All posts by scottmet99

Beasts of No Nation-2015

Beasts of No Nation-2015

Director Cary Fukunaga

Starring Idris Elba, Ama Abebrese

Scott’s Review #380

Beasts_of_No_Nation_poster

Reviewed February 21, 2016

Grade: B+

Having been made aware of this film following the healthy number of independent film award nominations heaped upon it in 2015, Beasts of No Nation is a war drama, set in an unnamed West African country.

It tells of dire events from the perspective of a young boy, who has lost his family.

He is forced into a life of brutality and death, taken under the wing of a charismatic commander.

Beasts of No Nation is sometimes raw, sometimes gorgeous, but at all times thoughtful and a powerful telling of the devastation of human life, in a world very few can comprehend.

We first meet Agu (approximately aged eight or nine), wonderfully played by unknown child actor Abraham Attah, during happy times.

He plays with his childhood chums and adores his older brother who is attempting to woo a pretty girl. His father is a leader and the family lives in a small village protected by troops.

They allow refugees in for care.

Their country is in a civil war, but the family happily survives and makes a life for themselves, sharing meals. Suddenly, the government has fallen and rebels seize the area.

Soon, Agu’s family is gone, leaving him alone and scared.

His world turns upside down, he becomes involved with a militia commandant, played by Idris Elba, and a fellow child soldier named Strika, who takes him in.

The film belongs to two actors, Attah and Elba, though all actors perform their roles with precision. The relationship between the characters is interesting and complex, like a father/son mixed with mentor/protégé, and is the most compelling part of the film.

The commander is a father figure to Agu. He sees a warrior in him, taking him under his wing, feeding, and caring for him. He is never violent or abusive towards Agu and in one powerful scene, Agu is sodomized ( mostly off-screen yet very much implied) and Agu seeks comfort in his best friend Strika, who has also met the same actions prior.

One cannot help but think sexual assaults like this are perceived and handled differently in Africa.

Rape is a subject that comes up numerous times in the film, mostly against women.

I noticed throughout the film the beauty of the cinematography as most scenes are set outside. Lush, green forests and the villages are tranquil and beautiful, contrasting starkly with the violence.

Agu does some terrible things- in one brutal scene an innocent student is hacked to bits by Agu and Strika at the commander’s coaching as a sort of initiation.

Agu sees the student as responsible for his family’s fates and goes berserk.

Agu then tearfully mistakes a village woman for his mother and angrily shoots her dead as she is being raped by his cohorts. The film is not soft and contains lots of violence. But again, this is a world unknown to most viewers.

At times we despise Agu and the violent rage he emits, but then we remember he is a young boy being turned into a warrior by savages.

He talks to God and his mother and knows what he does (and what is happening to his country) is wrong.

I would have liked to have learned more background about Elba’s character. What makes him tick? Has he lost loved ones long ago as Agu has?

I surmised that the answer is yes. He is brutal, but a calm, calculating, thoughtful man, but one that is in control at all times.

As war rages on Agu and his fellow tribe question what they are doing. Such smarts for a young boy and the audience admires his views. He is intellectual and worldly way beyond his years.

That is what makes Beasts of No Nation a compelling character study. I more than once thought that I had seen this type of film before (Last King of Scotland, 2006, comes to mind in recent times), but never to the extent of what a character-driven story it was, especially in the eyes of a child.

Beasts of No Nation (2015) takes the viewer to an unpleasant world of brutality and a world where there is no rule book. We are exposed to a once innocent child’s experiences and conflicted feelings in the face of danger and heartbreak, and learn its complications.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best Feature, Best Director-Cary Joji Fukunaga, Best Male Lead-Abraham Attah (won), Best Supporting Male-Idris Elba (won), Best Cinematography

The Martian-2015

The Martian-2015

Director Ridley Scott

Starring Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain

Scott’s Review #379

80058399

Reviewed February 19, 2016

Grade: C-

The latest film from heralded director Ridley Scott (notable for classics Blade Runner-1981, and Alien, 1979), The Martian (2015), is a science-fiction/space adventure about a believed-dead astronaut (Matt Damon) trapped on Mars after his fellow team members thought he was dead.

NASA and a crew of rescuers fervently attempt to save him as supplies run out.

Extremely resourceful, Mark Watney (Matt Damon) cleverly avoids death by using his wits to survive and prosper on the challenging planet.

Hot on the heels of several other high-profile modern science fiction offerings, such as Interstellar (2014) and Gravity (2013), The Martian features a big Hollywood star in the lead role.

Much of the action is Watney on his own, attempting to grow to produce, ration food, and keep his sanity- think Tom Hanks in Castaway (1996) except on another planet, and with a “Hab”, an indoor operations station left by his abandoned crew.

The Martian has received accolades, even winning the Golden Globe for Best Musical or Comedy Film, though that is poor categorization.

The film has snippets of humor and a few songs in the background, but that is it. Maybe some late 1970s disco songs constitute a musical?

I found The Martian to be a Hollywood mainstream film in every sense. That may be a high compliment to some, but I expect more.

It is not that The Martian is a bad film, it is not, but it is mediocre, and has all the elements of an average offering. The film was going for an emotional experience that I did not experience.

I had little doubt that the ending would be sweet and wrapped in a bow.

Mark Watney is the typical all-American character in a “guy film”. He hates disco and loves ketchup. The film makes him a guys guy, so therefore the average film-goer will relate to him.

He is in good shape, cracks jokes, and is likable.

But that is also a problem with the character and The Martian. He lacks substance. We know little about him except he has parents who never appear on-screen.

The way that the film touts him as the hero and is cheered and praised, while in real life would be warranted, it just feels forced and contrived.

This is not a knock against Matt Damon, who does a decent job.

My beef is that the character is not fleshed out.  The well-built Damon at the beginning of the film versus the scrawny Damon at the conclusion is a facade as a body double was used in the later scenes.

This lack of authenticity disappointed me.

I expected more from the supporting cast. Jessica Chastain, Jeff Daniels, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Kristen Wiig play one-note types that any actor could have played.

Why were big stars cast at all?

Chastain as a mission commander, Daniels as Director of NASA, Ejiofor as NASA mission commander, and Wiig as a Public Relations specialist. The casting, in particular, of Wiig in the straight-laced, stale was mysterious to me, and it was not a particularly good portrayal….and I am a Wiig fan.

The humorous parts in The Martian are contrived and not dissimilar to countless other films with the smart-ass remarks all containing a bland quality. Lines like “Eat your heart out Neil Armstrong” seem silly and unnecessary.

I expected more wit.

Let me be fair- the visual effects (it is space after all) are impressive, and it was fairly interesting to see what is supposed to be the planet of Mars, but really in this day and age of CGI effects the film is not that spectacular.

 I would much rather be given a compelling story than visual treats any day of the week.

My review of The Martian may seem harsh, but only because I expected more from it than I was given.

