All posts by scottmet99

2014 Films, Drama, International, International Drama, Israeli, Ronit Elkabetz, Shlomi Elkabetz, Simon Abkarian

Gett: The Trial of Vivian Amsalem-2014

June 9, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Gett: The Trial of Vivian Amsalem-2014

Director Ronit Elkabetz, Shlomi Elkabetz

Starring Ronit Elkabetz, Simon Abkarian

Scott’s Review #409

Reviewed June 9, 2016

Grade: B+

Gett: The Trial of Vivian Amsalem (2014) is the third in a trilogy of films focusing on the title character Vivian Amsalem and her unhappy marriage to her husband, Elisha.

The unhappiness is hers and he sees no reason to end the marriage.

It is a film about culture, religion, and modern views versus traditional ones.

I was unaware the film was a trilogy until after I finished watching and began conducting some research as I prepared to review it. It is not required to view the first two films (To Take A Wife and Shiva) to enjoy this film as I suspect they are each a chapter not continuations.

Vivian is a tall, beautiful woman, though she is weary and haggard when we first lay eyes on her in the stifling courtroom, where she sits and spends much of her time. She has long dark hair and intense eyes- she appears driven and quite modern and of liberal thinking, a feminist perhaps.

She is frustrated because her yearning for an independent life has been thwarted by her husband. She would like a divorce after over twenty years. Having met him at age fifteen, his is the only life she has known.

Since he will not agree to the divorce, the courts will not grant her the decision she wants. Since he has not abused her and gives her everything she desires, the judges have no grounds to grant her the divorce.

This is the conflict of the film.

Gett: The Trial of Vivian Amsalem has a clear religious message, which is an interesting component for an American viewer.

How simple it is to divorce somebody in Western civilization and how different the measure is in Israel. Jewish religious law is quite restrictive.

Vivian faces an enormous ordeal. She does not love her husband yet cannot end her loveless marriage. The film is fraught with a clear conflict and one’s interpretation of right and wrong.

Almost set as a play since the film has merely one set- the courtroom- this aspect is effective at showing frustration, exasperation, and even rage.

All the while, Gett, has a sly sense of humor, and I could not help but smirk at a few of the supporting character portrayals.

I sensed a Pedro Almodovar (a famous Spanish director) influence in the quirky, sly writing, and his themes of political freedom.

Character after character is called into the courtroom to testify as witnesses to Vivian and Elisha’s happy marriage- each attorney looking for evidence to cement their client’s point of view.

In contrast, to Vivian’s fierce independence, a mature neighbor couple of Vivian and Elisha heralds them as the perfect couple. Soon, the wife is grilled revealing that she is submissive to her husband and lives in an entirely different world than Vivian.

To be critical, the film drags slightly, but I wonder if this is the director’s intent. The tone is a suffocating one- Vivian and her attorney languish in the same courtroom for five long years as delay after delay occurs.

Throughout the numerous testimonies, an accusation is raised that is an interesting component of the film and an aspect I wondered about very early on- was an affair brewing between Vivian and her attorney? It is alluded to, but never confirmed, rather shrouded in mystery.

One wonders.

From an acting perspective, Ronit Elkabetz is fantastic, I am saddened she did not receive an Oscar nomination, but some buzz about this actress was expressed when the film was released. Her scene of pure rage towards the end of the film is brilliant. All the years of bottled-up emotions come flowing out in one great performance.

Gett: The Trial of Vivian Amsalem (2014) is an intense experience in tedium, frustration, and ultimately rage, but is never stuffy or too serious as evidenced by humorous supporting characters. It is for patient film fans seeking an emotional, human experience.

2014 Films, Brazilian, Daniel Ribeiro, Drama, Fábio Audi, Ghilherme Lobo, International, International Romance, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ International, LGBTQ+ Romance, Romantic Drama

The Way He Looks-2014

June 4, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Way He Looks-2014

Director Daniel Ribeiro

Starring Fabio Audi, Ghilherme Lobo

Scott’s Review #408

Reviewed June 4, 2016

Grade: B+

The Way He Looks is a foreign language film (Brazilian) from 2014 that tells a coming-of-age story about a blind high school student, who develops feelings for the new kid in town. The other boy has rapidly become his new best friend and the boys, while unsure of the other’s sexual preferences, fall in love.

The film is a charming story about a modern romance, now becoming more prevalent today.

Leonardo (known as Leo) is a blind high school student struggling to be his true self. His close friend Giovana (Tess Amorim) is in a similar situation as neither has ever been kissed, yet they feel adolescent desires- they are lonely but share a close bond.

Regardless of his disability, Leo is quite independent, despite having parents who border on smothering. One day, a new student named Gabriel volunteers to sit behind Leo in class and strike up a friendship.

Giovana, unaware of Leo’s sexual preferences, develops a crush on Gabriel.

The film then tells a sweet story about a young, blossoming, romance. The main characters do not face particularly tough obstacles from outside sources, but rather from each other as their feelings and emotions are fragile.

In addition to romance, the film focuses on the friendships between Leo, Gabriel, and Giovana.

The Way He Looks is a warm film. It is sweet, compassionate, and tenderhearted. The viewer witnesses a budding romance between two teenagers and the fact that they are both males is secondary- that is how charming the film is.

The audience will root for Leo and Gabriel because they are nice kids. Giovana, the outsider, also has a rooting factor- she is in no way a villain, nor does she harbor resentment for either Leo or Gabriel, but rather yearns for her first romance and happiness.

The film wisely does not turn her into an emotional wreck, or a psycho. Sure, she gets drunk at a party, but this is only to escape her feelings.

I recoiled at the scene after scene of Leo’s parents either fretting about something, worried sick about Leo coming home late or worried that something may happen to their son.

Relax already. Life is not meant to be spent frazzled because your son is blind.

The parents are not the strongest written characters in the film and are rather secondary characters. The case is the same for the bullies, the slutty girl, and the teacher.

The film belongs to Leo, Gabriel, and Giovana.

The supporting characters in The Way He Looks are meant to react to the central characters.

The Way He Looks is about a same-sex, young romance. Charming, not too heavy, with likable characters, who one can root for. There are no bombs, car chases, or explosions needed.

The Way He Looks (2023) is a slice of life that is simple, pure, and true.

1974 Films, Adventure, Ava Gardner, Barry Sullivan, Charlton Heston, Disaster, George Kennedy, Mark Robson, Richard Roundtree, Walter Matthau

Earthquake-1974

June 2, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Earthquake-1974

Director Mark Robson

Starring Charlton Heston, Ava Gardner

Scott’s Review #407

Reviewed June 2, 2016

Grade: B+

One of the several disaster films to populate film screens in the early to mid-1970s, Earthquake is one of the “main four” blockbusters (The Poseidon Adventure, The Towering Inferno, and Airport being the others), that still resonate with viewers in modern times and are nostalgic to watch.

One might argue that the aforementioned few largely influenced Earthquake since it was the last of the group to be filmed.

Certainly, the influence is apparent.

Earthquake is a classic, traditional, disaster film containing many stock characters (or types) and is an ensemble piece- as disaster films always are- frequently containing stars of yesteryear attempting exposure in the modern cinema.

The gender roles in Earthquake are quite mainstream for the day as the females are all clearly “damsels in distress” types and the men are portrayed as the heroes.

The action begins as we witness a Los Angeles-based middle-aged couple (the central couple if you will) engaging in a dispute.

Charlton Heston and Ava Gardner play Stewart and Remy Graff, an affluent couple, a former football star, she a boozy socialite. Her father is the wealthy Sam Royce, played by Lorne Greene. Stewart is carrying on an affair with a young actress, Denise Marshall, creating a soap opera-style romantic triangle, adding drama to the film.

We meet other characters who round out the character’s stories- LAPD Sgt. Slade (George Kennedy) shares a flirtation with Rosa (Victoria Principal), while drunkard Walter Matthau and evil kineval character Richard Roundtree provide comic relief.

These stories are merely filler until the inevitable earthquake arrives to ‘shake’ things up.

The earthquake is the main character in the film just like the tidal wave, the fire, and the airline peril are in the other same genre films.

The character’s trivial relationships soon take a back seat to the action as the earthquake shatters the city in subsequent onsets and aftershocks, destroying buildings and resulting in many deaths.

The very lengthy main earthquake sequence is second to none and hovers around the twenty-minute mark. We see many characters in peril. The scene goes on and on but is hardly redundant.

The scene is masterful and well done. The effects, cinematography, and visuals alone hold up well today and must have been breathtaking circa 1974.

In one particularly thrilling scene, a group of office workers on the thirtieth floor of a skyscraper desperately try to scramble to the elevator as the building shakes and shimmies. One businessman shoves a secretary out of the way and selfishly immerses himself in the crowded elevator as others desperately pound on the elevator door to escape.

Things do not end well for the folks on the elevator as bolts loosen and the car crashes to the ground. An animated blood splat fills the screen in a lighthearted, comical way.

The film wisely does not take itself too seriously.

As fantastic as the destruction sequence is, Earthquake is not a film without a few flaws, mostly from a character standpoint.

Unbelievable is Heston playing Greene’s son-in-law and Gardner are assumed to be young enough to be his daughter- they appear to be around the same age.

A strange character, Jody, a store clerk, suddenly dresses as a soldier, wearing a wig, following the destruction and, assumed to be gay by thugs, is teased, which prompts him to shoot them with a machine gun. He subsequently becomes obsessed with and nearly rapes Rosa.

The sub-plot seems uneven and very unnecessary.

With spectacular special effects, Earthquake is a must-see disaster film with a slightly downcast, hopeless tone. It does its job well- it entertains, thrills, and features an all-star cast of former Hollywood elite and a few rising stars.

A fun time will be had.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Sound (won), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

1965 Films, Art, Camp, Haji, John Furlong, Lori Williams, Russ Meyer, Scott's Top 100 Films, Sexploitation, Stuart Lancaster, Susan Bernard, Tura Satana

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!-1965

May 28, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!- 1965

Director Russ Meyer

Starring Tura Satana, Haji

Top 100 Films #85

Scott’s Review #406

Reviewed May 28, 2016

Grade: A

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! is a 1965 masterpiece that has eluded me for many years, mainly because it is unavailable on Netflix.

Finally, I decided to buy the newly released Blu-Ray edition and immediately became a massive fan of this Russ Meyer work of art.

Influential and intriguing, it is no surprise it is a camp classic.

Several famous directors, like Quentin Tarantino, have paid homage to this film in their later works, notably Death Proof (2007). Fast cars, sexy women, and murder represent this unique film.

Compared to other famous Meyer works, specifically the gregarious yet brilliant Supervixens (1975), Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! is almost understated and quiet.

He also directed the well-known Beyond The Valley of the Dolls from 1970.

Shot in black and white, several notable comparisons to Supervixens are: a hot California desert, large-breasted women, and gas stations are prevalent throughout.

Unlike Supervixens, though, there is little or no nudity.

