at least 0.1% based in weirdo prejudice where they can't even admit to being prejudiced. 

*In 2010, Locane, who was found to be over the blood alcohol level, was involved in a car collision that resulted in the death of a woman. She served a few years for vehicular homicide and assault by auto. Incidentally, in 1984, Vince Neil was involved in a car accident that resulted in vehicular manslaughter and DUI charges when a passenger in his car died. He served only 15 days in jail and paid restitution to the victims of the crash - The moral of the story: don't drink and drive.

*Remember when Howard Stern tried to be funny and not whatever the hell he is now? Incidentally, John "Stuttering John" Melendez appears in the movie and even has a song featured. 

Desperado.

Review #2415: Desperado.

Cast: 

Antonio Banderas (Manito "El Mariachi"), Joaquim de Almeida (Cesar "Bucho"), Salma Hayek (Carolina), Steve Buscemi (Buscemi), Cheech Marin (Short Bartender), Quentin Tarantino (Pick-Up Guy), Carlos Gomez (Memo "Right Hand"), Tito Larriva (Tavo), Angel Aviles (Zamira), Danny Trejo (Navajas), Abraham Verduzco (Niño), Carlos Gallardo (Campa), and Albert Michel Jr (Quino) Written and Directed by Robert Rodriguez (#1193 - Alita: Battle Angel, #1903 - From Dusk till Dawn, #2377 - El Mariachi)

Review: 

Admittedly, I wanted to Desperado for quite a while. I bought a DVD pack with it included a while ago and, well, it is time to collect. Robert Rodriguez followed El Mariachi (1992) with a television movie assignment that came out of the blue with Roadracers (1994)*. But here were are with his second feature film, a "Neo-Western action movie" once again. The movie was shot in late 1994 with a budget that was described as, well, adding a few more zeroes from before that was shot in the same place (Ciudad Acuña) as the first movie; as before, Rodriguez serves as writer, director, and editor. Sure, the movie had its troubles: the original cut was rated NC-17 by the MPAA due to the graphic violence that had to see a handful of cuts just to get an R rating, complete with taking out a shootout at the end that I think you will be curious about. When the movie was released on August 25, 1995 (the first of three Rodriguez-involved projects in a year next to winter 1995's Four Rooms, where Rodriguez directed one of the four segments and 1996's From Dusk till Dawn), the film was a general hit with audiences, and, well, there was eventually a follow-up film with Once Upon a Time in Mexico (2003). 

It is a nice movie for those who know what they are getting into with a movie that is more of a side-step sequel than anything, one that feels the need to see the last scene of the previous movie but with a different face this time around. Now it dwells on the idea that killing the killer wasn't enough to satisfy the fallen mariachi, now it rests to chop the head ahead of that guy too. For the most part, the movie is generally satisfying to those who liked the ambition shown in the other film without seeming like a product of compromises, which mainly means some energetic shooting and a few quick cuts to go with a slightly more packaged story. So yes, the adrenaline rush may not be for everyone, but it does have likeable folks to carry things for 105 minutes. Undeniably, Banderas has a gritty charm to make this character one worth searching further in how one could just slip into guns as if it was a rhythm to replace the one ripped from his busted hand. He clearly oozes the appeal that one could see a lover or a killer in the same breath without a false note detected because you roll with him and his baptism of fire that clearly needs the touch of people again. It helps to have Hayek (in her first key role in an American movie, after a good deal of telenovela appearances) generate just as much sensual appeal in curiosity at the idea of someone who isn't merely just a tool like other folks in the town but has their own sins just the same. Perhaps not surprisingly, their chemistry simmers quickly to the surface that is clear to root for and watch play out for all of the passionate strings you damn well know will be pulled. de Almeida (cast prior to shooting when Raul Julia died) is at least an adequate adversary to shoot for in clear-cut ruthlessness alongside wavering stability (note the sequence where he can't find his phone), at least until the movie makes its one turn of the screw that probably will strain at least one person's doubts. At least the supporting cast comes and goes for a few curious chuckles from Buscemi and the staging for the mayhem is worthy enough to make it look like the fights worth investing time in. Sure, the climax isn't played out to the whole bloody affair (instead having a few dark chuckles with the arrival (and departure of Gallardo and Michel Jr to the fray), but the slap-bang enjoyment of the film as a whole is consistent and kinetic enough to be satisfied with the movie reflecting the way the last one went: on the road but with company to travel this time around. As a whole, it is an improvement on El Mariachi with its general staging of action and all-around charm to ride the storm of doubt made by an up-and-coming director that is worth checking out.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Incidentally, because he managed to license music from Link Wray (it was cheap at the time), it played a tiny influence on Pulp Fiction (1994), because Quentin Tarantino saw Rodriguez using that music and got the idea to use Wray's "Rumble" for his film. No, really, you can read that and hear about "72 camera setups with a single camera in one day."