With several Oscar nominations including Best Picture, I anticipated a top-notch film, and The Martian did not come close.

Mediocrity, straightforward, and predictable describe The Martian (2015) film.

I have heard that the novel is fantastic and added it to my reading list.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor-Matt Damon, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Visual Effects

Violette Noziere-1978

Violette Noziere-1978

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Isabelle Huppert

Scott’s Review #378

70067611

Reviewed February 16, 2016

Grade: B+

Another in the legion of thrilling and mysterious films by French director Claude Chabrol, Violette Noziere (1978) tells the true story of an eighteen-year-old Parisian girl, who plots her parent’s murder in 1930’s France.

The fact that the tale is true to life makes it even more horrific and mesmerizing.

It is beautifully shot, though the action largely takes place in interior settings.

This film is a cerebral experience.

The film is classy in every way- like French films typically are, and Isabelle Huppert (Violette) takes center stage. She is gorgeous and interesting-looking (reminiscent of a young Jennifer Jason Leigh) in the lead role.

Violette appears to be a typical French teen but harbors a dark secret and something always appears glum about the character. She works nights as a prostitute accosting wealthy men.

When she meets handsome but spendthrift, Jean Francois, a young man she fancies, she becomes his main source of income and slowly begins to plot the murder of her low-income, yet stable parents, in an attempt to inherit their apparent savings.

The story is somewhat murky as Violette’s version of events (mainly in the past and concerning her father) is accusatory. She insists that her father sexually abused her as a child, but is this in her fantasy world, or did this happen? One never knows.

Making the film compelling is that Violette’s parents are quite likable. Struggling to make ends meet and provide quality life, they prepare home-cooked meals, enjoy life, and appear to be decent people.

What is the reality?

Later, we witness a rivalry between Violette and her mother. In one scene we see Violette’s father bouncing his daughter on his knee while the mother looks on filled with hatred.

When she attempts to seduce her husband, unsuccessfully, Violette looks on amused. Is this solely in Violette’s mind?

Chabrol, an admirer of Alfred Hitchcock, keeps the suspense going throughout the film, but the heart of the film belongs to Huppert.

From the start of the film, amid meaningless banter with her more refined girlfriend, the audience can tell there is something amiss about Violette. She seems lonely, like a lost little girl yearning for some excitement as her eyes stare into the distance.

Her true colors are slowly exposed, yet Chabrol never makes her all-out crazy. Violette always has a cool, calm, demeanor and that is why the film succeeds.

For fans of Chabrol, or film fans eager for a foreign language treat, Violette Noziere is a rare find, a welcome addition to the growing number of his films I have watched with interest, and heartily enjoyed.

The mystique, the beauty of the artistry, and the twists and turns are top-notch.

Hail, Caesar!-2016

Hail, Caesar! -2016

Director Ethan Coen, Joel Coen

Starring George Clooney, Channing Tatum

Scott’s Review #377

80074084

Reviewed February 16, 2016

Grade: B+

Hail, Caesar! (2016) is a quirky film created and directed by the Coen Brothers, who are known for offbeat films such as Fargo (1996), No Country for Old Men (2007), and Raising Arizona (1987).

Hail, Caesar is a satirical comedy about the Hollywood film industry during the post-World War II period of the 1950s.

The film features a bevy of current Hollywood talent, including George Clooney, Channing Tatum, Josh Brolin, and Scarlett Johannsen, including singing, dancing, and scandalous matters.

All give fine performances and add humor and wit to the film.

The plot centers on the character of Eddie Mannix (Brolin), a celebrity “fixer” and real-life person who works as an executive for Capitol Pictures and whose primary responsibility is to ensure that famous Hollywood stars remain out of trouble.

The period is 1951, a particularly scandalous time in pictures. One of the biggest stars of the time, Baird Whitlock (Clooney), is suddenly kidnapped and held for ransom while completing a big epic film for the studio.

Mannix must race to keep the crisis out of the news and safely get Whitlock back.

Indeed, there are interesting subplots, including handsome yet talent-less Western actor Hobie Doyle, hired by the studio to appear in a sweeping period piece directed by suave Laurence Laurentz (Ralph Fiennes), and DeeAnna Moran (Johannsen), unmarried and with a “bun in the oven,” determined to keep herself out of the tabloids.

I loved the look of the film, as numerous films occur within it. The 1950s set pieces and designs are exquisite, particularly the period piece set, lavishly designed with classic doors, a staircase, flowers, and a cast dressed to the nines.

It brings back an extravagant time.

The film is a satire, to be sure. Still, it also addresses the serious subject of communism (especially for that period), Russia, and Russian defectors, all involved in a plot to prove a valuable point.

Despite the film being a comedy, this is worth serious consideration. Many Hollywood writers make money for the studios and are rewarded with underwhelming salaries.

The same holds true in Hollywood today.

This point can spill over into other walks of life as well, and the point of the “little man gets screwed” is explored. Communism is also explored throughout the film as the central message- an important message that resonates.

Another interesting tidbit that Hail, Caesar!Mentionss, though only on the surface, is the burgeoning onslaught of television programming.

Suddenly, an increasing number of people were purchasing TVs and avoiding the glamour of films, opting instead for the comfort of their couches.

What a different time it was!

An intriguing, favorite character of mine belongs to Channing Tatum’s portrayal of Burt Gurney, a Gene Kelly-like character famous for singing and dancing numbers. A sizzling sailor dance gives edge and sexuality to the film.

A revealing scandal involving Burt and Laurence is fantastic and delicious.

My favorite scene belongs to Frances McDormand, who shamefully only appears in one scene- quite memorable. As film editor C.C. Calhoun, she diligently shows Mannix film dailies in the hopes of discovering a clue in the disappearance of Whitlock. When her scarf gets caught in the projector, hilarity and grotesqueness ensue.

It is a classic Coen Brothers comedy.

Hail Caesar! (2016) succeeds as a witty, comical throwback to a wonderful time in film history, with a political edge that historians will appreciate and Coen Brothers fans will relish.

Perhaps not their most creative or memorable, but enjoyable all the same.

Oscar Nominations: Best Production Design

Amy-2015

Amy-2015

Director Asif Kapadia

Starring Amy Winehouse

Scott’s Review #376

80049094

Reviewed February 8, 2016

Grade: B

Amy (2015) is an informative documentary telling the story of immensely talented, yet troubled, pop singer, Amy Winehouse.

Her childhood, rise to fame, and ultimate downfall as a result of drug, alcohol, and weight battles, are all chronicled in her documentary.

Despite the information, however, I never got the sense that I knew the singer well, and in the conclusion, she still seemed mysterious.

Possessing a unique jazz/soul-infused sound and a wonderful British accent to boot, Winehouse burst onto the pop scene like gangbusters in 2003 as a talented artist with many layers of genres in her music.

A diamond in the rough you might say, and a breath of fresh air in modern music.

The fact that she wrote her songs only added to the level of talent oozing from her.