Three go-go dancers race through the desert in their sports cars. They have murder and kidnapping on their minds. The ring leader, Varla (Tura Satana) is a vicious, sexy, Asian woman. Her two side-kicks are Billie (Lori Williams) and Rosie (Haji). While Billie and Rosie fight in a juvenile fashion, Varla is the serious one.

The trio enjoys racing their cars and engaging in the game “chicken.” When they meet the all-American couple, Tommy and Linda, out for a romantic drive, they have a dispute and end up killing Tommy- drugging and kidnapping Linda.

After stopping for gas, Varla hatches a plot to steal money from a crazy older man, his muscular yet dimwitted son (known as the Vegetable), and the older man’s seemingly normal son, Kirk.

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! is a groundbreaking film because it is gender-bending. The women are hardly written as sex objects, as most films of that day were far from that. They are ferocious, specifically Varla, and they do typically masculine things. They race cars, fight, and kill, yet they do not sacrifice any of their femininity.

All three women are sexy and busty and wear stylish makeup. They are not trying to be like men but tough girls, and these aspects make the film so wonderful to watch.

In Hollywood, these female characters are usually molls to even rougher men or support the men in some way. These female characters are the film.

My favorite character is Varla. Sexy, fierce, and a minority, how often is a female villain this charismatic? Perhaps she would be a conquest of Bond in Bond films and not her person.

Varla makes up her own rules. The fact that she is Asian is superb and breaks many barriers to how Asians are portrayed in the film. Varla is more devious than the other characters and willing to kill anyone who stands in her way, even her friends.

She is a character written very well by Russ Meyer and a pure femme fatale.

The male supporting characters are interesting. The older man, actor Stuart Lancaster, would later appear in Supervixens. He is a cripple, wacky, and as diabolical as the women. He has designs on innocent Linda and makes no bones about it. The Vegetable is hunky and fresh-faced- an innocent victim of his father’s evil ways, so he is a character we root for. I enjoyed the brief romance between him and Billie.

Lastly, Kirk is the “normal” son, also a victim of his father. When he and Linda run across the desert while Varla chases them, we root for them to survive.

The black-and-white style, chosen to save money, enhances the unique cinematography with sharp edits and gives the film a mystique.

The 1960s jazzy score adds to the film as well. In color, I wonder if the film would have had a more cartoonish quality. The black and white moves Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! Into art film territory.

The debate over the film is, “Is the film exploiting women or empowering them?” The film answers whether women can be tough, sexy, and complicated with a resounding yes.

All three principal characters are layered, each developing feelings for other characters. At one point, Billie questions Rosie’s sexuality. Still, the female characters are not monsters, nor are they caricatures. They are complex with real emotions.

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1965) is an influential art film/exploitation film that empowers female characters, questions gender categorizations, and takes hold of the viewer, never letting go.

The film is a brilliant representation of the changing times in cinema during the 1960s.

2015 Films, Biography, Brian Helgeland, Chazz Palminteri, Crime Thriller, David Thewlis, Emily Browning, Mob, Taron Egerton, Thriller, Tom Hardy

Legend-2015

May 24, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Legend-2015

Director Brian Helgeland

Starring Tom Hardy

Scott’s Review #405

Reviewed May 24, 2016

Grade: B+

Tom Hardy is one of my favorite modern film actors (he should have won the 2015 Oscar for his riveting performance in The Revenant, in my humble opinion) and in Legend (2015) fans are treated to a dual role by the handsome Brit.

Hardy portrays Reggie and Ronald Kray, two of London’s most feared and brutal gangsters.

The film belongs to Hardy in every way, shape, and form, the locales of London are fantastic, and more than one scene is jaw-dropping violent, but the film meanders quite a bit and the vocals of Ron Kray are quite difficult to understand.

Still, impressive effort as a whole.

The time is late 1950s London. Reggie Kray, the more mainstream of the Kray brothers, is a feared member of the organized crime community. He is coddled by his mother and can do no wrong in her eyes. This makes any relationships difficult as his mum disapproves of his mates.

He falls in love with Frances Shea, a young woman who narrates most of the film, so it is told from an outsider’s perspective. Reggie’s brother Ron has recently been released from a mental hospital and if off of his medications, is certifiably crazy, and very volatile.

He is gay and makes no bones about it.

Ron and Reggie have a love/hate relationship, and this dynamic is the most interesting aspect.

Thanks to Hardy, as the writing is not Legend’s strongest suit, we see two very different characters, even though they look alike. In the myriad of scenes shared between the brothers, it appears that two actors are playing the roles which is to Hardy’s credit.

An important scene emphasizes the relationship between the two. When a rival dares to mention Reggie’s wife’s name disparagingly, he points a gun and fires at the man’s head.

Fortunately, the gun is not loaded, so the audience breathes a sigh of relief. Yet, a worse fate awaits the victim. After the deed is done, Reggie whispers in Ron’s ear that he killed the man “because I can’t kill you”.

This means Reggie would kill Ron if he could- shocking since they are brothers. To add to this, it is implied that he would kill his brother with the same savageness as his victim.

This makes the audience ponder.

Impressive is Ron’s sexuality, especially since he is not written stereotypically. He is brutal, masculine, and hardcore. The fact that Ron Kray was a real figure is important to note. His entourage of boyfriends follows him around in dedication.

Who can blame them as his charisma oozes- think of an unstable James Bond.

The twin’s relationship is the best part of the film, but as a mob film, Legend meanders quite a bit, so much so that it becomes tough to identify what the point is, if not for Hardy.

Save for Frances, none of the supporting characters are written with interest and are all rather forgettable.

The wonderful Chazz Palminteri is wasted in the role of Angelo Bruno, head of a Philadelphia crime family and friend of the Krays. There is little meaning or interest in his role.

A mediocre story, but with leading characters with depth, makes Legend (2015) an interesting film that flies under the radar and receives little notice.

Hopefully, if nothing else, it continues the success that Tom Hardy is currently achieving in modern film.

1968 Films, Art, Bibi Andersson, Drama, Feminist, International, International Drama, Swedish

The Girls-1968

May 11, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Girls-1968

Director Mai Zetterling

Starring Bibi Andersson, Harriet Andersson

Scott’s Review #404

Reviewed May 11, 2016

Grade: B+

The Girls is a 1968 political-leaning, surreal, dream-like, feminist Swedish film. These may seem like too many adjectives to describe a film, but they all happen to be warranted and work to categorize it, which is tough- it is a complex film.

The film left me deep in thought about what I had just viewed- that is a positive for me.

Directed by a female, Mai Zetterling, the film is told from a female perspective and is quite difficult to follow, though the message portrayed is a thought compelling, and powerful women repressed- whether in reality or fantasy-by men.

In my attempt to describe The Girls accurately, it appears to contain the boys versus girls component throughout- told by the girls. The plot centers around three women: Liz (Bibi Andersson), Marianne (Harriet Andersson), and Gunilla (Gunnel Lindblom).

The women are hired to star in a touring production of Lysistrata and each faces conflict and concern over leaving their respective families, but for differing reasons.

Liz’s husband, who is having an affair, cannot get rid of her soon enough. Marianne has recently dumped her married boyfriend. Gunilla has four children and suffers from guilt. All of the women are very friendly with each other.

All three principal actresses are familiar to eagle-eyed Ingmar Bergman fans as each of them has appeared in numerous films of his-in very different types of roles.

Wild Strawberries and The Seventh Seal feature these actresses.

The women go on tour and have various surreal experiences based on the play in which they are a star. The film, made in black and white, has very overexposed cinematography. The blacks and the whites are very sharp in look and this is no doubt purposely done.

On the surface, it would appear that the women hate men and yearn to be free of them. Is that the point of the film? It seems to go in other directions as well. Do they hate their lives and feel confined with men and free without them, when they are touring their play?

How do they feel about their children? Do they miss them on tour, love them, resent them, or perhaps a bit of each? They yearn to be free of restraint.

We are treated to numerous scenes that seem to be a dreamlike state or a fantasy of one of the women. One runs through the forest and comes upon a grizzled, dirty child on the ground. Is it hers? She then sees her husband sitting in a living room chair in the middle of the forest.

The symbolism resonating through The Girls is countless. We also see the women fantasize about a handsome, young man. Are they tired of the doldrums- looks and otherwise- that their husbands have caused them?

Many political scenes of protest occur throughout the film. In one, the women march in unison- Nazi-style and chant. In another, the women lead what appears to be a charge of women- suffragette style, until the women start attacking each other and punching and kicking each other in the streets.

These scenes and countless others are tough to analyze, but perhaps this is the point. I decided to simply escape into the film and not try to figure out what everything meant.

Fantastic to see is the exterior scenes shot in Stockholm, Sweden, which reminds us what a liberal, democratic city it is. Yet the women are repressed. Made in 1968, during the sexual revolution, the timing of the film is perfect.

The Girls left me pondering the story and the viewpoint and I will need further viewings for the film to more successfully sink in and for me to get it- if I ever do, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

The film is the kind of film that requires further viewing to understand. I look forward to watching this film again and that is high praise for it.

2015 Films, David Arquette, Independent, Independent Western, Kurt Russell, Matthew Fox, Patrick Wilson, Richard Jenkins, S. Craig Zahler, Sean Young, Western

Bone Tomahawk-2015

May 10, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Bone Tomahawk-2015

Director S. Craig Zahler

Starring Kurt Russell, Patrick Wilson, Richard Jenkins

Scott’s Review #403

Reviewed May 10, 2016

Grade: B+

Bone Tomahawk is a film from 2015 that almost nobody saw or heard of, and is a unique independent horror/western hybrid. It has strong influences on Quentin Tarantino and contains an impressive cast for such a low-profile film.

Bone Tomahawk is the proverbial diamond in the rough and is worth seeing for film fans with patience enough to sit through the slow-moving pace to get to the good stuff.

It largely comes in the final thirty minutes of the film.

Notably, the film was recognized by the Independent Film Committee and received two Spirit Awards, for Best Supporting Male (Richard Jenkins), and Best Screenplay.

It won neither.

The film does not have a “star”, but rather a myriad of heavy hitters in a clear ensemble. Kurt Russell plays Franklin Hunt, sheriff of a tiny town named Bright Hope, presumably somewhere in the west (Wyoming?) circa 1890. His deputy sheriff, Chicory, is played by Jenkins.

When drifters kill some travelers, they accidentally stumble upon a mysterious Native American burial ground and taint its contents, leaving one brutally murdered by the tribe.

The other (played by David Arquette) stumbles into Bright Hope and is immediately deemed suspicious. When he, a female Doctor’s assistant, and a young local man disappear, it is realized that they have been abducted by the owners of the burial ground, who are feared to be cannibalistic savages.

Hunt, Chicory, a foreman named Arthur (the doctor’s assistant’s wife), played by Patrick Wilson, and a local playboy played by Matthew Fox, decide to trek long terrain to find and rescue the missing.

The pace is slow and will undoubtedly turn off some folks seeking slicker, high-tech viewing, or even some CGI, but the payoff for patience is immense.