Tales from the Darkside: The Movie.

Review #2129: Tales from the Darkside: The Movie.

Cast: 

Wraparound segment: Deborah Harry (Betty) and Matthew Lawrence (Timmy)

"Lot 249" segment: Steve Buscemi (Edward Bellingham), Julianne Moore (Susan Smith), Christian Slater (Andy Smith), Robert Sedgwick (Lee), Donald Van Horn (Moving Man), and Michael Deak (The Mummy)

"Cat from Hell" segment: William Hickey (Drogan), David Johansen (Halston), Paul Greeno (The Cabbie), Alice Drummond (Carolyn), and Dolores Sutton (Amanda)

"Lover's Vow" segment: James Remar (Preston), Rae Dawn Chong (Carola), Robert Klein (Wyatt), Ashton Wise (Jer), and Philip Lenkowsky (Maddox) Directed by John Harrison.

Review: 

Well, when you have a good film going for you, why not do a television series? The success of Creepshow in 1982 led to the creation of Tales from the Darkside with a pilot (as written by show creator George A. Romero) in 1983 and a syndication run that started the following year, which ran until 1988 in displaying stories of sci-fi or fantasy that adapted various authors such as Stephen King or Harlan Ellison to go with narration, that, well, "Man lives in the sunlit world of what he believes to be reality. But ... there is, unseen by most, an underworld ... a place that is just as real, but not as brightly lit. A darkside." I went on a lark and watched the DVD boxset of the series roughly four years ago. It was...decent if not very wavering in quality, but somehow, I found myself comparing it to the other show that followed the lead of EC Comics in Tales from the Crypt, which started its run on television almost immediately after the end of Darkside. Perhaps it makes perfect sense that the show's success would inspire a feature film in 1990. This was the feature film debut for director John Harrison, who had started in film as a first assistant director on Creepshow (1982), which he also composed the music for. He also wrote and directed a handful of episodes on Darkside. Richard P. Rubinstein (who also produced Creepshow) and Mitchell Galin (who produced with Rubinstein the Darkside spinoff Monsters) produced the film.

Oh, but what anthology isn't worth mentioning unless it has a framing device? The wraparound (taking up eleven of the 93 minute film) is a suburban housewife...and modern-day witch preparing a dish made of a kid she has locked up in her house, but the kid tries to stall by reading three stories from, well, "Tales from the Darkside". Needless to say that the story goes better than it does for the main characters of the real three stories, although I could do without the 4th wall moment at the end. "Lot 249" (28 minutes) is based on a short story by Arthur Conan Doyle first published in 1892 that saw Michael McDowell (a novellist and also most notably the writer of Beetlejuice) serve as screenwriter. The ending of the story is the most changed from the original and likely for the better, since it involves more than just being on the run. Besides, the story wisely lets the one we like the most mostly off without a hitch. Buscemi makes a suitable presence to strike revenge upon such confident jerks that come with Slater (a moderately convincing goof), Moore (this was her film debut), and Sedgwick. The mummy stuff is decent for a yarn, but yeah, go with gore. "Cat from Hell" (23 minutes) is based on a 1977 short story of the same name by Stephen King with Romero as screenwriter. The premise is as such: a man hires a hitman to kill a cat that apparently led to the deaths of three people. A good chunk is spent on telling said story of the cat, but it is at least spent with a darkly amusing Hickey, talking about a cat that seems like an assassin due to the nature of his work (drugs affecting poor little black cats). Besides, the conclusion of what happens when cat meets the mouth is a nice and grisly conclusion to see play out. "Lover's Vow" (29 minutes) is based on the Japanese folk story "Yuki-Onna", as originated by Lafcadio Hearn, which you may recognize because that story was adapted into Kwaidan; McDowell wrote this story with gargoyles taking the helm, in this case one that happens to strike on a bunch of drunks that have an artist survive and swear his life on not telling what happened. Remar is at least where on expects him to be when it comes to being good for middle material, which contrasts against the bare minimum of mystery provided by Chong for a story that, well, can only go one way, I guess. It's a decent story but somehow it feels lacking in that build to the inevitable, although the final moment is at least somewhat poignant. As a whole, the film is basically about on par with the show that it arose from: halfway entertaining if not exactly a great successor to Creepshow. It is basically a notch above Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983), to put it bluntly. The stories are decently handled with a few recognizable names, but one would be hard-pressed to say just which story is the real showstopper when it comes to such varying tones. It has a few fun moments for being an ordinary anthology that would probably fit just fine in the latter recommendations for any October, so take that for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Next: A John Carpenter film - 25 years later!