The documentary wisely tells of her upbringing and her abandoned father, who later resurfaced in her life. Her mother, while decent, could not control Amy, who was full of life and energy.

The main crux of the film, however, is to show her difficulty with fame, a sad, tried and true story of celebrities near and dear, artist types, who do not do well with the attention and adoration thrown their way and Amy Winehouse is no different.

As her popularity grew, all she wanted was to be left alone, and, unfortunately, her life became very public, including her tumultuous relationship with her boyfriend who wound up in prison.

Sadly, Winehouse did not have the best support system and her father was perhaps an opportunist. Amy was a tortured, pure artist who sadly wasted away due to outside circumstances.

Throughout most of the film, she seems lost or overwhelmed by the success that comes her way. In a cruel irony, her biggest hit “Rehab” became fodder for late-night television comics to poke fun at her.

The documentary, while informative, is also quite basic and I felt like I was given more of an overview of Winehouse’s life than anything personal. I did not feel a sense of her inner thoughts and dreams.

Yes, she did not want to be famous and it bothered her, but I wanted to see more of the real Amy Winehouse.

Amy (2015) is an adequate documentary about the life and times of Amy Winehouse and I finished the piece knowing more about her, but not nearly as much about her as I wished I had learned.

Good effort, but more would have been nice.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Documentary-Feature (won)

Irreversible-2002

Irreversible-2002

Director Gaspar Noe

Starring Monica Bellucci, Vincent Cassel

Top 10 Most Disturbing Films #4

Scott’s Review #375

60026141

Reviewed February 7, 2016

Grade: C+

As I ponder my review of Irreversible,  a 2002 French thriller and “art film”, I am attempting (as I always do) to look at the film critically, from a story and a technical standpoint, as well as a myriad of other aspects that make up a film.

This is admittedly a toughie.

On the surface, I despised the film wholeheartedly (more on that later), but from a critical standpoint, I found characteristics to admire and give credit to. One thing is for certain- I never want to see this film again.

The story is told in a non-linear style, begins after the story, and works backward, which I credit the film for, giving it a unique storytelling experience, cleverly done.

Two Parisian friends, Marcus and Pierre, go on a rampage after Marcus’s girlfriend is brutally raped and beaten. In panic mode, they learn the name of the attacker (Le Tenia) and go to a gay BDSM club aptly named “The Rectum”, a place the attacker requests, where they fervently search for him all the while beating club-goers and cause havoc.

Since the story is told in reverse, the audience is initially in a state of confusion at the events transpiring, and the jagged, shaky camera work, a very creative technique, only adds to the chaos. We only know that two maniacs are running rampant, destroying everything in their path.

Slowly, we realize what their motivation is as we work backward.

We are introduced to Alex, a beautiful young woman- in the early stages of pregnancy, who is Marcus’s steady, but used to date, Pierre. They are all very good friends. We see the romance between Marcus and Alex, and, working even further backward, we see Alex sitting alone in a park, reading a novel, and enjoying a bright, pleasant day in the park.

This peaceful closing scene contrasts drastically with the rest of the dark film. The film then becomes a flashing, frenetic, black-and-white experience, which I do not understand.

The film is quite bizarre and intensely brutal. The rape of Alex in a dark, gloomy underpass is one of the most intense and disturbing scenes I have ever witnessed in the film, and at one point I needed to leave the room briefly.

The scene is ten minutes in length and Alex is anally raped and then beaten into a comatose state. It is a sickening scene and we witness her pain, misery, and humiliation.

When Pierre and Marcus avenge her rape on who they think is Le Tenia, the scene is also extremely brutal. After (supposed) Le Tenia is captured by them, he attempts to rape Marcus, and Pierre grabs a fire extinguisher and bashes the victim to death as the face is repeatedly destroyed in full detail. It is a tough scene to watch.

I question the motivations of the director wholeheartedly and wonder if he intended to story-tell, or simply make as gruesome and shocking a film as possible.

I have read that when the film was shown at the Cannes Film Festival, many people walked out of the auditorium in disgust- I can see why.

Irreversible is severely homophobic, with repeated gay slurs being used throughout the gay club scenes, and is also anti- Asian as evidenced by Pierre’s and Marcus’s racial slurs directed at a taxi driver.

The motivations of the character of Le Tenia make no sense to me as it is revealed he is a gay man. Why a gay man would brutally rape a female is unclear to me. This, combined with the extreme brutality, anti-gay, anti-minority, and anti-women, renders the film rather pointless from a story perspective.

My assumption after processing the film is that the director wants us to sympathize with nobody in the film, except Alex. Pierre, Marcus, and Le Tenia are all hateful characters.

It is interesting how, at first, since the beginning is the end, the motivations of the characters are unclear and confused.

My admiration of Irreversible (2002) comes solely from the unique camera work, the clever pacing of the film in the form of backward chapters, and the frenetic style of the opening work, however, the homophobia, racism, and brutality left me cold and I could not shake the feeling that this film is shocking for the sake of being shocking, and one that I ultimately cannot applaud.

Wild Tales-2014

Wild Tales-2014

Director Damian Szifron

Starring Liliana Ackerman

Scott’s Review #374

80013561

Reviewed February 5, 2016

Grade: A

What a crazy adventure!

Receiving a well-deserved 2015 Best Foreign Language Film Academy Award nomination, Wild Tales is a Spanish film that weaves six unique vignettes together.

Each tale involves conflict between characters and centers around the subject of revenge. Each reminds me of a foreign language version of a Twilight Zone episode, albeit much darker, mixed with a prevalent Quentin Tarantino influence.

A psychopath arranges for all of his enemies to be on the same flight (“Pasternack”), a hit-and-run accident among a wealthy family turns murderous (“The Proposal”), a bomb expert turns his expertise onto a corrupt towing company (“Little Bomb”), a disturbed bride and groom bizarrely celebrate their wedding reception (“Until Death Do Us Part”), a revenge-driven waitress waits on her rival (“The Rats”) a brutal tale of road rage (“The Strongest”) are the stories told in this fantastic film.

Wild Tales is an outrageous journey and as each chapter unfolds we are treated to the unexpected and each is cleverly written- bear in mind that they are independent stories and have nothing to do with each other chronologically or otherwise.

The vignettes also vary vastly. One as short as ten minutes and another hovering around the forty-minute mark.

Some characters are sympathetic and hateful, which is interesting in itself. The diner in “The Rats” is despised and we wish for his demise.

After “Little Bomb”, the protagonist (or antagonist depending on how you look at it) receives a hero’s welcome for standing up to corruption.

In other stories, particularly in “The Strongest”, all the characters are unlikeable.

Famed director Pedro Almodovar (The Skin I Live In, Volver)  does not direct Wild Tales but does produce the project and his imprint is all over it. Almodovar has a thing for the weird and, as in 2013’s I’m So Excited, a thing for passengers in peril inside airplanes.