The group’s trek through the desert in pursuit of the accosted seems endless, and I did have thoughts of what the point was, but the forthcoming turn of events makes this tedium worth it.

In defense of the long plodding journey, this aspect does make the audience get to know and begin to care about the characters- some make it out alive, others are not as lucky. The fun part is finding out who does and doesn’t.

Bone Tomahawk contains one of the most gruesome scenes that I have ever witnessed in my thousands of viewed films. A male character, nude, is brutally scalped and a spear is hammered into his throat in full view of the prisoners.

As if this is not shocking enough, he is then turned upside down, split down the middle, and chopped in half, as his insides spill to the ground. The snapping sounds of his bones and the visual horror of the guts are even tough for the non-squeamish to view.

It is uncanny that Kurt Russell plays a similar character in another 2015 film, the much higher profile, The Hateful Eight. Sure, he is a bounty hunter, but the period, setting, and costumes are almost identical.

One might wonder which was made first.

Bone Tomahawk is a guy’s movie, but not in the traditional sense- there are no explosions, no unnecessary machismo, or apparent clichés.

But at the end of the day, it is a Western and the cast is mainly male. Besides the Doctor’s assistant, the only other females are wives with small roles.

The most glaring is Sean Young- given hardly anything to do in a cameo appearance. Otherwise, the Native American females, blind, deaf, pregnant, and missing appendages are the only other females in sight.

A unique hybrid of film genres, Bone Tomahawk (2015) is a clever, different experience.

I am a champion of independent film and this film is a good example of why I am. Evidently, with a stellar cast of A-list or former A-list stars banding together to make a piece of art, it seems others champion good films too.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Richard Jenkins, Best Screenplay

1959 Films, Claude Chabrol, Drama, French, Gérard Blain, International, International Drama, Jean-Claude Brialy, Juliette Mayniel, Stéphane Audran

Les Cousins-1959

May 5, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Les Cousins-1959

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Gerard Blain, Jean-Claude Braily

Scott’s Review #402

Reviewed May 5, 2016

Grade: A-

Les Cousins is a 1959 Claude Chabrol French-language film.

Made in black and white and set in Paris, the focus is on metropolitan life as seen from the perspective of one of the main characters, who is from the country and far removed from the bustle and complexities of city life.

The focal point is contrasting traits- personality, background, and otherwise. The film delves into psychological aspects that lend themselves to making the film a character-driven, thought-provoking experience.

Les Cousins is open to many interpretations. The film, therefore, has many nuances to ponder and sink one’s teeth into deep thought.

Les Cousins is about two male cousins, Charles and Paul.

They appear to be similar in age and are both law students, but they are opposites in almost every other way. Paul is the alpha male—self-centered, quick-tempered, and forceful. Living an affluent life in the heart of Paris, he has many friends, is a social butterfly, and has no filter on his criticisms and judgments of others.

On the other hand, Charles has an entirely different set of qualities. Sent by his mother to live with Paul and study for the agonizing, impending law exam, Charles is meek, quiet, and insecure.

When Charles meets Florence, a beautiful friend of Paul’s, who has a reputation for “sleeping around”, Charles falls madly in love with her, almost love at first sight, unaware of her reputation.

What follows is a strange triangle between Paul, Florence, and Charles that is laced with jealousy, revenge, and ultimately violence.

The relationships between the three principal characters are interesting to consider and are at the film’s heart.

When Paul realizes Charles is in love with Florence, does this turn of events disturb him? Does he feel sorry for Charles or elicit some perverse joy in bedding Florence in front of Charles? If so, why does he resent Charles?

Is Florence in love with Charles, or is it a guise? Does she even realize the extent of his love for her? A sexually expressive woman, she is not outlandish in her appearance and seems quite virginal to the outside viewer.

Does she enjoy the fact that the unwitting Charles sees her as pure? Does she wish that she was virginal?

Finally, the complexity of Charles’ character is mysterious. We learn that he writes letters to his mother to give updates on his studying habits and exams.

Does he harbor resentment toward his mother? Is he a “mama’s boy”? Is he overwhelmed in the city? Does he genuinely love Florence (tough to believe after one or two dates) or yearn for the freedom that she represents?

We see countless scenes of Paul and his good-looking friends engaging in various forms of merriment, usually in his modern apartment overlooking the city.

He is affluent. Is this the main reason for his popularity?

The partygoers are all well-dressed and very good-looking—sort of a fraternity party for the exceptionally tailored, if you will.

Interestingly, a female couple- appearing to be a lesbian couple- featured numerous times at the parties. Is this meant to show Paul and Parisians as open-minded and progressive?

A revolver- with only one bullet in a six-chamber gun prevalent throughout the film in a Russian roulette sequence comes into play after the film.

In the last sequence, someone is mortally wounded without ultimately revealing the ending, and we are left to ponder what is happening now.

Are the survivors lives forever changed and ruined? A knock at the door just before the credits roll leaves us wondering who is there.

My one complaint about Les Cousins is that exploring its complexities takes a long time. After the film ended, I was left pondering more than wholly engaged.

I also wondered if the pompous and over-indulgences were slightly overdone to elicit more audience reaction and contrasting elements between Paul and Charles.

A French new wave experience by one of France’s best directors, Les Cousins (1959) is a character study of three fascinating characters that leave the audience thinking about their lives past, present, and future, comparing their idiosyncrasies, actions, and thoughts to delve deeper into their psyches.

2015 Films, Action, Adriana Paz, Andrew Scott, Ben Whishaw, Christoph Waltz, Daniel Craig, Dave Bautista, James Bond, Judi Dench, Léa Seydoux, Monica Bellucci, Naomie Harris, Ralph Fiennes, Sam Mendes

Spectre-2015

May 5, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Spectre-2015

Director Sam Mendes

Starring Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz

Scott’s Review #401

Reviewed May 5, 2016

Grade: B+

A modern treat for James Bond fans, Spectre (2015) is a slick, costly production sure to please die-hard lovers of the storied franchise.

It contains a rich history and nods to recent installments, wrapping the story arc up, a fantastic villain, and fast-paced, compelling story-telling.

It lacks an interesting lead Bond girl, a quality that detracts from the film, and what is a must for the cherished franchise.

This is the only major flaw in an otherwise fantastic film. In typical Bond fashion, his adventures take him to London, Rome, Mexico City, Austria, and Morocco.

Speeding along in what is now the twenty-fourth Bond film, and still feeling fresh and relevant, Spectre commences where its predecessor, Skyfall, left off, mainly hot on the heels of M’s (Judi Dench’s) shocking death.

How wonderful to see her again, albeit in a videotaped message crucial to the central plot.

The new M is a male character again and portrayed by Ralph Fiennes. In the film’s sub-plot, a new character, C, comes into play as the head of the Joint Intelligence Service, who deems the 00 section outdated.

The focal point is Bond’s avenging of the former M’s death by taking down Spectre, an organization not seen in a Bond film since 1971’s Diamonds Are Forever, but once again a strong presence.

The opening sequence in Mexico City kicks off the energy of the film.

Fast-paced, and with an awesome helicopter chase/fight sequence, it is a long sequence that thrills. We watch, engaged, as it swirls and tumbles mid-air, while hundreds of spectators in a large outdoor square flee for safety.

The film then forays into the inevitable Bond song, “Writing’s On The Wall”, this time written and performed by Sam Smith. This particular song has received mixed reviews, but I am fond of it.

This leaves the audience geared up for a wild adventure to come.

The return of the crime organization, Spectre, to the story brings a rich history and is the most interesting part. We have a rooting value since it is familiarity.

Even more pleasing is the return of Bond’s arch-enemy Ernst Stavro Blofeld, known more forcefully as “Number 1”, who has been played by such legendary actors as Donald Pleasance, Telly Savalas, and Max Von Sydow.

In Spectre, Christoph Waltz takes over the role and a major win. Waltz, a tremendous actor, plays Blofeld in a sly, wicked manner, taunting, yet with some comedic elements.

In a compelling scene (and the first one containing Waltz), James Bond appears, hidden, at a Spectre summit. He recoils as he recognizes the shadowed Blofeld, realizing the detrimental repercussions this will mean.

I only hope that in subsequent Bond films, Waltz returns.

Let’s discuss the Bond girls in the film.

Ironically, the small role featuring the oldest Bond girl in franchise history (aged fifty and played by the gorgeous Monica Bellucci) is more compelling than the lead Bond girl, Dr. Madeleine Swann, played by Lea Seydoux.

As Lucia Sciarra, widow of the Italian crime lord, Sciarra, there is more chemistry between Daniel Craig and Bellucci than between Craig and Seydoux.

I would have much rather seen Sciarra as the primary focus, but she is shamefully underused, appearing in two scenes only. Seydoux seems to lack energy and I noticed zero chemistry between her and Craig.

I am not sold on the new Moneypenny either, Bond’s labored sidekick and always suggested one-sided love interest, in earlier films it used to be a fun dynamic. She was a secretary, older, and their flirtation was charming, light, and fun. She was almost a mother figure to him.

There are no flirtation or romantic hints as the character has been modernized to fit the twenty-first century.

Despite this character’s misses, the film is exceptionally well-made with loads of action. Sometimes Bond films hold up well, other times they do not.

Time will tell what fate holds for Spectre (2015), but my hunch is that it will age well.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Song-“Writing’s on the Wall” (won)

1956 Films, Arthur O'Connell, Betty Field, Comedy, Don Murray, Eileen Heckart, Hope Lange, Joshua Logan, Marilyn Monroe, Romantic Comedy

Bus Stop-1956

April 30, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Bus Stop-1956

Director Joshua Logan

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Don Murray

Scott’s Review #400

Reviewed April 30, 2016

Grade: C

Bus Stop is a 1956 film starring Marilyn Monroe that, while surprisingly ranking as one of her best roles, is one of her worst films in my opinion and, at present times, feels dated, chauvinistic, and diminishing to women.

Perhaps perceived as romantic and cute in 1956, times have changed, and the film no longer has the charm it undoubtedly must have had decades ago.

The film is based on a play by William Inge and, remarkably, is Monroe’s first full-fledged dramatic performance. She plays a nightclub performer named Cherie or mispronounced “cherry” by her love interest, Beau, an immature, naïve, socially inept cowboy, unfamiliar with women, and looking for his “angel”.

He is accompanied by his friend and father figure, Virgil.

Together, they travel by bus for a rodeo from Montana to Phoenix, Arizona. Once Beau meets Cherie, he conquers and marries her despite her resistance to his pursuits.

As a fan of Monroe’s more familiar works- Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953) and How To Marry A Millionaire (1953), it is nice to see her in a dramatic role, giving her some nice range and meatier material to tackle.

In 1956, she still looked marvelous, and the sexy nightclub outfit she wore while prancing around in the film worked well.

While Monroe will never be accused of being the most excellent actress in the world, her performance in this film is to be praised. She expresses some lovely emotions. Unfortunately, the character is poorly written, but Monroe gives it the old college try.

Another positive aspect of the film is that of the supporting cast.