Miller's Crossing.

Review #1629: Miller's Crossing.

Cast:

Gabriel Byrne (Tom Reagan), Marcia Gay Harden (Verna Bernbaum), Albert Finney (Liam "Leo" O'Bannon), John Turturro (Bernie Bernbaum), Jon Polito (Johnny Caspar), J. E. Freeman (Eddie "the Dane"), Steve Buscemi (Mink Larouie), John McConnell (Bryan), Mike Starr (Frankie), Al Mancini (Tic-Tac), Olek Krupa (Tad), and Frances McDormand (The Mayor's Secretary) Written, Produced, and Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen (#659 - True Grit (2010), #765 - Fargo, #1063 - Blood Simple, #1517 - The Big Lebowski, and #1552 - A Serious Man)

Review:

"It doesn’t really concern me if the audience sometimes loses the thread of the plot. It’s not that important to understand who killed the Rug Daniels character, for instance. It’s far more important to feel the relationships between the characters. The question of intelligibility concerns me more, but, until now, I haven’t received any bad reactions concerning that."

It can be amazing to look upon the early part of the career of a director and see how they can synthesize entertainment with their own particular brand of craftsmanship and characters that entices one with wit and intrigue in where it all will lead by the time of its final shot. The Coen brothers certainly have done well with cultivating memorable films over the span of four decades, with a fair share of notice to accompany it depending on how it reaches them. Miller's Crossing, the third film directed, written, and produced by the Coens, was made on a budget of roughly $10-$14 million, but it did not shake the world with fervor upon release, likely owing to the fact that it was released days after Goodfellas (1990). Granted, they are not entirely similar when it comes to dealing with the gangster film genre, since this one is more of a synthesizing of the gangster and noir genre than anything - they were not so much inspired by the gangster film but rather with the gangster novel with the works of Dashiell Hammett, particularly with the novels The Glass Key and Random Harvest (incidentally, the Coens have argued it to be more closer to noir than the gangster film). Incidentally, the time it took to write such an intricate plot (roughly eight months) led to writer's block, during which the Coens were inspired to write what became their next feature with Barton Fink the following year.