After “Pasternack”, the first installment, one will experience an “OMG!” moment, which wisely sets the tone for the entire movie.

We wait and wonder what can happen next.

My favorite tale is between “The Proposal” and “The Strongest”. I love the class distinction evident in the former as a wealthy father struggles to cover up his family’s dirty deeds initially at any cost necessary, but has he finally had enough?

Will the wealthy once again victimize the poor?

In the latter, class distinction is again explored, as a hotshot in a slick car angers a simple man in a battered car, only to regret his outburst of road rage.

The story turns into a Lord of the Flies situation where it is “kill or be killed”. The clever ending for this one is fantastic as the officials completely misinterpret the events.

The most bizarre tale is “Until Death Do Us Part”, which is also the finale.  A glorious and festive Jewish wedding reception turns bitter and bloody as the bride’s jealousy is tested. But is the bride the unstable partner or is the groom? Or perhaps both?

This chapter reminds me of a Quentin Tarantino film (must have been The Bloody Bride), as the tone and the texture are reminiscent of his films (and yes, the blood too!).

Unusual, delightful, and sometimes even deranged, Wild Tales (2014) is a nice reminder that there are still creative and left-of-center projects being made in modern film that must be experienced and enjoyed.

This is not an ordinary, predictable film making it quite a gem.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Room-2015

Room-2015

Director Lenny Abrahamson

Starring Brie Larson, Jacob Tremblay

Scott’s Review #373

80073823

Reviewed January 31, 2016

Grade: A

Room (2015) is a compelling story of a woman’s battle in captivity with her five-year-old son in tow.

The film also tells of the after-effects of reclusive living as they both strive to adapt to their changing world.

Receiving a slew of Academy Award nominations, the film is more than a one-dimensional story of peril or rescue, but rather, a smartly woven tale that delves into the psychological issues involved with being confined in a room for years, giving the film a deeper meaning.

Room is adapted from the novel of the same name, written by Emily Donoghue.

We meet twenty-four-year-old Joy (Larson) and her five-year-old son Jack, who live in squalor in a shed made into one room. They exist from food and supplies delivered by their captor “Old Nick”, who abducted Joy seven years prior.

He periodically rapes her and is Jack’s father, though there is no affection on either side. Joy has attempted escape before but has failed.

She is determined to break free once and for all and allow her and Jack a normal life.

In the first half, we learn about Joy and Jack and how they exist and forge a life together. Joy tells Jack they are real and the outside world and people on television are not.

They live in a fantasy world and Jack periodically treats objects (chair, toilet, bed) as real-life things, giving morning greetings to these objects- this is both cute and sad. His only channel to the outside world is a small skylight, which he endlessly gazes at.

I love how the film suddenly changes course at the halfway point and shifts focus to the aftereffects taking a dark, complex, psychological turn.

The first half takes place entirely in the “room”, and suddenly, a new world has blossomed. A monumental event changes the course of the film.

From this point, the film deals with the traumatic effects of being shut away for years. Joy suffers from depression. Jack sees a new world. We see how other characters deal with the turn of events.

Joy’s parents, wonderfully played by Joan Allen and William H. Macy react in completely different ways.

How have their lives changed because of Joy’s abduction? Will they see Old Nick every time they lay eyes on Jack? How will Joy’s mother’s new boyfriend react?

There is a strong theme of coping throughout the film and how all the characters cope with life events and attempt to resume a life of normalcy. There is such a unique humanistic feel to the film that makes it deeper than I would have expected.

Sure, Brie Larson gives a dynamic performance, but the film offers reflection and thought.

The direction and camera work are a marvel. We see a blurred view of what Jack sees in “the real world”.  It is almost like the audience is reawakening to life and we see it through a child’s eyes- the sights, the sounds.

Jack has created an imaginary dog in his mind and the film introduces more than one real dog that plays a pivotal role. We see Jack’s joy and terror at the new experiences.

Room (2015) encompasses thought-provoking ideas making what might only have been a basic story and turning it into an intricate journey into human psychology through many different nuances and facets.

What a wonderful, dark experience this is.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Lenny Abrahamson, Best Actress-Brie Larson (won), Best Adapted Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best Female Lead-Brie Larson (won), Best First Screenplay (won), Best Editing

Showgirls-1995

Showgirls-1995

Director Paul Verhoeven

Starring Elizabeth Berkley, Kyle MacLachlan

Scott’s Review #372

962109

Reviewed January 31, 2016

Grade: D

Having heard much about the infamously badly reviewed Showgirls (1995), and its ranking as one of the worst films ever made, I finally got around to watching this (twenty years after its release).

Now considered something of a camp classic, I am glad I did.

While I recognize the dubious distinction it holds and does not disagree with it, I also found something slightly entertaining about the film, and my thought process throughout was “this film is so bad that it might be good”, but in the end, it is pretty much just a bad film.

Nomi Malone (Elizabeth Berkley) hitchhikes to Las Vegas intending to find success as a showgirl. Having her belongings stolen, she is then befriended by a kind-hearted woman named Molly, who works as a seamstress at the topless dance revue, Goddess.

Molly takes her in and introduces her to the star of the show-Cristal (Gina Gershon).

A rivalry immediately develops between the women as Cristal mocks Nomi’s job at another topless club. The main story centers on this rivalry, as Nomi attempts to climb the ranks and achieve success in the shady world of adult entertainment.

Along the way she becomes involved with various men, specifically entertainment director (and Cristal’s boyfriend), Zack, played by Kyle MacLachlan, leading to further tensions.

Let me be honest here- Showgirls is a bad film in every way. I observed three major flaws in the film- poor acting, poor writing, and the film being over-the-top on every level.

Let’s break it down.

Within minutes, I knew the acting was sub-par, and I wondered if that was the fault of the director’s (Paul Verhoeven) directing or the actors themselves- or a combination.

Known for directing Basic Instinct (a sexy, smoldering film), one wonders if he had the same success in mind for Showgirls.

Berkeley gets the brunt of the mention since she is the lead character, but, wow what a bad performance. From the over-dramatic delivery to the phony earnestness, I did not buy the performance for a minute and fantasized on more than one occasion about how a different actress might have tackled the role (Nicole Kidman and Julia Roberts came to mind).

Gershon was almost worse as her sexiness and vixen-like character were fraught with an irritating brooding pout.

The writing is one-dimensional- a poor girl tries to achieve success in a bad, bad world and meets challenge after challenge. Nothing new here.

The predictability was apparent almost immediately and most of the characters were unlikable. When Nomi garners interest in a man, he turns into a player with another aspiring female star on the side, feeding her the same lines as he did Nomi.

Even the one sympathetic character (Molly), exists only to make Nomi more likable as is the case when Molly is attacked and Nomi races to her bedside.

Forced and formulaic, this scene is a prime example of poor and contrived writing.

Most scenes play over the top.