Bus stop owner Grace (Betty Field), who has a suggested affair with the bus driver (Robert Bray), is a delight and nearly steals the show! I found their limited screen time and limited romance more interesting and fraught with more potential than the main couple (Beau and Cherie).

Eileen Heckert is acceptable as Vera, Cherie’s waitress and confidante, though she is given little to do.

My favorite scene is at Grace’s Bus Stop as the group is stranded during a sudden winter storm. Beau and the bus driver engage in a bare-knuckles fight outdoors in the driving snow while the rest look on. The bus driver is tired of Beau’s obnoxiousness and intends to teach him a lesson.

Despite being on a sound stage, the scene is authentic, and the snow and gusts add to the animal-like, masculine scene.

Otherwise, the film is not kind to women and, in some parts, is downright sexist. When Cherie, clearly rebuffing Beau’s advances, attempts to board a bus out of town (and alone), Beau decides to lasso her to prevent her from leaving.

In the next scene, Cherie obediently sits beside Beau on another bus to Phoenix to marry him. It is suggested that she finally gives in, temporarily, to his advances.

This film would never be made today.

The character of Beau is not well crafted. Dumb, lower class, and bordering on abusive to Cherie, I am perplexed as to why the audience should root for this character to obtain Cherie and ride off happily into the sunset- I certainly did not.

I would have preferred a pairing of Cherie and Virgil, who are older, sensible, and kind.

Dated, sexist, and poorly written characters, Bus Stop (1956) is not Monroe’s best film, but it allows an audience to see her in a dramatic role that is worth a viewing.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Don Murray

2015 Films, Alan Alda, Amy Ryan, Billy Magnussen, Coen Brothers, Drama, Historical Drama, Jesse Plemons, Mark Rylance, Noah Schnapp, Peter McRobbie, Sebastian Koch, Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks

Bridge of Spies-2015

April 28, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Bridge of Spies-2015

Director Steven Spielberg

Starring Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance

Scott’s Review #399

Reviewed April 28, 2016

Grade: B+

Tom Hanks teams with Stephen Spielberg once again in another A-list Hollywood film.

Like Saving Private Ryan (1998), Bridge of Spies (2015) is in the historical vein. This time, the Cold War is featured; the film begins in 1957.

The camera work, the artwork, and the set decorations are second to none as the film looks and feels authentic.

As interesting as the overall result is—it felt like I was watching a well-made film—there was also something missing, which did not make it truly riveting, and that is why it received a B+ rating.

With Spielberg and Hanks on board, one will get a quality film.

Hanks portrays James B. Donovan, a Brooklyn attorney specializing in insurance law, but a wiz at negotiation and experienced with the Nuremberg trials.

He is assigned to defend suspected spy Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance) in what is assumed to be an open-and-shut case, his guilt is considered a given.

Abel has been arrested by the FBI and is thought to be a Russian spy. They are willing to release him on the condition that he reveal Soviet contacts, but he refuses.

Meanwhile, an American pilot, Frances Powers, is captured in Soviet territory and taken hostage. To make matters more complicated, an American graduate student, Pryor, is trapped behind the Berlin Wall in East Germany and not allowed by the Germans to leave.

The pressure is on Donovan to defend Abel in the United States but to make a deal to return the three men to their respective countries.

Hanks, a great actor, is his typical stoic, capable self, and his portrayal reminds me of his role in Captain Phillips (2013), calm, well-mannered- a clear yet quiet leader.

The role is not flashy compared to other legendary Hanks roles (Forrest Gump-1994, Philadelphia-1993). The film centers around Hanks and caters to his acting style. His character is always at the forefront.

Hanks never gives a bad performance and I admire him in almost anything.

Let’s discuss the role and the portrayal by Mark Rylance in his Oscar-winning role.

Giving a very subdued, nuanced performance, he is good and low-key in what could have been an energetic, over-the-top performance if written that way, but I am not sure I would have handed him the golden statuette over a few of the other nominees in the 2015 Supporting Actor category.

This isn’t a criticism, but I am unsure if he warrants an Academy Award.

Bridge of Spies is very detail-oriented and every set piece- from late 1950s cars, clothing, hairstyles, and home furnishings is spot on.

The film was expensive to produce and no expense seems to have been spared.

The film travels from Brooklyn to the Soviet Union, to Germany, and gives off a patriotic, Americana flare, which is true to life in the given time. There was such a sense of country and community.

Nothing makes this more apparent than the distasteful glares coldness and hatred displayed by many characters towards Donovan.

To counteract this, when Donovan is ultimately more the hero, he is revered and celebrated.

As great as the film looks, there is something slightly disconnecting about it. I was left wanting more from a story perspective and feeling slightly disengaged throughout parts of it. I was never riveted or blown away despite realizing I was watching a well-made film.

This can happen if the story is less compelling than the way the film looks as with Bridge of Spies.

After I finished watching I felt that I did not need to see the film again, in contrast to truly great films where one can watch over again.

A slight mention is that Bridge of Spies is a “guy’s film”. Amy Ryan, a great actress, does all she can with the only real female role in the film in that of Donovan’s dutiful, supportive wife, a role written one-dimensionally hundreds of times.

It is a shame her character is not fleshed out. The typical worried scenes or fretting for her husband to return home to his family are purely reactionary and do not further the plot.

In this sense, the film deserves criticism for being too traditional.

Bridge of Spies is a good effort but not a tremendous film. It is the type of film I liked but did not love.

Perhaps, the names Spielberg and Hanks on the marquee had me expecting more.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Mark Rylance (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design

2015 Films, Assa Sylla, Céline Sciamma, Drama, French, International, International Drama, Karidja Touré

Girlhood-2015

April 24, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Girlhood-2015

Director Céline Sciamma

Starring Karidja Touré, Assa Sylla

Scott’s Review #398

Reviewed April 24, 2016

Grade: B

Girlhood (2015) is a coming-of-age foreign language, French drama that tells the story of a sixteen-year-old French girl, living in a poor area (the projects) just outside Paris.

She faces numerous conflicts and tough decisions on how to live her life. School, gangs, and romance are the main issues she tackles, as well as troubled home life.

Wisely, the film uses a female director, Céline Sciamma, which lends some authenticity to the largely female issues discussed. For all its good intentions and some interesting nuances, the film suffers from a lack of grit and has a safe feel making it less compelling than it could have been.

I felt I was watching a glossy film rather than any harsh reality.

Still, worth the effort.

Marieme is a tall, gorgeous teenager living near Paris. She struggles academically and is rejected from attending high school, instead of being sent on a vocational track to be able to find a job.

Her mother works long hours as an office cleaner, and Marieme’s abusive brother is in charge of the household. Marieme also has two younger sisters.

Upset to learn she will not be attending high school, she is approached by a gang of girls, led by Lady, who asks her to go to the city with them.

She agrees to join their gang when she realizes that her brother’s best friend, Ismael, whom she has a crush on, is friendly with the other girls. Marieme and the girls begin to while away the days by stealing, fighting, and terrorizing anyone in their path.

Partying in hotels, they make the rounds. Marieme must ultimately decide if this is the life she wants.

What I found most interesting about the film is its use of an all-black cast. Sciamma (who ironically is white) felt that the female black population in Paris is underrepresented.

This is accurate and scores point with me. I love the camaraderie among the girls. They always have each other’s backs and when Marieme fights a rival girl to defend the recently beaten Lady, there is a sense of sisterhood that is appealing and is at the heart of the film.

Friendship, loyalty, and bonding are explored.

Also worth noting is that most of the cast are either unknown actors or non-actors picked off the streets to appear in the film. To this effect, the acting is surprisingly good for most novice or non-actors.

The romance between Marieme and Ismael is another strong point. They share an undeniable attraction but are forced to spend time in secret. Marieme’s brother appears to run a gang of all boys and forbids anyone from being with his sister.

The scenes shared between Marieme and Ismael are tender, sweet, and believable. They have a rooting factor.

The positives are also the negatives to Girlhood. The film lacks real grit or dirt and the friendship and romantic elements are also played safely.

Everything is glossy and bright.

For example, two fight scenes occur, one with Lady and a rival girl, and one with Marieme and the rival girl. A group of spectators gathers in a circle egging the girls on. They are in a hot, deserted parking lot.

The scenes could have been brutal, bloody, and fierce. Instead, they are short, lack blood or bruising, and feel safe. When Marieme pulls out a knife, it is intended to cut the rival girl’s bra, not to stab her. This seems unrealistic and not how things would play out in an urban gang situation.

And on a nitpicky level, why was the mother absent from the family life? Sure she had a night job, but the film presented her as being all but out of the picture. She tried to help Marieme get a job working with her, so why so much turmoil due to her busy schedule?

Also, the silly scene of the girls playing miniature golf added nothing to the plot and should have been dropped.

Girlhood (2015) is a nice, albeit sweet, coming-of-age, female gang story, that might have been more intense, but the decision was to make a soft film rather than a harsh one.

An effort that mainly focuses on bonding, friendship, and life choices over the realistic brutality it could have dealt with.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

1969 Films, Claude Chabrol, French, International, International Thriller, Stéphane Audran, Thriller

La Femme Infidele-1969

April 23, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

La Femme Infidele-1969

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Stephane Audran, Michel Bouquet

Scott’s Review #397

Reviewed April 23, 2016

Grade: A-

Another gem by French director Claude Chabrol, La Femme Infidel (The Unfaithful Wife) is a 1969 film later remade in the United States in 2002, directed then by Adrian Lynde.

Having seen the remake a few times before watching the original, I cannot help but compare the two films, which in itself is fun for me since both films are vastly different from one another, especially as I find myself further pondering each.

One is more conventional- the other more psychological.

Successful insurance executive Charles Desvallees lives in the suburbs of Paris with his beautiful wife Helene and their young son.

Life is seemingly idyllic, as they enjoy every luxury imaginable beautiful house with a beautiful landscape and a dutiful maid.

Charles has a sexy secretary, smokes, drinks, and enjoys life at work and Helene frequently goes to Paris for shopping sprees, beauty treatments, and to attend the cinema.

What could be missing from their lives? Helene is a bored housewife and has embarked on an affair with Victor Pegalla, a writer who lives in Paris.

When Charles grows suspicious of Helene, he hires a private investigator to track her activities and reveal the true story of how she spends her time.

Admittedly, I was highly influenced by Unfaithful, the 2002 remake starring Diane Lane and Richard Gere when I viewed La Femme Infidel.

The remake is set in New York instead of Paris and is more polished and less psychological- a Fatal Attraction-type slick thriller if you will.

The “other man” is much sexier and more passionate, and the connection is more primal than in the original. This changes the tone of the film from a sexual and lustful one to a more complex and psychological dynamic- La Femme Infidel is a more thinking man’s film.

Victor is handsome and well-groomed, but he is rather similar to Helene’s husband, so we wonder what the main appeal is- if she is seeking adventure.

Lane’s 2002 character’s choice is easy- her affair is based on the physical attractiveness of the man. 1969’s Helene is not having her affair for that reason-, the reasons, besides boredom, are unclear, making the film more complex.