It sure is a puzzle with a dazzling look to go with it. It is a series of contradictions and machinations, whether that means a struggle for ethics in illicit activities or various angles for all but the one that matters (i.e. the man who takes more blows than a sunken ship). In short, it moves like the breeze on a fedora in a forest (that particular image spurred the idea for the film). They wanted to make a film with a jigsaw puzzle in the background as a plot that makes one focus on the momentum of the folks inhabiting a "dirty town movie". The 115 minute run-time moves with the shift of a long con that can go for humor alongside curiosity but also melancholy, which is naturally aided by its soundtrack by Carter Burwell and look (shot but not exactly set in New Orleans - this was the third and final film that Barry Sonnenfeld shot for the Coens). It's a journey with various twists that goes with such a visual and complex punch that has a rhythm of greatness that always keeps itself a step ahead of the viewer without shaking them down for it. There are a variety of memorable presences, all of which spring down from its primary man of inscrutable charm in Byrne, who actually had to lobby with the Coens to keep his native Irish accent for the film (The Irish accent would also be done by the British-born Finney). He protrudes icy confidence with reasonable edge, one that can take a hit or an angle without ever striking a false note throughout all the layers. He weaves his way through a rough and tumble rat-a-tat kind of film with the sense of a lead presence taken from 50 years prior (such as a Bogart) but without the sense of being duped into watching an impersonation, which works with scenes that revolve around banter with Harden to moments spent in counsel with Finney. This was the first major role for Harden, who had a few roles on television and stage prior to this feature - she does well here, fitting the screen well in sultry jaded charm (in a sea of gangsters and molls, who expects anything less?) that keeps in motion with Byrne in clear-cut noir interest. Finney was a last-minute casting choice, as Trey Wilson died just before shooting was to begin. Who knows how it would have worked out with Wilson, but one sees Finney right at home with this role, one that is sprinkled through the film with great character role presence in wry intrigue. He has likely the best scene in the whole film, involving him in a shoot-out while "Danny Boy" (sung by Irish tenor Frank Patterson) plays in the background to a constant pulpy hail of gunfire. This was the first collaboration between the Coens and numerous actors that they have worked with in various films, such as Polito (5 in total), Turturro (4 in total), and Buscemi (5 in total). Each are memorable in their own way, such as Turturro and his rambling cover of hustling, which naturally sticks with one in scenes dealing with guns in a forest or in a dark house. Polito (who was actually approached to play the Dane but insisted on reading for Caspar) proves his own among a talented group of ethically challenged folks that try to avoid (or give) the high hat. Buscemi may have just one scene, but he sure talks his way into it (and webbing of the plot) with worthy ease. Freeman finishes the job with worthy smarm required of a second man in a film full of triangles between folks. What we have is a film that moves on its own plotting, detailed in its style with intricate care that will leave one curious by the time of its climax and its last fateful scene in the trees. It is the kind of noir that fits like a glove with others of its ilk in one category: it merits more than one viewing in a positive way, where one wants to follow along with the webbing of its story and characters through and through, because it looks and feels so good to do so. It may not have been the proper respect it deserved three decades ago, but it surely has found a place in worthy entertainment in the noir and gangster genres that one should be looked upon with great interest in the progression of the Coens in their execution of story and style.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Big Lebowski.

Review #1517: The Big Lebowski.

Cast: 
Jeff Bridges (Jeffrey "The Dude" Lebowski), John Goodman (Walter Sobchak), Julianne Moore (Maude Lebowski), Steve Buscemi (Theodore Donald "Donny" Kerabatsos), David Huddleston (Jeffrey "The Big" Lebowski), Philip Seymour Hoffman (Brandt), Tara Reid (Bunny Lebowski), Philip Moon (Woo), Mark Pellegrino (Blond Treehorn thug), with Peter Stormare (Uti Kunkel/Karl Hungus), Torsten Voges (Franz), Flea (Kieffer), Jack Kehler (Marty), John Turturro (Jesus Quintana), David Thewlis (Knox Harrington), Sam Elliott (The Stranger), and Ben Gazzara (Jackie Treehorn) Written, Produced, and Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen (#659 - True Grit (2010), #765 - Fargo, and #1063 - Blood Simple)

Review: 
"What's interesting to us are the people you know that are very good at what they do but aren't necessarily successful."
"The movie people let us play in the corner of the sandbox and leave us alone. We're happy here."

Brothers can make for great things together, and it is the work of film that Joel and Ethan Coen are best known for. They had an interest in film from a young age by what they viewed on television living in Minnesota and doing their own remakes on a Super 8 camera. Joel spent his studies in college in film programs such as New York University while Ethan studied in philosophy at Princeton University. They made their first feature together with Blood Simple (1984), which they had enticed backers with through a trailer they did together that led to a funding over the course of a year - the resulting film was a hit, and other films followed (with fair degrees of attention from critics and audiences). Over the course of over three decades, the Coens have made a total of eighteen films together, for which they have written, directed, produced and also edited together.

If there truly was a cult movie that stoked so much fervent interest in the years that followed being (at best) a modest hit with audiences, I would say that this is exactly the right film to qualify as "cult classic". With countless examples of lines that people can repeat to each other endlessly and an actual festival dedicated to a screening of the film alongside bowling and wearing costumes of certain characters. When it gets to that kind of blandishment before watching a film, either you'll be hooked in or you won't care that much about it, and others have certainly described it as their favorite film of the Coen brothers (when asked about the film years after release, J. Coen noted the "enduring fascination for other people than it does for us"). Attention can be everything, but I know in my mind that this is a pretty good film. It certainly does not reach greatness, nor does it teeters towards mediocrity, it just serves as a nice little experience worth a fair curiosity if one is in the mindset for it. One can abide it with no problem, whether in its attitudes of eccentric presences and a story that the Coens aimed to seem like a "modern Raymond Chandler story" that goes where it wants in twists before unraveling in relaxation. It's a silly movie at times, such as with its dream sequences, but it never wavers in cheapness or becomes anything too outlandish.