Brimming with nudity and sexual excitement, the film is bawdy and party-friendly. In one scene, dancers take a line of coke before hitting the stage and a feud between two of the dancers results in one sabotaging the production so that the other dancer will break her hip.

The larger-than-life (in more than one way) x-rated, well-endowed, mama dancer, while entertaining, is also silly and foolish.

Chaotic and pointless, each scene was hard to believe and take seriously.

You may be wondering what positives can be found in Showgirls- the answer is not many, but there is a charm I found in the film, but perhaps I am glutenous for punishment.

I think the film “feels” like it wants to have fun and a certain level of entertainment can be found in viewing it, but this is like trying to find a needle in the haystack to see any good in Showgirls.

I do not disagree with the distinction that Showgirls (1995) is one of the worst films ever made, but I found a sliver of charm, interest, and fun mixed in with the more prevalent drivel, poor quality, and painfully bad acting.

But perhaps that is because it is so bad.

The Revenant-2015

The Revenant-2015

Director Alejandro G. Iñárritu

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy

Scott’s Review #371

80064516

Reviewed January 27, 2016

Grade: A

The Revenant is a fantastic 2015 film filled with intensity, great visual camera work/direction, and the acting talents of one of modern cinema’s dynamic performers Leonardo DiCaprio.

He shines every minute he is on-screen.

Almost all of the filming takes place outdoors (the American frontier period), and is a revenge tale, only adding to the excitement and beauty of the film.

The film is set in the 1820s, and we are immediately introduced to a large party of hunters and trappers in remote Wyoming as the film opens.

Right off the bat, I was struck by the picturesque scenery.

We are treated to a compelling (and bloody) battle between the trappers and a tribe of Native American Indians. The Louisiana Purchase has just passed, leading to tensions between various parties causing conflict and blood to spill.

The hunters are decimated so the remaining group must flee on foot, hoping to return to safety hundreds of miles away. The main character, Glass (DiCaprio), later receives a terrible injury and the main crux of the story develops as we embark on a tale of his desperation to survive and exact revenge on the men responsible for leaving him to die.

The film is a lesson in endurance. Glass is arguably put through almost every punishment imaginable and we wonder what more he can endure.

The film belongs to two actors. Dicaprio, and Tom Hardy as the villainous John Fitzgerald, a hunter with a major rivalry with Glass.

The film parlays into a revenge tale between the two characters.

DiCaprio is a gem in this film, not only is he compelling from a physical standpoint, he also looks broken, battered, and bruised, but DiCaprio gives a performance that I am fond of.

He acts non-verbally.

In one crucial scene, Glass is unable to move or speak as a violent act is committed. He is desperate yet helpless. The range of emotions portrayed by DiCaprio is astounding. The pain, hurt, and frustration are evident on his face and we sympathize greatly.

This is a powerful performance by DiCaprio.

Tom Hardy is compelling in his own right as the scoundrel he portrays. We despise this character and all his dirty deeds and Hardy successfully pours all his energy into this grizzled role.

Hardy, quite handsome in real life, is transformed into a partially scalped, dirty man. His fate at the end of the film is a clever aspect of The Revenant that helps make it not a typical run-of-the-mill western, but something so much more.

The infamous “bear scene” is second to none. How this compelling scene was shot is beyond me, but the result is a realism I have seldom witnessed in film. The scene is so prolonged and violent that one wishes it would conclude quickly.

A surprise comes that rivals any horror film.

Directed by Alejandro G. Iñárritu he follows a vastly different type of film (Birdman-2013) and does a wonderful job.

The Revenant is arguably a “guy’s movie”.

There are almost no women featured and the ones that are not treated well, which is unfortunate, however, sadly likely true of the times.

Interesting to note though, is Inarritu decided to have a female victim enact revenge on her abuser in a satisfying (though squeamish moment for the male viewer).

I found The Revenant to have definite left-wing leanings. The age-old controversy of the white man taking the Indian’s land is explored and the film has a way of bringing this up more than once as well as not making the Indian tribes “bad”, but rather sympathetic.

Especially since the character of Glass marries an Indian woman and bears a son with her.

Gorgeous cinematography morphed with a wonderful and intriguing story and peppered with brutality. The Revenant (2015) succeeds on every level and sets an important precedent for a film about perseverance in the face of hopelessness.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Alejandro G. Iñárritu (won), Best Actor-Leonardo DiCaprio (won), Best Supporting Actor-Tom Hardy, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Cinematography (won), Best Makeup and Hairstyling, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing, Best Visual Effects

Leviathan-2014

Leviathan-2014

Director Andrey Zvyagintsev

Starring Elena Lyadova, Vladimir Vdovichenkov

Scott’s Review #370

80013610

Reviewed January 16, 2016

Grade: B+

Nominated for the 2015 Best Foreign Language Film (Russian), Leviathan is a tale of governmental corruption at the expense of the “little man”, mixed in with a family drama- and is quite heavy.

The film is above average. It’s a standard, tense drama, if you will, though a bit slow-moving at times. This is not so much a complaint as it is an observation.

As with many Foreign language films versus American films, there is more nudity (not in a gratuitous way) and fewer explosions, which is admiration, and hats off to foreign language films as a whole.

Leviathan made me think of the overall foreign language film genre in that assessment as it did not need CGI or any other “bells and whistles” commonplace in current American films.

Set in a gorgeous coastal area of Russia, featuring landscapes and outdoor shots, Leviathan is a story with religious overtones mixed with drama. “Good vs. evil” and both sides questioning God or defending their actions for god are featured message points.

The protagonist, Koyla, lives with his second wife, Lilya, and his son Roma in a coastal fishing town. Koyla is hot-headed and sometimes expresses rage, but is a good man living a simple life as a mechanic.

The corrupt Mayor is determined to take Koyla’s land and build a villa, offering Koyla an insulting sum of money to sell his land. The disputed land is currently in legal hands, and Koyla’s handsome lawyer friend, Dima, arrives from Moscow to handle the case and support the family in their uneasy times.

A secondary plot involves a love triangle between Koyla/Dima/Lilya, and Roma’s hatred for Lilya that, while somewhat interesting on its terms, did not do much to further the main plot and I am not sure how necessary it was to the film as a whole.

It has nothing to do with the land dispute and was left unresolved.

The clear “hero” of the film is Koyla, but he is no saint himself. He drinks heavily, at one point smacks his son (albeit deservedly so), and has a temper. But his land is being taken from him by a corrupt figure making Koyla empathetic and likable.

Leviathan is a compelling film as the clear message received is “bully vs. beleaguered working man”. The mayor is a fat, unattractive, drunken bully and the audience is instructed to root against him. He has the town justice department in his back pocket and uses blackmail to achieve success.

The film brings religion into the plot as a priest tells the mayor he is doing “God’s work”, thereby justifying his motivations (at least in his mind). Later, a defeated Koyla converses with a religious man questioning God and God’s actions.