When the main action (death) occurs at the midway point, the film goes in a different direction and becomes complicated. No longer is the main plot of Helene’s adultery, but rather what Charles has done and the repercussions bound to follow.

Do we see Charles as the villain and Helene as the victim? Who do we feel sorry for? Do we root for anyone? Certainly, the character of Victor is not explored in much depth. What are his motivations? Is he in love with Helene?

Helene is an interesting character. Is she meant to be sympathetic or hated? Or just complex? One can interpret her in different ways- the woman has it all beauty, a faithful husband, and a wonderful home life- why does she risk sacrificing it all for a fling?

Does she dare to want more out of her life and have some adulterous fun? It does not seem that Helene is in love with Victor or has any desire to run away with him or leave her husband.

Charles is also a character to be analyzed closely.

Throughout the film’s first portion, he is seen as a victim- his gorgeous wife has mysterious contempt for him and plays him for a fool. She spends his money and cheats on him, while he adores her and resists his young, flirtatious secretary, who has a thing for Charles and wears short skirts seemingly for his benefit.

She is much younger than Helene. Later, his character’s actions and motivations shift from victim to arguably brutish and primal. A momentary outburst changes his motivations and the texture becomes calculating.

In the end, Charles and Helene come together and resume normalcy in their lives, but will things ever be the same? Will the trust ever reappear in their lives? Is Helene now afraid of or intimidated by her husband or rather, does she now have a newfound desire for her alpha, take-charge husband?

The 1969 version of La Femme Infidel is layered, complex, interesting, and left me thinking about the film and that is a very good sign.

The remake, while very good, is more of a blockbuster, produced kind of film, while the original goes more for thought.

The lack of sex appeal in Victor is a negative of the film as are his motivations, but the character-driven nuances of the other characters make this a thought-provoking watch.

2015 Films, Documentary, Indonesian, Joshua Oppenheimer

The Look of Silence-2015

April 18, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Look of Silence-2015

Director Joshua Oppenheimer

Scott’s Review #396

Reviewed April 18, 2016

Grade: B+

An extremely grim and depressing 2015 documentary, The Look of Silence is a companion piece to 2013’s The Act of Killing.

Both focus on the brutal Indonesian genocide of 1965-1966, in which an estimated one million people were exterminated.

The documentary tells of the effects on one of the families who survived, who now must co-exist in the same village as the killers, who remain unpunished because of government corruption.

They are still in power.

The documentary is cleverly put together as the central figure watches what appears to be outtakes of the related The Act of Killing on television, and the story is manipulated so that some of the killers do not realize they are being filmed for the purposes they are.

The main point of view of the film comes from a middle-aged Indonesian man, peacefully living with his wife and daughter, as well as tending to his very elderly parents, the father is a torture victim and quite frail, who appears to suffer from dementia.

The father is rail-thin and the mother cares for him. Their life is tough. For protection, throughout the documentary, the middle-aged man is unidentified.

Through conversation with his mother, we learn that his brother (their son) was one of the “communists” or leftists, who were led to the nearby Snake River, tortured, and eventually murdered and thrown into the river.

The mother reveals that by some miracle, the middle-aged man was conceived shortly after his brother was killed, thereby saving the parents from suicide because of their grief.

The middle-aged man, under the guise of fitting patients with eyeglasses, goes from murderer to murderer (all still alive, very old, and living in the town) and politely quizzes them on their involvement in the Indonesian Massacre.

It is unknown whether the middle-aged man is, in fact, a Doctor, or if it is merely a ruse. Interspersed throughout, the interview clips of the murderers on television proudly describing their feats, are shown.

The Look of Silence is a true downer but shockingly realistic, sad, painful, and eye-opening.

Unlike many documentaries, we are not shown repeated clips of the events of the 1960’s- the story stays in the here and now.

The audience uses their imagination to create what they think happened. Powerful stuff. In the videos of the killers, they describe in brutal detail how they killed their victims and it is quite sickening to watch.

Two men proudly reminisce of the chopping off of a woman’s breast, comparing the ruined flesh to an open coconut, or slicing off a man’s penis. Others tell of drinking the blood of the victims.

Painful to realize is that this is not some horror film, but a real-life event.

Quite dumbfounding to me was that little or no remorse was shown when the middle-aged man questioned the killers in the present time. Some shrugged their involvement off, some got hostile, and some denied their involvement.

Some, now quite feeble, were accompanied by younger family members unaware of their father’s or grandfather’s past doings.

Some appeared quite upset.

The documentary is not filled with spliced-together archives or flashy lights or graphics. It is slow-paced and plodding. Some may find it too slow.

The title, The Look of Silence is rather perplexing and makes little sense to the subject of the documentary so I am not sure why it has the title that it does. But that is merely an aside.

As much as citizens of the United States complain and stress about the political state of affairs or financial matters, we have it quite good, and viewing this painful documentary is a reminder of that.

The Look of Silence (2015) displays the evil of human beings in the recent past. They show no remorse. In a world filled with ISIS, the documentary is a scary reminder that something like this can easily happen again.

This is a sad and morbid reality and this film will stick with you for some time.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Documentary Feature (won)

2015 Films, Documentary, Matthew Heineman

Cartel Land-2015

April 17, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Cartel Land-2015

Director Matthew Heineman

Scott’s Review #395

Reviewed April 17, 2016

Grade: B

Cartel Land is a 2015 documentary film about the Mexican drug war, specifically focusing on vigilante groups in both Mexico and the United States.

These groups attempt to combat and thwart drug cartels by using their illegal efforts. Brutal and ugly, the documentary paints a dark picture of the drug trafficking problem and the hopelessness of the situation.

Interestingly, the hot-button issue of illegal immigration is not explored.

The great thing about documentaries, in general, is their truthfulness and ability to open one’s eyes to a situation in which one may not be aware or have limited knowledge.

Most people know there is a drug problem in the United States, but Cartel Land successfully educates the viewer on the complexity of the issue.

Various perspectives are explored throughout the documentary: the Arizona Border Recon, led by militant figure, Tim “Nailer” Foley, and the Autodefansas, led by Dr. Jose Mireles, are the vigilante groups in the U.S. and Mexico, respectively.

A third perspective, in that of one of the cartel members, the particular gentleman featured, cooks and transports the crystal meth across the Mexican border.

Additionally, some individuals feel that the police and government are responsible for solving the issues and should be left in their hands.

The documentary does not endorse one particular opinion but paints a controversial picture of the situation’s reality and presents both sides objectively. However, the majority of the screen time is dedicated to the Autodefansas story.

One of the most thought-provoking parts of the documentary, and what initially engaged me in it, is at the very beginning of the story.

Told from the perspective of one of the cartel members who is interviewed with the backdrop of a nighttime scene, where he cooks the meth he will then deliver, is poignant.

Since he transports drugs, he is perceived as a monster.

He admits he causes people’s deaths, destruction, violence, etc. He then explains that the cartel members come from poverty- what else are they going to do to make this much money? Or make a living at all? It is an opportunity- who would give that up?

This made me think of how complex a problem drug smuggling is and it also laid the groundwork for the viewer to realize that the cartel members may not be the only ones who are bad or crooked.

What is the definition of right and wrong? On whose terms?

The primary members featured are Dr. Mireles and another member of Autodefansas, Papa Smurf. They started Autodefansas to combat the corrupt Mexican police and government that allows the drug cartel to exist, presumably for profit.

Their group of vigilantes brandishes militant guns to “protect their town” and the inhabitants. An assassination attempt occurs when someone tries to crash Mireles’s plane- he goes into hiding.

But we also learn that Mireles is a womanizer, a cheat, and cannot be trusted. Is he making deals for profit on his own? Papa Smurf is in cahoots with the police. Is cash being exchanged?

The Arizona vigilante story is interesting to hear from Foley’s perspective. I observed the group to be uneducated, poor, angry, and filled with racist hatred. This is scary to think that some Americans feel the way they do and it made me sympathize with them the least and the drug cartel a bit more.

One vigilante compared different races to being like two pit bulls in a cage- separated things are fine, but released from those cages the animals will kill each other. He had no concept of two races being able to live happily amongst each other.

Parts of Cartel Land are quite gruesome and descriptive.

In one scene we see a teary mother from the town of Michoacán, who the Autodefansas protect, describe how an entire family of innocent farmworkers, including a newborn, were murdered by being hurled against rocks until they died.

They were the victims of a revenge scheme enacted against their boss. One pities her and we see the funeral for the newborn take place amid screams of despair from surviving family members. We also see decapitated heads and murdered individuals.

It is chilling to think that this goes on in today’s world.

The cinematography is splendid and countless scenes of the Mexican and Arizona landscape are prominently featured. Miles and miles of spacious, mountainous areas are shown, and the use of night vision cameras allows a feeling of being right there with the patrol groups.

The main takeaway from Cartel Land is the subject of corruption.

Throughout each story the lines are blurry. Who is corrupt? Who should we sympathize with? Who are the good guys? Who are the bad guys? The facts are shaded in gray and we know there are no good groups or bad groups.

This documentary teaches the audience that there is a major problem with the drug cartel across Mexico and the United States that has existed for years and will continue to exist for years to come.

A lesson learned.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

1990 Films, Albert Finney, Coen Brothers, Crime Drama, Frances McDormand, Gabriel Byrne, Gregory Jacobs, John Turturro, Marcia Gay Harden, Mob, Sam Raimi, Steve Buscemi

Miller’s Crossing-1990

April 13, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Miller’s Crossing-1990

Director Joel Coen

Starring Ethan Coen, Gabriel Byrne

Scott’s Review #394

Reviewed April 13, 2016

Grade: B+

Containing a mixture of The Godfather Part III, Goodfellas, and The Grifters- ironically all released in 1990- Miller’s Crossing is an old-fashioned gangster film made fresh thanks to the direction of Joel Coen.

He brings a quirky edge to the film, throwing in a blend of film noir, black humor, and edgy characters, that make the film storyline feel fresh and alive in the present.

It has a definite late 1980’s era cinematic look (not a compliment).

I could immediately tell which decade it was made. Miller’s Crossing begins slowly, but during the second act gains steam and is the best part of the film.

The film is set somewhere in New York during the 1920s Prohibition period- it is assumed New York City, but this is never stated.

The general story involves Tom Reagan, a handsome Irish gangster, and right-hand man of Leo O’Bannon (Albert Finney), who becomes involved in conflict with Leo, his lover Verna (Marcia Gay Harden), and her brother Bernie (John Turturro), who is wanted dead by rival Italian mobster, Johnny Caspar.

Johnny’s right-hand man “Dane” comes into play, as does another gangster, Mink, played by Steve Buscemi. Tom changes allegiances and plays one mob boss against the other as a web of deceit, tested loyalty, and murder ensues.

As the first half concluded I was not completely sold on the film.

How many times have I seen a gangster film with all the stereotypical elements, the tough-guy shtick, and the contrivances?

I was afraid I was watching a retread of similar films.