In a role generally referred to as iconic (along with one of his favorites), Bridges certainly grabs onto such a terminally relaxed role (with one inspiration being producer Jeff Dowd) with ease that strides from scene to scene with absolute feeling in out-of-shapeness that is obviously suitable for what is needed in casual charm (Eagles slander notwithstanding). Goodman (based in some part on friend John Milius) rolls with bombast and blazing timing in speaking his mind with no restraint needed. The others prove fine to follow along with besides our undeniable curiosity over the main duo, to a point. Buscemi says a few lines in second gear to Bridges and Goodman (with one distinct retort to tell him to shut up a few times), which I suppose makes sense in the fringes of chuckling along. Turturro shows up for moments at a time, to which I check my watch, chuckle in theory and move on to someone else (preferably a character that isn't a pederast, so not only is Turturro playing a useless character, he's playing a useless pedo). Huddleston moves things along past slack with a little edge to him, while Hoffman follows with care. Moore livens in quirks for those small moments one thinks it is needed, while Elliott provides a well-suited narrator.

Really, if the plot was tightened just a little bit more or some a trimming of all these characters may have meant a better movie (again though, one tries to not express a desire for what they wanted out of a film and just talks about what is in it instead). If one ranges entertainment through how much they enjoyed the characters they saw moreso than a deep plot, all power to you. Plenty of good movies can do that and also become icons in their own right. To me, it is good enough to overcome a decent (if not quite as interesting as it should be) setup because it generally results in fascination for where it could go next with interest. It has a nice look (credit to Roger Deakins along with the Coens' desire for a retro pop film in contemporary times) and certainly will provide those who desire to see what all the fuss is about something to remember for nearly two hours. Whether it serves enough to repeat lines from it or even go to church over it (Dudeism, because of course that is a thing) is up to you to sit on the couch and decide for oneself.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within.

Review #1217: Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within.

Cast: 
Ming-Na Wen (Doctor Aki Ross), Alec Baldwin (Captain Gray Edwards), Ving Rhames (Ryan), Steve Buscemi (Neil), Peri Gilpin (Jane), Donald Sutherland (Dr. Sid), James Woods (General Hein), Keith David (Council Member #1), Jean Simmons (Council Member #2), and Matt McKenzie (Major Elliot) Directed by Hironobu Sakaguchi and Motonori Sakakibara.

Review: 
Perhaps this movie is like the tale of Icarus. However, instead of daring to fly near the sun on illustrious wings of feathers, this is a film that dares to soar as the first photo-realistic computer-animated feature film, made over the course of four years with a budget of $137 million (with at least half the budget being spent on marketing from Columbia Pictures and construction in Hawaii of a studio for Square Pictures, whose demise rose from the eventual failure of the film at the box office). Final Fantasy (created by Hironobu Sakaguchi) is a series of fantasy role playing video games, with each installment being stand-alone tales that have recurring elements in terms of game mechanics, with fifteen main titles being released since 1987. Undeniably, it is easy to give praise to the ambition that the makers of this film had towards delivering something that would inspire curiosity and interest, although it seems more for the animation than the actual story in any case. It just can't help itself being a visual spectacle even after two decades of age (although it may take a bit of time to get used to its type of flair), at least. The spirit aspect feels a bit too hokey to really make for a compelling story, with the twist involving their true nature (with a name like Phantoms, take one guess) not making as much an impact. It feels too clumsy with trying to handle its characters, particularly with its main character, who never comes into focus as someone to really follow along with.