The film is cold despite being set in what I believe to be the summer or fall. There is a chill in the air, it always looks windy, and the look of the film is dark. This is effective as Leviathan is a dreary film with an unhappy ending.

Life is harsh and cruel and the film extends that message.

I did not quite understand Lilya’s motivations and not much is known about her character, despite being involved in the events. What motivates her to have an affair with Dima? Why does she return to Koyla? Is she unhappy and seeking a more glamorous life?

This can be assumed but is never made clear so she is a mysterious character.

Enjoyable to me most is the final thirty minutes or so. When a character’s sudden death occurs, I wondered if a particular character was responsible for the death before it was revealed what truly happened.

A cinematic treat and an interesting premise, mixed with a bit of religion and a whodunit, make the Russian film Leviathan, a worthy viewing experience.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

The Big Short-2015

The Big Short-2015

Director Adam McKay

Starring Christian Bale, Steve Carell

Scott’s Review #369

80075560

Reviewed January 10, 2016

Grade: A-

The Big Short (2015) is a confusing film and is its intention and also its genius.

Throughout some of the film, I was uncertain how much I liked it (or got it) and found many of the characters unlikeable, but at the conclusion, I realized that is exactly what the filmmakers intended is a clever tactic and makes The Big Short a success.

On the surface, the film has some humor but a very dark story at its core and left me a bit depressed and terrified at the conclusion.

I am happy that the film is receiving accolades and is the “thinking man’s” hit movie of the season.

To attempt to summarize the film, the film begins in 2005, approximately two years before the financial crisis of 2007-2008.

Eccentric hedge fund manager Michael Burry (Christian Bale), realizes the U.S. housing market is unstable and predicts a crash.

He attempts to profit by betting against the market, a move laughable to all around him, especially the banks who anticipate a windfall at Michael’s expense. Trader and fellow market managers, Jared Vennett and Mark Baum (played by Ryan Gosling and Steve Carrell) catch wind of Michael’s theory and try to get in on the action.

There is a sub-plot involving two younger investors also attempting to profit through the guidance of a retired banker (played by Brad Pitt).

The financial collapse is a tender subject and certainly no laughing matter, especially since it is so recent and affects many people.

The Big Short is touted as a comedy, which is strange. I found the audience didn’t know exactly what to laugh at or when. The film’s “laughs” were cynical, witty, and sometimes wicked. Many people do not get this type of humor.

In real life, people were kicked out of their homes and lost their jobs, pensions, etc. and it was all the result of greed, which The Big Short hammers home.

Several scenes include frat-boy investor/trader types getting rich by enabling almost anyone to afford a new house. Little did these people realize that there was a catch.

The film paints a jaded picture of Wall Street. The rich get richer at the expense of the middle class and the poor. It is an age-old sad tale.

Performance-wise, Carrell and Bale are the standouts. They both play characters who are damaged. Bale’s Michael is socially awkward, and has a false eye, but is also a genius. Carrell’s Mark is angry, grizzled, and is in therapy as a result of his brother’s suicide.

Both actors are great and have developed into worthy, credible acting talents. Worth mentioning, are small, but meaningful roles by Melissa Leo and Marisa Tomei.

The Big Short is shot interestingly, and highly unusual. From time to time, the action will stop and a famed celebrity (Selena Gomez, a world-renowned chef, or a model in a bubble bath) will explain the events, thus far, or give some review.

Also, more than once the actors will turn to the camera and speak directly to the audience. A personal touch that I found effective.

In the end, not much in life has changed, which is the message, and a frightening one. As one character brilliantly puts it “people will go back to blaming the poor and the immigrants”, which is a sad message.

After millions lost everything, not much has changed in the world and The Big Short makes that very clear. The people responsible have gotten away with crime, the banks bailed out, and a new scheme is undoubtedly in place.

It’s a sad world.

The Big Short (2015) is a gritty, harsh look at reality and a terrific film.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Adam McKay, Best Supporting Actor-Christian Bale, Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Film Editing

My Bloody Valentine-1981

My Bloody Valentine-1981

Director George Mihalka

Starring Paul Kelman, Lori Hallier

Top 20 Horror Films #20

Scott’s Review #367

60024026

Grade: A

Reviewed January 9, 2016

My Bloody Valentine (1981) is a perfect slasher film to watch on the romantic holiday of Valentine’s Day or, in fact, any day during the cold and snowy month of February.

The film loses something if watched during summer or any other time of the year since the dark and harsh feeling of the film is the perfect atmosphere if watched appropriately.

My Bloody Valentine is an underrated gem of the early 1980s- just as Black Christmas was to the 1970s- and both ironically are heralded so by directors such as Quentin Tarantino.

Other less gritty films received greater exposure and commercial success, but I am proud to name My Bloody Valentine as one of my Top 100 favorite films.

Both are also “holiday-themed” films.

The plot is basic, yet layered, with a unique setting. Rather than a creepy house, a summer camp, or some other tried and true device, we have the ingenious coal mine setting- immediately fraught with great potential.

Think about it- a coal mine is dark, suffocating, creepy, with countless secret passages, the fear of being lost, and running out of oxygen. It is also underground where help cannot easily be unobtainable.

The town is aptly named Valentine Bluff (how clever) so Valentine’s Day is a major holiday. The Mayor and police chief figure prominently in the story and the use of town history makes the film engaging.

Typical for the slasher genre we have a bunch of horny teens, partying to the max, who decide that the coal mine is the perfect place to throw a Valentine’s Day party, and they do so with gusto.

There are a few middle-aged characters with meaty stuff to do, and the main plot is of the whodunit sort. The killer’s get-up is simply genius.

He (or she) is wearing a miner’s outfit, completely dark, with an oxygen mask, which elicits a heavy breathing sound adding to the great atmosphere that My Bloody Valentine contains.

One of my favorite scenes involves the offing of Mabel Osbourne, the earnest, sweet-natured party planner, who excitedly is preparing the annual Valentine’s Day town dance.

She marvels at receiving a box of chocolates with a wonderful poem until she reads the poem. “Roses are red, violets are blue- two are dead and so are you”! Poor Mabel then has her heart removed and it is sent (gift-wrapped naturally) to the Mayor and police chief.

The scene is both horrific and comical.

My Bloody Valentine (1981) is a favorite of the genre for me and cascades that genre with its bloodiness, fun storytelling, and wicked charm.

Dancer in the Dark-2000

Dancer in the Dark-2000

Director Lars von Trier

Starring Björk, Catherine Deneuve

Scott’s Review #365

60002276

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Dancer in the Dark is in my opinion one of the most important, inventive films of the 2000s and proudly is one of my favorites of all time.

However, the film is not pleasant to watch, and is quite painful and depressing, if the truth be told. But the relevance and sheer emotion the film elicits is more than enough reason to be exposed to it- if only, but perhaps, once.

Director, Lars von Trier, is a master at creative and disturbing, dream-like films that are either odd, non-linear, or otherwise open to interpretation in some way.