I wondered what the point of the film was- the relationship between Tom and Leo’s struggle for power and control. A triangle between Tom, Verna, and Leo?

I noticed little chemistry among any of them and could not help but wonder if a female presence was required in the film, but not all that necessary. Regardless, I was quickly bored with the character of Verna.

But then the elements of the film started to come together and some rather left-of-center nuances presented themselves leaving me more engrossed.

A homosexual triangle (seldom seen in traditional, crime/mob films) took shape between Mink, Dane, and Bernie. All vicious killers had no stereotypes often seen in the film, which is refreshing.

Dane was arguably the most brutal of all the characters, and the bloodletting was plenty. I found this reveal completely refreshing not to mention unexpected.

However, the intricacies of the triangle were left unexplored. They simply bedded each other.

A pivotal scene set in the woods (Miller’s Crossing) is as gorgeous as it is character-driven. Tom must choose between killing Bernie and proving his loyalty to the mobsters awaiting, or secretly letting him live, fake his death, all in the name of his love for Verna.

But will his decision come back to haunt him? Is Tom, at his core, a good man or a bad man?

The calm of the forest mixed with the brutality of the film is perfect. I was reminded of the 1970 Italian masterpiece The Conformist as I viewed this beautiful scene. Tom’s conflict between good and evil and his earlier premonition of a tumbling hat comes into play.

His character conflict reminded me of Michael Corleone in The Godfather films.

Look quickly and you will see Frances McDormand, soon to be a fixture in Coen films, as a slinky, well-dressed secretary. We are reminded of great things to come by this then-unknown talent.

A nice thing that I always look forward to in Coen films are the quirky, weird, fun, minor characters, and Miller’s Crossing is no different- Johnny Caspar’s overweight wife and son- an Augustus Gloop from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory lookalike- give comedy to the potentially too dark film.

From Bryan to Tic-Tac, to the fat lady with the purse, all give amusing and meaningful turns that give the film a richness with an unusual cast of characters.

Miller’s Crossing (1990) proves to be a nice little film once it picks up steam and the intertwining of stories, characters, and a bit of classic film noir mixed in, makes it a refreshing take on an age-old genre of film.

1970 Films, Horror, International Horror, Italian, Italian Horror, Mario Bava

Five Dolls For An August Moon-1970

April 9, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Five Dolls For An August Moon-1970

Director Mario Bava

Starring William Berger, Howard Ross

Scott’s Review #393

Reviewed April 9, 2016

Grade: B-

Five Dolls For An August Moon is a 1970 Italian horror film by horror maestro Mario Bava, a well-regarded director of the genre.

Being relatively a novice to his films, but knowing his name, I expected a bit more from the film than I was treated to.

From a critic’s consensus, Five Dolls For An August Moon is not considered to be one of his better films- not even close. I found some positive elements to the film, but ultimately it did not come together concisely or compellingly.

The dubbing from Italian to the English language is poor and I would have preferred more authenticity to watch in the native Italian language.

Containing a fascinating and mysterious premise, a group of gorgeous people gathers on a sunny, remote desert island- somewhere off the coast of the Mediterranean Sea.

Owned by wealthy industrialist George Stark, the weekend is intended to be one of socializing, fun, and relaxation.

It appears to be summer(hence the title) and the vacationers exude sexuality and a sense of good style. The beach house is lavish and sophisticated and it is suggested that all are brilliant, or at least, riding on the coattails of those who are.

One of the guests is famed chemist, Professor Gerry Farrell, who has recently created a revolutionary formula, and it is quickly revealed that all of the guests are industrialists with plans to buy the formula from him at any price.

Incensed, Farrell refuses to budge and, suddenly, one by one, the guests are killed off in typical gruesome horror fashion.

I am a sucker for a good whodunit, and Five Dolls For An August Moon appears to be in Agatha Christie’s- And Then There Were None style of intrigue, but this aspect of the film proves to be the most trivial and uninteresting as the plot moves along.

The character’s motives were unclear (yes, I get they all wanted the secret formula), but the real necessity of having it besides, presumably money, which they all appeared to already have plenty of, was dull.

The ending of the film and the “big reveal”, while clever, was also overly complicated for this type of film.

The film was for its time (1970), very provocative in look and style, and that impresses. Featuring a groovy, psychedelic soundtrack, bright, trendy clothing, and a sunset, the film challenges the tried and true horror elements, especially foreign horror (darkness, rain, fog, gloom) and this makes the film work from a cinematic perspective.

One cannot help but watch this film and think of director Russ Myer as a heavy influence. The casting of good-looking Italian actors, both male and female- the females busty and gorgeous- the men stylish and cool, reminiscent of Myer male actors, is noteworthy.

Interestingly, another glaring example of how other countries’ progressive sexual viewpoints contrast with the more conservative United States is that many of the couples on the island are involved sexually with other people on the island, including a lesbian romance, highly unusual to show in 1970.

These shenanigans give Five Dolls For An August Moon a more creative, suave, and sexual intrigue.

A highly effective, and creepy, aspect of the film is the keeping of the corpses in a freezer with plastic bags over the victim’s heads- meat locker style. Eyes bulging, with the clear bags giving a ghastly view, I immediately thought of the still-to-come masterpiece, Black Christmas, and how this film might have been influenced by a similar scene of a victim wrapped in plastic with a gruesome facial expression.

This is good horror stuff.

Five Dolls For An August Moon (1970) is not a great film, but it does have some edgy elements, a cool look, and thanks to great direction from Mario Bava, does some influencing films to come.

A decent horror flick and a worthwhile investment for fans of Italian horror- Bava is a heavy hitter and, next to Dario Argento, is the master in Italian horror films.

2003 Films, Bruce Dern, Clint Eastwood, Dennis Hopper, Documentary, Ellen Burstyn, Francis Ford Coppola, Jon Voight, Julie Christie, Martin Scorsese, Milos Forman, Pam Grier, Paul Schrader, Peter Bogdanovich, Robert Altman, Roy Scheider, Sissy Spacek, Sydney Pollack, William Friedkin

A Decade Under The Influence-2003

April 5, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

A Decade Under the Influence-2003

Director Ted Demme, Richard LaGravenese

Starring Francis Ford Coppola, William Friedkin

Scott’s Review #392

Reviewed April 5, 2016

Grade: B+

Produced by the cable network Independent Film Channel (IFC), A Decade Under The Influence explores the decade of 1970s film, a decade that was arguably the most creative and liberating to filmmakers and audiences alike.

A period in film defined by the directors securing creative freedom instead of the studios, where artists instead of corporations finally ruled the roost. A Decade Under The Influence gives us an overview of the era.

Despite some conspicuous omissions, I enjoyed this informative piece a great deal.

The documentary is divided into numerous segments including sections on women in film, the transition into a different period in Hollywood, and the subsequent close of the decade.

The interviews are plentiful including a who’s who of stars: Martin Scorsese, Ellen Burstyn, Clint Eastwood, Robert Altman, Julie Christie, Francis Ford Coppola, and numerous other influential directors, actors, and filmmakers.

Each individual describes his or her perspective on 1970s cinema, and personal anecdotes of experiences or challenges are shared.

Ellen Burstyn, for example, describes how the success of The Exorcist afforded her a plethora of other film offers, but all of the roles were of prostitutes, dutiful wives, or women in peril.

She needed roles more stimulating than those so she chose to star in Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore, which was a much better-written role. What I found a bit sad is how there are still limited, layered roles for women in Hollywood to this day unless one goes the independent film route, which this documentary touts as a savior.

Francis Ford Coppola relays how The Godfather was never expected to be a success, but rather, how he was chosen to direct the film merely because he worked for cheap and was Italian-American.

How ironic that the film became such a monumental success and influential to film making as a whole for generations to come.

The documentary, at times, seems like an overview of the decade, with many clips of classic 1970s cinema interspersed with the talking points.

Despite being three hours in length, I still felt that there was so much more than the documentary could have explored. Not surprisingly, the stars granting interviews were granted heavy screen time for their films.

The documentary was fine, but could have delved much deeper- I could see a multiple-disc set totally of ten or more hours dedicated to the decade.

One conspicuous omission was Robert Altman’s Nashville, arguably, the best film of the decade. While it was briefly mentioned, and a still frame of a scene from it did appear, I felt that it warranted more dissection and discussion.

This was more surprising given that Altman was interviewed for the documentary.

Another miss was Halloween or any mention of John Carpenter films. Halloween influenced many horror films to come and The Exorcist received heaps of coverage, undoubtedly because star Burstyn and director William Friedkin appear at length throughout the production.

Additionally, in the horror genre, Black Christmas (a highly influential horror film) was not mentioned at all.

A celebration of my favorite decade of cinema, A Decade Under the Influence is a documentary that is a basic must-see for fans of 1970s cinema, or film students perhaps immersing themselves into the world of great film for the first time.

1955 Films, Cloris Leachman, Drama, Film noir, Gaby Rodgers, Maxine Cooper, Ralph Meeker, Robert Aldrich

Kiss Me Deadly-1955

April 2, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Kiss Me Deadly-1955

Director Robert Aldrich

Starring Ralph Meeker

Scott’s Review #391

Reviewed April 2, 2016

Grade: A-

Kiss Me Deadly is a 1955 noir drama that influenced many subsequent films. After years of keeping it on my “to see” list, I finally got around to viewing this influential gem and now realize its power.

At times, it is confusing and perplexing and requires additional watching. I rate it an A——; however, I can see its grade rising to a solid A upon subsequent viewings.

Still, Kiss Me Deadly has much respect from me as a lover and appreciator of a good film.

The mysterious plot goes like this: Mike Hammer (played by Ralph Meeker) is a stern Los Angeles private eye. One evening, driving along a lonely country road, he picks up a hitchhiker, Christina (Cloris Leachman’s film debut), who is clad only in a trench coat.

He quickly realizes she has escaped from a mental institution but is compelled by her desperation. When thugs catch up to them, this sets off events as Mike spends his days investigating the strange turn of events.

The plot twists and turns in innumerable ways and becomes complex but fascinating. A peculiar glowing box, which everybody seems to want, comes into play.

Wonderfully directed by Robert Aldrich, Kiss Me Deadly features unique and creative uses of lighting, camera angles, and moody shadows to significant effect, and this is one of the first aspects I noticed.

Shot in highly effective black and white, allowing Kiss Me Deadly a murky, suspicious look- as if danger and doom might be around every corner.

Meeker and Maxine Cooper as Velda, Mike’s secretary/lover, make a nice pair, as they are good-looking, but a rather B-movie type couple, in contrast, to say, Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint, two gorgeous upper echelon Hollywood stars of the day.

Casting those stars might have changed the tone of the film. Meeker and Cooper bring, perhaps, a blue-collar look to the film. Nevertheless, the chemistry works.

An interpretive film, Kiss Me Deadly undoubtedly influenced later film noir classics such as Chinatown (1974), L.A. Confidential (1997), and Pulp Fiction (1994), as well as science-fiction films and, arguably, Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981).

The list could go on as Kiss Me Deadly crosses into numerous genres.