That's not to say I didn't like the performances of the cast, who each do their parts just fine. Wen does okay with what she is given, even if her chemistry with Baldwin (probably the most practical performer here) reads more like an audio-book than something befitting a movie, especially a science-fiction one. Rhames, Buscemi and Gilpin all do okay, providing little moments of amusement until they aren't needed by the plot. Sutherland fills the wise old shoes of his character without much trouble (ponder on the whole Gaia theory stuff as you wish, however), and Woods is finely tuned to play with a good deal of ham to his performance, which work out okay, even if his motivations feel a bit too underplayed to really resonate. The writing can't quite make them feel like people to gel with, as if I am watching one long cut-scene with no way to break free. The story was done by Sakaguchi, while having a screenplay from Al Reinert (writer of films such as For All Mankind and Apollo 13) and Jeff Vintar (co-writer of I, Robot). The parts involving the Gaia only serve to make the film seem more deeply rooted than it really is, with a climax that feels too patched up to have an impact. It isn't so much a junk food type of sci-fi movie as it is just an off-brand piece of candy that looks nice but is a bit stale in all the wrong places to really sit right. With a run-time of 106 minutes, it will prove fine for the eyes to sit with while resonating less with its aims that at drag a cobbled assortment of sci-fi gobbledygook across the line without being a complete success. I didn't feel that it was a waste of my time, but I did feel disappointed that it wasn't worth it just enough. I do find science fiction movies to be a fun thing to sit through, but I couldn't find this one to be just as fitting of praise as others that dared to show a different kind of reality or look.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Reservoir Dogs.

Review #1180: Reservoir Dogs.

Cast: 
Harvey Keitel (Mr. White/Larry), Tim Roth (Mr. Orange/Freddy), Michael Madsen (Mr. Blonde/Vic Vega), Chris Penn ("Nice Guy" Eddie Cabot), Steve Buscemi (Mr. Pink), Lawrence Tierney (Joe Cabot), Randy Brooks (Holdaway), Kirk Baltz (Marvin Nash), Edward Bunker (Mr. Blue), Quentin Tarantino (Mr. Brown), and Steven Wright (K-Billy DJ) Directed by Quentin Tarantino (#638 - Kill Bill: Volume 1 and #639 - Kill Bill: Volume 2)

Review: 
Reservoir Dogs is the first major motion picture directed by Quentin Tarantino, who also wrote and co-starred in it. Tarantino had done a select amount of jobs beforehand, such as working at a video store or production assistant for an Dolph Lundgren exercise video. It was his meeting with producer Lawrence Bender in 1990 that helped elevate Tarantino to making this film on a much higher scale; Bender gave the script to his acting teacher, whose wife was a friend of Harvey Keitel. The signing of Keitel (who also serves as co-producer) helped in raising the budget for the film from the original intended amount of $30,000 to $1.5 million. There were a few films that influenced Tarantino, such as The Killing (1956) and Kansas City Confidental (1952), and it's not hard to see his love of films, which certainly comes through in a heist movie that is fairly entertaining in how it conducts itself, holding itself well enough through its dynamite cast. Keitel, Roth, Madsen & Buscemi are the main group that we follow throughout a film that utilizes plenty of snappy dialogue and choice use of violence that sprinkles itself throughout its 99 minute run-time, conducting itself out of order (without showing the heist itself) without feeling disjointed or too much like a chore to reach, never really having a period of sluggishness. It doesn't ever feel like a movie bogged down by heist cliches, but rather one that rolls with what it is without focusing too hard on falling in line with expectations. It may be a bit much for some with its style/violence, but there is still a valid amount of substance involved to make it work. Keitel shines the best, having a hard-edge to his character of a career criminal that is instantly one we can follow without reluctance, and he has some entertaining moments with the other members of the group. Roth finds time to shine with ease, and Buscemi is snappy but worthwhile when on screen. Madsen plays his role with a fine bit of ruthlessness and unpredictability that sticks out in various ways. Penn and Tierney (known for his previous portrayal of mobsters and tough guys in films prior) round out the main cast, and each play their respective parts handily without trouble. The film clicks itself pretty early with its opening sequence, inviting you into a look of these folks through an amusing conversation and music choices that work to give the movie some flavor. The film works out enough to not go off the rails in its climax because it keeps a fine level of thrills and tension going that make for a worthwhile debut for Tarantino.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Messenger (2009).

Review #1133: The Messenger.

Cast: 
Ben Foster (Sgt. Will Montgomery), Woody Harrelson (Capt. Tony Stone), Samantha Morton (Olivia Pitterson), Jena Malone (Kelly), Steve Buscemi (Dale Martin), Yaya DaCosta (Monica Washington), and Eamonn Walker (LtCol. Stuart Dorsett) Directed by Oren Moverman.