He has directed such gems as 2011’s Melancholia and 1996’s Breaking the Waves, to name but two.

With Dancer in the Dark, he uses handheld cameras which add much grit to the film so it almost feels documentary style, and a grainy, shaky look.

The addition of musical numbers mostly written and performed by the star, Bjork, is a wonderful touch.

Speaking of Bjork, words cannot express what a brilliant performance she gives in the film, and the raw emotion she expresses in her starring role is awe-inspiring.

So much was the stress of filming Dancer in the Dark, that she, to my knowledge, has never made another film.

She was shamefully overlooked in the Best Actress Oscar category- an omission that is one of the biggest fails in Oscar history.

Tensions were reportedly high on the set of Dancer in the Dark, as Bjork reportedly despised her director, never missing a chance to tell him so, disappeared from the set for days on end, and spat in his face. Co-star Deneuve, a former French mega-film star, reportedly did not get along well with Bjork.

Despite all the drama, the stars managed to pull together a masterpiece.

Bjork plays Selma, a Czech immigrant, living in Seattle with her young son. The year is 1964. Selma is poor, struggling to survive by working in a clothing factory along with her best friend Cvalda (Deneuve).

Selma and Cvalda escape their dull lives by watching classic musical films at their local cinema. To make matters worse, Selma is suffering from a degenerative eye disease causing her to gradually lose her sight. She struggles to save enough for surgery for her son, who is sure to suffer the same fate without it.

Selma frequently imagines musical numbers in her day-to-day life involving friends and co-workers. When a tragic turn of events occurs and Selma is accused of a crime, the film goes in a very dark direction.

The conclusion of the film will always require handkerchiefs as it is as powerful as it is gloomy.  The aspect I love most about Dancer in the Dark is that it smashes barriers about what film art is and throws all of the rules out the window.

Lars von Triers, famous for this created a dreamy, independent hybrid musical and drama, a dynamic, tragic, emotional experience all rolled up into one great film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song-“I’ve Seen It All”

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Foreign Film (won)

Forrest Gump-1994

Forrest Gump-1994

Director Robert Zemeckis

Starring Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, Gary Sinise

Scott’s Review #362

60000724

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Awarded a bevy of Academy Awards in the year 1994, Forrest Gump is a film that is engrained in many people’s memories since the film was a monster hit in the mid-1990s.

Some complained that the unrealistic nature of the film was silly, and the story too saccharine, but the film is an innocent, sweet piece about a simple-minded man’s journey through life and the insurmountable success that he achieves.

I adore the film largely from a sentimental standpoint and the memories that watching the film years later conjures up.

I find the film to be a comfort.

Zemeckis, a feel-good film director (Back to the Future-1985, Who Framed Roger Rabbit? -1988), carves a whimsical tale of a fellow, Forrest Gump (played brilliantly by Tom Hanks), a slow-witted, but gentle soul, from Alabama, and his decades-long journey through life.

His lifelong love is Jenny (played by Robin Wright), who is a troubled girl and relies on Forrest over their friendship spanning decades.

Forrest is always in the right place at the right time and influences the events of history in his innocent way.

Forrest Gump is unique in its clever use of editing to incorporate Forrest into real-life historical events, which is a big part of the appeal of the film.

In one instance, Forrest meets with Richard Nixon and reveals the Watergate scandal. He also met President John F. Kennedy after winning a football scholarship.

And who can ever forget the numerous lines made famous from the film- “Stupid is as stupid does”, and “Life is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get.”, to name just two.

What I love most about the film is that it has heart and the relationships that Forrest shares with the central characters in his life are rich. Forrest’s haggard, but kind mother (Sally Field) loves her son and they share a tender, emotional relationship.

When Forrest enlists in the Army during the Vietnam War, his grizzled commanding officer, Lt. Dan Taylor (an Oscar-nominated performance by Gary Sinise), surprisingly becomes one of Forrest’s closest friends.

The film takes a darker turn when we begin to see a more human side to Taylor after a horrible accident, which leaves him without legs. To counterbalance this tragedy, Forrest is comically wounded in the buttocks.

I am not sure if I love or loathe the character of Jenny. Wright is perfect at giving her some vulnerability and her terrible upbringing can excuse some of her actions and take advantage of Forrest for arguably her gain.

Still, she has Forrest’s heart so she cannot be all that bad.

A favorite scene occurs in Washington as Forrest speaks at an anti-war rally. Jenny, in the crowd, recognizes Forrest and their reunion is sweet. Jenny, now a hippie and expelled from school, returns to Forrest’s life.

The fate of both Jenny and Mrs. Gump are scenes that will undoubtedly require tissues to get through as they are tender and emotional as can be.

Zemeckis’s Forrest Gump (1994) has emotion, sweetness, and heart, and those are nice qualities for a film to have.

It is not too sappy overwrought or manipulative, instead provides an honest story.

Oscar Nominations: 6 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Robert Zemeckis (won), Best Actor-Tom Hanks (won), Best Supporting Actor-Gary Sinise, Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published (won), Best Original Score, Best Sound Effects Editing, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Makeup, Best Film Editing (won), Best Visual Effects (won)

The Hand That Rocks the Cradle-1992

The Hand That Rocks The Cradle-1992

Director Curtis Hanson

Starring Rebecca De Mornay, Annabella Sciorra

Scott’s Review #360

569891

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

One may argue that the slick 1992 thriller, The Hand That Rocks The Cradle, is a direct rip-off of the 1987 blockbuster hit Fatal Attraction, which spawned countless imitators, and they may be accurate, but I simply adore this film.

It contains great tension and is well-acted, but above all, The Hand That Rocks The Cradle features Rebecca De Mornay in a wonderful performance as one of the screen’s most memorable villains, Peyton Flanders.

This is a film that will admittedly not win any awards for originality, but that I love all the same.

Peyton Flanders is very pregnant when we meet her. Her husband is creepy Dr. Mott, an obstetrician who sexually molests Claire Bartel (Sciorra) in his office during an exam.

Humiliated and upset, Claire, after being encouraged by her husband, Michael, files charges against Dr. Mott. He commits suicide and Peyton loses her child. Filled with vengeance, she vows to destroy Claire.

The plot may sound like a tawdry daytime soap plot device, but The Hand That Rocks The Cradle somehow works like a charm.

Unlike Fatal Attraction, there is little rooting value between Petyon and Michael- we know she is a crazed lunatic- the fun is seeing how she gets hers. She manipulates him and insinuates herself into their home- she pretends to be a nanny and subsequently manipulates Michael and Claire’s daughter.

Julianne Moore- in an early role in her storied film career- is believable as Claire’s best friend, who is the only one who sees Peyton for the monster she truly is.

Sadly, her screen time is limited.

Regardless of the other fine performances from the rest of the cast, this is De Mornay’s film- she is psychotic, then sweet, and plays both to the hilt.