The ending is highly complex, spooky, and downright weird. It is one of the craziest endings I have ever experienced.

Once the mysterious box is opened, the film becomes a strange Twilight Zone episode with screeching sounds. The explosion is open to complete interpretation and changes the dynamic. I had the enormous fortune to view the alternate ending not released in theaters.

Mike and Velda’s fates were vastly different from one end to another. My preference was the alternate ending. Sometimes, the studios play things too safe.

What does it all mean? Nuclear weapons, the apocalypse, the Cold War, glowing boxes, and detective work are many elements in one film.

A conversation about Kiss Me Deadly (1955) could be enjoyed, as it speaks volumes about the film’s high quality.

I look forward to seeing this revolutionary film again for further appreciation.

2016 Films, Independent, Independent Romantic Comedy, Romantic Comedy

Hello, My Name Is Doris-2016

April 1, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Hello, My Name Is Doris-2016

Director-Michael Showalter

Starring-Sally Field, Max Greenfield

Scott’s Review #390

Reviewed April 1, 2016

Grade: B

Sally Field shines in Hello, My Name Is Doris, a sweet-natured indie romantic comedy that tells of a lonely Staten Island woman, and her mostly fantasy-laden relationship with her colleague, a much younger, hunky man.

The film has a certain measure of predictability, but is sweet, honest, and works well. It hardly reinvents the wheel, but rather is a story of a woman’s reawakening from a dull life and is a nice character-oriented film- refreshing in a world of retreads and super-hero flicks. Hello, My Name Is Doris is humanistic.

Doris Miller meanders through life at her crappy data entry job at an Advertising Agency in mid-town Manhattan. Having worked in the same role for decades, she is overlooked and more or less invisible to colleagues.

She is the “weird old lady” or the “wallflower” who goes unnoticed. Her personal life is a dud- she lives with her mother who has recently died, is a hoarder, and is severely marginalized. She has no dating possibilities.

One day, on the elevator, heading to the office, a kind young man named John Fremont innocently pays attention to her and she becomes enamored with him. Later, she is stunned to realize that John is the new Art Director at her job.

Her crush escalates as she and John become friends, and a series of misunderstandings ensue, with the added conflict of her friends think she is living in a fantasy world, worried she will wind up hurt.

Sally Field carries this film in every way. It is nice to see her in a lead role again, which sadly, for a seventy-year-old actress, is a rarity these days.

She convincingly plays quirky, shy, awkward, and has one melt-down scene that is a powerful testament to her continued acting ability.

The character of Doris slowly blossoms and becomes rich with zest. We discover she is much more than meets the eye and these moments in the film are wonderful to experience and this is thanks to Field’s charisma.

My favorite scenes involve the nice bond between Doris and the thirteen-year-old granddaughter of her best pal, Roz, played by Tyne Daly.

Despite the age difference, the granddaughter views her as a peer, giving daring dating advice to the inept Doris. This leads to a nice portion of the plot and some funny moments.

One unique aspect of Hello, My Name Is Doris, is that it is not a film about a May-December romance between a man and a woman, at least I did not look at the film that way. Rather, it is about a woman who finally decides to live regardless of her age.

I felt her stifled and smothered by her brother and sister-in-law, who clearly did not understand that she hoarded “stuff” in her home to cope with her loneliness and to be surrounded by things that gave her comfort helped her deal.

Granted, Doris clinging to one broken wooden ski from the dark ages was amusing in its cuteness.

Worth a huge note is Tyne Daly, who, from an acting standpoint, can recite the phone book and I’d be happy with that. She is one of those natural, confident, interesting, real, actresses and her scenes with Fields glistened with raw talent and emotion.

Perhaps a female buddy movie with Field and Daly?

The remainder of the supporting characters is capable, but not spectacular. They are rather clichéd and one-note.

For example, Doris’s colleagues view her as invisible with the classic office jokes and especially the female boss has thrown into the film- possessing a hard-as-nails personality and coldness. I have seen these characters time after time in comedy films.

Supporting actors from Orange is the New Black and Mad Men are featured as a couple of the colleagues.

Indie, fun, and with a freshness made in large part by Sally Field, Hello, My Name Is Doris is an innocent comedy with a romantic edge and some nice laughs.

It is far from a masterpiece, but a good-natured escape, especially for the middle-aged or senior crowd craving a non-stereotypical female character- and that is refreshing in itself.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Piaget Producers Award (won)

1961 Films, Arthur Miller, Clark Gable, Drama, Eli Wallach, John Huston, Kevin McCarthy, Marilyn Monroe, Montgomery Clift, Thelma Ritter

The Misfits-1961

March 27, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Misfits-1961

Director John Huston

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Clark Gable, Montgomery Clift

Scott’s Review #389

Reviewed March 27, 2016

Grade: B+

A dark film about loneliness, insecurity, and the need for friendship, The Misfits (1961) stars several of the era’s great legends in a film that I found both sad and disturbing.

Tragically, two stars would soon be gone from this world shortly after the film was made- Clark Gable and Marilyn Monroe. This was the final film for each.

The film, shot in black and white, has a bleak feel and represents the onset of darker decades in the film (the 1960s and 1970s). Primarily starring in light, feel-good films, The Misfits is a complete departure for Monroe.

The film is well-written and character-driven, which appeals to me, but cruelty to animals is a lot to take.

Set in Reno, Nevada, Roslyn has arrived from out of town for a quickie divorce. She is staying with Isabelle (Thelma Ritter), who frequently assists women needing divorces, lending as their witness in court.

After the divorce is final, they go to a local watering hole to celebrate life, where they meet an aging cowboy, Gay (Gable), and his tow-truck friend, Guido. They all agree to go to Guido’s house in the desert to party. When they arrive, they learn that Guido’s wife has recently died.

From this point, Gay and Roslyn become a couple and grow vegetables at Guido’s house, attempting to begin an everyday life. Later, the group decides to round up Mustangs and hire a rodeo hand, Perce (Montgomery Clift), to help.

This leads to conflict as Gay intends to sell the horses as dog food. A subplot of a love triangle between Gay, Roslyn, and Perce emerges.

The Misfits is a rugged watch. From a story perspective, it is cynical and sometimes heartbreaking. Each of the principal characters is severely damaged and pained.

We learn that Gay has two estranged children. When he runs into them at a bar, he excitedly wants to introduce them to Roslyn, but they have left before he can.

In a drunken stupor (and a sad scene), he pathetically calls out for them to return, causing a stir. Perce’s father has died, and his mother left a changed woman- his stepfather selfishly takes their ranch for himself, despite Perce’s father wanting it to go to Perce.

Alcohol abuse is prevalent throughout the film- obviously, the characters drown their sorrows to escape or avoid the pain that they feel.

The opening credits are unique and feature puzzle pieces. This symbolizes the group’s isolation and desire to find each other and fit in. They are all misfits who come together for some sense of companionship.

This is a unique aspect of the film, and director John Huston deserves the credit for immediately setting the tone for clever viewers.

The acting in The Misfits is outstanding, and I would argue that Monroe and Gable’s performances are the best in their respective careers. They both chartered very dark territory in the lonely and damaged characters they portrayed.

Thelma Ritter adds sardonic humor but inexplicably vanishes from the film about halfway through- never to return or be mentioned again.

I would have liked to have seen much more of Isabelle and more depth to her character. Why was she a misfit? She mentions loving all cowboys, so we might assume she has had her share of damaged relationships with men. More clarity might have been interesting.

The final portion is difficult to match. Ann’s interminable scene involves Gay and Perce savagely rounding up the horses and roping them down overnight—the length of the scene and the the horses’s struggles to escape will tug at one’s heartstrings.

Knowing that animals, until quite recently, were not treated well on film sets leaves me twice as unsettled.

Dark stuff.

A film fraught with difficulties (Monroe and writer Arthur Miller’s marriage breakup, Monroe’s and Huston’s substance abuse issues), and a dark subject matter, make The Misfits an intriguing experience.

Having watched the film twice, I appreciate it more with each viewing and think it contains memorable qualities worth exploring.

As the years have passed, The Misfits (1961) has become more appreciated, like a fine wine- I am realizing why.

1959 Films, Billy Wilder, Comedy, Jack Lemmon, Joe E. Brown, Marilyn Monroe, Tony Curtis

Some Like It Hot-1959

March 26, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Some Like It Hot-1959

Director Billy Wilder

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis

Scott’s Review #388

Reviewed March 26, 2016

Grade: A

Considered one of the best comedies ever made, Some Like It Hot (1959) is a funny, outlandish, yet controlled film that never goes too over the top or dives into outrageous camp. Instead, it is well-written, well-acted, and contains excellent chemistry between the stars.

In summary, it is a film in which all the elements come together just right. In film comedy, this is an infrequent occurrence. Instead, we are typically treated to formulas or retreads of past successes.

Some Like It Hot feels refreshing and brilliant.

The film was also monumental in paving the way to the eventual elimination of the hated Hays Code, which imposed many restrictions on American cinema from 1930 to 1968.

Some Like It Hot pushed the envelope in essential ways, leading to a spike in creativity and art within the film industry that lasted mainly throughout the 1960s and 1970s.

For that, it is a masterpiece.

Down on their luck, broke, and needing work, Jerry and Joe (Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis) are struggling jazz musicians seeking a meager existence in snowy Chicago. Having witnessed the St. Valentine’s Day massacre, they go on the run from the assailants, who have seen them, and pose as Josephine and Daphne, dressed in drag.

This leads to one humorous situation after another as they take the bus from Chicago to Miami with an all-girl musical band, a slumber party of sorts led by boozy starlet Sugar Kane (played by Marilyn Monroe), who serves as the band’s vocalist and ukulele player.

Once arriving in sunny Miami, “the girls” find romantic entanglements with Sugar and rich millionaire Osgood Fielding III, which leads to blatant comic antics. Josephine poses as a male Shell Oil Junior, attempting to woo Sugar with his assumed riches in the oil business.

What makes Some Like It Hot work so well is that it does not go too far over the edge to seem campy, nor does it play it too straight. This perfect balance makes the film rich with natural, fresh comedy.

Director Billy Wilder chose to film in black and white, avoiding Lemmon and Curtis looking ridiculous with colorful, bright makeup. This was toned down and muted so that it allowed for more believability.

Additionally, the film’s subtle edginess impresses me with each passing watch. Some Like It Hot got away with a lot in 1959, considering the restrictions, and that knowledge gives it a groundbreaking quality.

There is an air of homosexuality throughout, and the final line is my favorite, allowing for a thought-provoking interpretation.

When Daphne reaches her breaking point with Osgood’s romance and yanks off his wig, she professes exasperation, “I am a man!! ” Only to hear Osgood’s startling reply, “Well, nobody’s perfect,” is clever dialogue.

Did Osgood know all along that Daphne was male? Will he marry ‘her’ anyway?

Who wouldn’t have blushed gazing at Monroe’s skin-colored and quite revealing outfit? It gave the impression that she was nude and showed how funny Lemmon and Curtis’s physical comic timing together is.