Review: 
It feels hard to face the truth at times. The realities of life and how people deal with their actions and consequences can make for an interesting subject for a film to confront. With this film, the main focus in on casualty notification officers, with the main two being a trainee and his mentor, as they try to do their job - no matter how hard it may be, whether for the notifier or the person being notified. There is a dark but driving feel to the reality that it shows for these two and the people that they encounter in their mission that justifies its existence through a 113 minute run-time. It may fall a bit with pacing at times, but there is a sense of duty to tell a story worth wanting to see, being factual and punctual with showing emotion that never feels cynically manufactured in its episodic nature. Foster and Harrelson make for an interesting pair to follow with, where they are faced with trying to do the job they are assigned to do within the standards of the role while dealing with their own story-lines. Foster does a fine job with what he is given, balancing the trauma the character has to deal with while dealing the newfangled reality of his assignment - particularly the people he encounters. Harrelson stands out the most among the cast, having a hardened edge of sincerity and intensity that invites us to look at him with a inquisitive lens that keeps the movie moving along. Morton does fine with what's she is given for a role that occasionally invites focus of interest, and her chemistry with Foster is somewhat present, making for a few fair moments. Buscemi, with a presence of probably less than ten minutes on screen, does fine with showing a good range of emotion as one of the receivers of news from the main group. The movie is at its finest when trying to show honestly with the rough nature of the main duo's job, which makes the first half work a bit better than the second half, which isn't as too held together. The film has a few cliches to it, but it isn't anything that makes the material come off as anything other than fairly watchable. It isn't the kind of movie that had much success upon original release, having a limited run in few theaters before making just over a million dollars on a $6.5 million budget, although it did receive nominations for numerous awards, such as Best Original Screenplay at the Academy Awards for writers Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman and Best Supporting Actor for Harrelson; in any case, this is a fairly decent film that manages to pull enough emotional honesty and focus from its main two actors to pull a victory out, and I'm sure it will work just fine for people in the mindset for something a bit different for a war drama.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Fargo.

Review #765: Fargo.

Cast
Frances McDormand (Marge Gunderson), William H. Macy (Jerry Lundegaard), Steve Buscemi (Carl Showalter), Peter Stormare (Gaear Grimsrud), Harve Presnell (Wade Gustafson), Kristin Rudrüd (Jean Lundegaard), Tony Denman (Scotty Lundegaard), Larry Brandenburg (Stan Grossman), John Carroll Lynch (Norm Gunderson), and Steve Reevis (Shep Proudfoot) Directed by the Coen Brothers (#659 - True Grit)

Review
The movie opens with the following text: "THIS IS A TRUE STORY. The events depicted in this film took place in Minnesota in 1987. At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed. Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred." The movie's credits utilize the "All persons fictitious disclaimer", but even with all of that, the movie seems so real, especially with the small-town setting. While only the opening scene takes place in Fargo, it is where everything comes together for Macy and the two kidnappers he hires in a plan that goes...let's just say awry. It's a movie that spruces itself up with interesting characters and brutal crime to make for a really engaging movie. McDormand does a fine job making a folksy, but effective detective that is enjoyable to see figure out the pieces in such a bizarre case. I don't know why, but the first scene with her (alongside Lynch) having breakfast and then leaving for work is one of my favorites, mainly because it isn't just a normal eat and go kind of scene, it feels very regular (of course, the scene ends with her needing the car to be charged, but with the setting it makes sense).

Macy does a fine job in such a panicky role of a man that tries (and fails) to make the best out of the situations he has gotten himself into. I especially like when he is trying to explain a (deliberate) mistake he made with regards to filing on forms (by smudging the numbers). You can see the desperation and the ways he tries to wiggle out, even with all the pleasantries exchanged between the two. Buscemi and Stormare have their own quirks as well, even if they aren't as pleasant as the rest of these "Minnesota nice" characters. I especially like the scene where Buscemi's character is trying to get Stormare to talk during their trip to Minneapolis. Maybe it's just the fact that he is doing this on a trip to kidnap someone, or the fact that I can relate trying to make conversation on a driving trip because I (admittedly) did that while my dad and I drove up to Oregon a few years back (though at least my trip did not end with...you know). Buscemi is the more talkative villain, but Stormare really does a good job of silent force that is probably the more efficient killer. On the whole, this is a movie that feels original because it does what it wants to do that utilizes dark comedy to great effect to make for a riveting, but still enjoyable flick.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Escape from L.A.