Bumbling around in stockings, heels, and dresses, attempting to be feminine but never really succeeding, making all the other characters think they were women is excellent.

Curtis was reportedly quite uncomfortable in drag, which shows on camera, but this works out well, giving Josephine a natural awkwardness.

Lemmon went all out in his costumes, and his energy came across.

In my opinion, not looking her best, slightly plump and tired looking, Marilyn Monroe still gives the film added life and charm, and who is not mesmerized viewing her on stage singing “I Wanna Be Loved By You”?

To think that Monroe died only three short years later is sad and an appreciation of her career in the final stages.

A risqué, laugh-out-loud, funny treat, Some Like It Hot resonates with me and did so with audiences upon release in 1959.

Comical, thoughtful, and highly influential, the film is a must-see for fans of film comedy done honestly and free of standard cliché.

It is a blueprint for all witty comedies to follow.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Director-Billy Wilder, Best Actor-Jack Lemmon, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won)

2014 Films, Comedy, Drama, Gaby Hoffmann, Gillian Robespierre, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama, Independent Romantic Comedy, Jake Lacy, Jenny Slate, Richard Kind, Romantic Comedy, Romantic Drama

Obvious Child-2014

March 22, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Obvious Child-2014

Director Gillian Robespierre

Starring Jenny Slate

Scott’s Review #387

Reviewed March 22, 2016

Grade: C+

Obvious Child is a 2014 independent comedy/drama nominated for a couple of independent spirit awards, that has mixed results.

It works on some levels but has an irritating underbelly and some unneeded components that ultimately give it a thumbs down.

The major success is star Jenny Slate, a real-life Brooklyn stand-up comic with immeasurable comic timing, who will hopefully become a rising star.

Slate starred in a 2009 short film of the same name before said film graduated to a full-length feature.

Slate stars as a twenty-eight-year-old Brooklyn-ite, who moonlights as a stand-up comic in a dingy bar while working in a desolate bookstore that is soon closing.

Conversely, her parents are successful- her mother is a famed professor. When she is unceremoniously dumped by her steady, she takes up with a handsome young man for a one-night stand filled with fun.

Predictably, she winds up pregnant and forges ahead with a plan to abort their child.

The abortion story is quite interesting since there is never a doubt about what will happen. Unlike films that make abortion the main focus of conflict, Obvious Child wisely does not- every character supports, and even encourages her to have the procedure, including her mother and best friend.

Having been written and directed by women, this is intentional and a way of empowering women, which is one of the high points. If one is on the fence about the topic of abortion or is a pro-life stance, this film may be very tough to watch as its slant is made crystal clear.

Slate is the other high point of the film.

She exudes confidence and comic range. Jewish and slightly awkward looking, she is not the leading-lady type and this arguably makes her wit and sarcastic language all the more comical. She is a natural in the comedy department and hope she will go far.

Two slight props for me worth mentioning are the wonderful mention of the classic film Gone with the Wind (1939) and the setting of Brooklyn. This was a great nod to film history and the setting gave Obvious Child an authentic New York City feel.

On the other hand, an utter annoyance about Obvious Child is the shameless and constant use of blatant and off-putting bathroom humor- not just once or twice, but numerous times.

How is this necessary to the plot? I can’t say, but surmise that it was deemed necessary by the filmmakers to show that females can give as good as males can.

Almost saying, “men can make poop jokes, why can’t women”? Why this is necessary for any film is beyond me and it gives Obvious Child a crass, ugly feel.

The film also has an unrealistic quality to it. Max is portrayed as prince charming. He can do no wrong, supports Donna in any decision she makes, is enamored by her sole being, and loves her unconditionally after only a one-night stand.

This would not happen in real life.

The fact that Donna is Jewish and quirky and Max is Christian and straight-laced is not explored. What conflicts would they undoubtedly face? Why were his parents not featured?

Highly uneven, with a great premise and an interesting slant on a still-controversial social issue, Obvious Child (2014) succeeds in the story department but fails in its uncalled-for use of potty humor to elicit cheap laughs.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Jenny Slate, Best First Feature

2015 Films, 50 Cent, Action, Allison Janney, Bobby Cannavale, Comedy, Jason Statham, Jude Law, Melissa McCarthy, Miranda Hart, Paul Feig, Rose Byrne

Spy-2015

March 20, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Spy-2015

Director Paul Feig

Starring Melissa McCarthy, Jason Statham

Scott’s Review #386

Reviewed March 20, 2016

Grade: C+

Spy is a 2015 comedy spy spoof starring funny lady Melissa McCarthy as a loser desk CIA analyst suddenly thrown into the field and assigned to rescue a missing agent with whom she is also in love.

Carrying the film in every way, McCarthy is funny and adds to an otherwise formulaic, by-numbers, comedy.

As, admittedly, the “action-comedy” genre is not my favorite, I have seen much worse than Spy, and the premise is quite nice, but the second half of the film sinks into the ridiculous and is very loud and overly long.

McCarthy plays Susan Cooper, a frumpy forty-year-old woman with a decent job as a CIA analyst (she tracks the field agents’ cameras and warns them of impending peril), an important job, but is deemed dispensable and a loser by the higher-ups at her job, with more important duties.

She is single, overweight, and lonely, pining after her sophisticated partner Bradley Fine (Jude Law), a field agent and stylish James Bond-type. After a mishap with Bradley thought dead, Susan goes undercover in France, Rome, and Budapest to solve the case since she will be unnoticed.

Spy is a film with a star that completely carries the film. Being a big fan of McCarthy’s and enjoying her performance in whatever she appears in (comedy or drama), this film needs her charisma and comic timing.

Spy contains a few laugh-out-loud moments, especially when McCarthy is forced to take on the persona of one loser after another- a divorcee with multiple cats and a wardrobe to cringe over-throw in a 1980s perm and got a great SNL-type moment.

The film itself reminds me of a long SNL skit. When McCarthy delivers her one-liners they connect and amuse.

An apparent homage to spy films and James Bond films, Spy seems closer to an Austin Powers film as it goes for more silliness, but not quite as over the top.

Still, the European locales offered added elements of Bond films pleasantly. McCarthy as an apparent female James Bond is also cute.

A noticeable negative is the unnecessary two-hour running time. With a genre of this nature, a ninety to one-hundred-minute running time is all that is necessary, and any more than that the jokes wane, become redundant, and usually go into the ridiculous.

Another problem with Spy is the supporting characters. A well-known cast including Rose Byrne, Allison Janney, Jason Statham, and Bobby Cannavale, each of these actors are cast in cartoon-like, one-note roles.

Cannavale and Byrne are the villains (Sergio and Rayna) in the plot and they play their roles in a one-dimensional way, as evil as possible, but perhaps also over-acting the parts.

This could be the fault of the director or simply what is accepted in the genre that this is. Janney- as the tough-as-nails CIA director and Statham as the dumb, temperamental, field agent also overplay their roles.

Why are all of these characters loud, unpleasant, insulting, or all of the above? The answer is it might allow better comedy to have caricatures instead of characters, but that is a debate for another time.

On the other hand, Miranda Hart as McCarthy’s sidekick Nancy, a very tall, awkward woman, and Susan’s best friend is great and shares equally in the comic success that McCarthy brings.

Their chemistry is evident and a recommended second pairing would be worth exploring. Unlike the other characters, I felt myself rooting for her and wished her a love interest, though the 50 Cent’s romantic introduction was strange.

The plot is more or less trivial and unimportant in a film like this. Rationally speaking, almost everything that transpires would never happen in real life, but alas, this is the movie, so one must suspend disbelief big time.

Spy is escapist fare to the max.

A hot mess if not for the wit and comic timing that McCarthy brings, Spy (2015) has an interesting premise but doesn’t deliver anything more than the silly formula that has existed for decades in the film comedy world.

I finished the film with mixed emotions.

1954 Films, Jean Negulesco, Marilyn Monroe, Otto Preminger, Robert Mitchum, Rory Calhoun, Western

River of No Return-1954

March 15, 2016 scottmet99 Leave a comment

River of No Return-1954

Director Otto Preminger

Starring Robert Mitchum, Marilyn Monroe

Scott’s Review #385

Reviewed March 15, 2016

Grade: B-

A departure in genre and character from the iconic Marilyn Monroe, most notable for playing “bubble gum” roles, in the 1954 film River of No Return, she plays a dance hall singer living in 1875 northwestern United States.

The film is in the Western genre and features gorgeous scenery, some authentic and some staged. The look of the film is a great selling point for me, as is Monroe’s performance and appeal.

However, the story has significant negatives, mainly that it is not very compelling or engaging, not to mention existing plot holes.

The crux of the story is as follows- A widower, Matt Calder (Robert Mitchum), arrives in a tent city in pursuit of his ten-year-old son, Mark, left in the care of Kay (Monroe), while the man who delivered the boy to the town has taken off for the hills.

What follows is a mishmash of the storyline involving Matt, Mark, and Kay being chased by Indians, a love triangle between Kay, Matt, and Kay’s fiancé Harry, and the father/son reconciliation between Matt and Mark.

The story is not the strong point of the film. Nevertheless, it is undoubtedly where the high drama exists. Despite being characterized as a Western, a stark contrast to most Marilyn Monroe films, it appears a soft Western with a romantic slant.

There are some kills, to be sure, with vicious wild animals, guns, and knives prevalent, giving it an outdoorsy, naturalistic feel.

The film lacks a streamlined direction and does not know where it’s headed. Is it intended to be an all-out Western, a romance, or some hybrid? Why does the story ultimately not work?

I sensed a snippet of chemistry between Mitchum and Monroe, though they were hardly Clark Gable and Vivian Leigh. One could argue that Matt does not treat Kay very well, and, surprisingly, Matt is portrayed as the hero in River of No Return.

Close to the middle of the film, while camping along the river, he attempts to rape Kay, where she struggles and ultimately submits. Then, almost as quickly, this fact is forgotten, and the story forages forward as a love story. Huh?

The film almost seems spliced together from a story perspective and is not compelling or memorable.

As an aside, and upon some research, River of No Return was riddled with problems and setbacks amid shooting, most notably drama due to Monroe’s needed on-set acting coach who conflicted with director Otto Preminger and star Robert Mitchum’s heavy drinking.

Then, there was Monroe’s broken ankle and numerous weather issues. Publicly, Monroe later stated that River of No Return was her least favorite film that she appeared in. Let’s say that the gods were not with this film.

River of No Return is undoubtedly an uneven film with a lackluster story and odd chemistry among the characters, which has a marginal appeal to me, mainly due to the talents of Monroe, who carries the weight of an otherwise lackluster and forgettable film.

Welcome to my blog! 1,450 + reviews posted! My name is Scott Segrell and I reside in Stamford, CT. My blog is a diverse site featuring tons of film reviews I have written since I launched my site in 2014. I hope you enjoy perusing the site for latest or greatest films or to search for your own favorites to see how we compare. Please take a look at my featured sections at the top of the page which change often! Utilize the tags and category links.