Review #732: Escape from L.A.

Cast
Kurt Russell (Snake Plissken), Steve Buscemi (Map to the Stars Eddie), Georges Corraface (Cuervo Jones), Cliff Robertson (President), Stacy Keach (Cmdr. Malloy), Peter Fonda (Pipeline), Pam Grier (Hershe Las Palmas), A. J. Langer (Utopia), Valeria Golino (Taslima), Bruce Campbell (Surgeon General of Beverly Hills), and Michelle Forbes (Brazen) Directed by John Carpenter (#068 - Halloween, #634 - Escape from New York, and #712 - The Thing)

Review
It's been a while (ten days) since I reviewed a movie, so let me get back to work with a familiar director, John Carpenter. And hey, it's the sequel released 15 years after the first movie, what could go wrong? The answer to that question lies within the movie itself. I praised the original for its dystopian outlook, Russell himself, and the thrilling action. What I forgot to mention is that Escape from New York managed to keep itself from losing momentum. The sequel? Not so much. While Russell is still the best actor in the movie, the rest of the cast isn't as impressive. Corraface's character comes and goes too quickly to make any real impression on you, while Fonda's character is more pointless than Buscemi's character, but at least the latter does something important, so points for that. The movie is bleak, but it isn't as interesting as the first movie, and the computer effects for water effects (especially the surfing - yes Snake surfs) don't help the movie, as they come off as too distracting. It takes a while for the movie to become interesting, and the action scenes are passable, though they are overshadowed a bit by the scene where Plisskin has to make 5 baskets in a row (at the LA Coliseum, no less), and the aforementioned surfing scene, which is just plain strange. The movie was written by Debra Hill, John Carpenter & Russell, with Russell apparently coming up with the ending. I guess it was hard to make an ending that wasn't just like the last one, with this ending being more bleak given that there was no sequel (which apparently would've been Plissken escaping Earth) because this movie proved to be a failure financially. It's not a bad movie, it at least is entertaining to a degree, and Russell clearly had a lot of passion for this movie, and I respect his performance. The movie itself, though, isn't as good, but it is at least a good way to pass 100 minutes, and you might enjoy the movie more than I did. It's hard to believe this movie was released in August 1996. August...9th, 1996. Okay, I didn't plan for this to be an anniversary review. Welcome to the human race.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Island.

Review #129: The Island.

Cast
Ewan McGregor (Lincoln Six Echo/Tom Lincoln), Scarlett Johansson (Jordan Six Delta), Sean Bean (Dr. Merrick), Djimon Hounsou (Albert Laurent), Steve Buscemi (James McCord), and Michael Clarke Duncan (Starkweather Two Delta). Directed by Michael Bay (#057 - Transformers and #058: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen)

Review
This film has Michael Bay directing, so...Minus three points already (I kid, ratings don't go like that). Anyway, the film is an mix of science-fiction films such as Logan's Run and Fahrenheit 451, with a reasonable plot. The acting is good, especially from McGregor, Johansson, Buscemi, and Duncan (being important in the beginning) The beginning is interesting, making you feel invested not for the action (which comes in the second part), but for the actual plot for once. However, the action starts to seep in, and it is mediocre, as we've seen this before and before (and later and later from Bay...), with the plot unraveling a bit, yet the film still works to be an alright film.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Monsters, Inc.

Review #074: Monsters, Inc.

Cast
John Goodman (Sully), Billy Crystal (Mike), Steve Buscemi (Randall), Jennifer Tilly (Celia), and James Coburn (Mr. Waternoose) Directed by Pete Docter, David Silverman, and Lee Unkrich.

Review
This is one of many gems of Pixar Animation (Toy Story, Toy Story 2, Toy Story 3, Cars, #153 - The Incredibles, #155 - Finding Nemo, #222 - WALL-E, #288 - Up), as this film succeeds in telling a story with good animation, good acting, and of course a story that sells you the premise. It truly is one those films that will make you scared/laugh/cry...I recommend it for anybody, especially if you need a scare. Or two...

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.