I suppose a film like The Hand That Rocks The Cradle (1992) is not intended to be analyzed too much since it tries to thrill, scare, and make the audience uneasy, but boy is it sure fun.

Caddyshack-1980

Caddyshack-1980

Director Harold Ramis

Starring Chevy Chase, Rodney Dangerfield, Bill Murray

Scott’s Review #353

343044

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Caddyshack is one of the funniest slapstick comedy films of the 1980s, arguably the decade of the “mindless comedy”.

Made in 1980, the cusp of the decade, it led the pack during a time when one after the other, comedy films were churned out out-cookie cutter style- based largely on the success of Caddyshack.

While not every aspect of the film works, the parts that do are hysterical and its influence in film history is unquestionable. More than merely a “dumb comedy”, Caddyshack features funnymen of the day (Bill Murray, Chevy Chase, and Rodney Dangerfield), and the talent and timing are well.

Clean-cut teenager Danny Noonan works as a caddy at a posh resort named Bushwood Country Club. An “underachiever”, he lacks direction in life while being pressured by his parents to attend college.

While spending the summer at work pondering his future, high jinks ensue as a rivalry develops between the club co-founder, Judge Smails (Ted Knight), and the outrageous Al Czervik (Rodney Dangerfield), who is a nouveau riche real estate developer.

Meanwhile, bordering on psychotic, Bill Murray as groundskeeper Carl Spackler is engrossed in his feud with a gopher running rampant on the golf course.

Mixed in with all of this are the standard teen romance themes, bathroom gags, and sexual jokes.

Caddyshack is not high art nor does it need to, or intend to be. It is simply pure juvenile fun. It is not even that well written, but it works. The portions that work so well do not even involve the caddies featured in the film- originally set to be the focal point.

Rather, the real scene-stealers are the two oldest members of the cast- Rodney Dangerfield and Ted Knight. The bickering and barbs traded between the two characters are delicious and downright funny.

When Al mocks Smail’s hat, or dances with his snobbish wife, or crashes into his new boat, each scene is rich with goofy comic timing.

Without a doubt, my favorite scene is the “doody” scene in the resort pool. It is laugh-out-loud raucous as a candy bar tossed into the water is thought to be something else.

The star of this scene is Lois Kibbee, who plays Judge Smail’s wife.

Her comic mannerisms and upper-crust looks make her a perfect choice for the role and she arguably steals the show in her limited appearances.

When Al jokes that she must have been something before electricity, her facial expressions perfectly emit comic horror.

There are points of the film that really are unnecessary and do not work well- I have never understood Bill Murray’s character of Carl. Bordering on silly, with a stuffed animal as the gopher, Murray himself is fantastic- improvising, but the role does not seem necessary to the rest of the film.

More scenes between the Judge and Al, or more from Chevy Chase’s character of Ty, and of the Judge’s wife would have been preferable.

Also, the attempted teen triangle between Danny, Maggie, and Lacey is dullsville- plain Maggie cannot compete with gorgeous and slutty Lacey.

These criticisms, however, are small gripes when compared to the hilarity and perfect timing of the rest of the film and that is why it ranks among one of my favorites.

Caddyshack, along with Animal House, paved the way for the plethora of slapstick comedies to follow- a few good, most bad, but must be recognized as the influence that it was, and a must-see for fans of golf, sports, and good, clean fun.

The elements of Caddyshack (1980) come together and work so well.

Burn Witch Burn (Night of the Eagle)-1962

Burn Witch Burn (Night of the Eagle)- 1962

Director Sidney Hayers

Starring Peter Wyngarde, Janet Blair

Scott’s Review #316

220px-Night-of-the-eagle-poster

Reviewed January 1, 2016

Grade: B

Burn Witch Burn, retitled for U.S. release from the original British title Night of the Eagle, is a 1962 black-and-white horror film.

It is based on a 1943 novel entitled Conjure Wife.

The film is quite decent and delves into the fascinating and arguably unusual subject of witchcraft. It’s careful not to be too dark a film, and it resembles more of an extended episode of the Twilight Zone. It’s a good episode.

I enjoyed the film’s wit and charm. It never took itself too seriously and added humor and lightness.

Norman, a psychology professor at the local university, is intelligent, successful, and well-adjusted. He has a blonde, pretty, sophisticated wife named Tansy.

The perfect housewife, she coordinates Friday night bridge parties with fellow professors and staff and a Mrs. Cleaver type, the mother character from the famous 1950s television series Leave it to Beaver.

When Norman discovers Tansy is practicing witchcraft and possesses various charms, dolls, and weird things, he forces her to destroy all of them.

This leads to a series of bad events.

Norman is accused of rape by a student, and other dire circumstances occur. Tansy assumes this is a result of the destruction of her witchcraft.

Burn Witch Burn is a fun film that doesn’t take itself too seriously despite its heavy subject matter. Tansy certainly does not look like the stereotypical witch. She is more like a PTA mom; we almost cheer for her.

At the same time, the film is not so over-the-top that it becomes ridiculous, either. I found it entertaining but not a masterpiece or scary.

As the film progressed, I found the action confusing from a story-line perspective, but that was admittedly okay. I went with it and enjoyed it.

For instance, the plot thickens when an enormous eagle affixed to the front of the university building comes into play or the sinister university secretary’s motives are revealed.

The special effects and ambiance of the thunderstorm are worth mentioning. The heavy storm was crucial in making Burn Witch Burn a compelling horror film. It added a heavy dose of spookiness to the events, and the atmosphere was spot on.

Burn Witch Burn (1962) is a fun, late-night horror flick that does not take itself too seriously. It is a worthy film for horror fans to enjoy.

An underappreciated British horror flick.

Horror Express-1974

Horror Express-1974

Director Eugenio Martin

Starring Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing

Scott’s Review #311

7780013

Reviewed December 30, 2015

Grade: B

Horror Express (1974) is a fun 1970s Spanish/British horror film starring legendary horror actors Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing.

A horror version of Agatha Christie’s Murder On The Orient Express with a bit of camp thrown in, it is an entertaining late-night experience, on a low-budget level.

It is the early 1900’s, and while traveling from Shanghai to Moscow, via the Trans-Siberian Express, a British anthropologist named Professor Alexander Saxton (Lee) brings an enormous,  mysterious crate on board that contains a creature he discovered in a cave.

What we know is it has something to do with human evolution.

A fellow passenger, Doctor Wells (Cushing), and various other passengers become suspicious of the crate and demand to have it opened.

Things go awry and victims begin to be murdered by the creature (an ape-like monster) and left with eyes completely white with missing pupils and irises.

The best part of Horror Express is the setting. The cozy train is a perfect backdrop for the events taking place and it makes the film exciting as the different cars are set-decorated nicely.

This lends itself to a sense of entrapment and being unable to escape the creature as it roams freely from car to car.

For being a low-budget film,  the train sets are quite believable, as are the sounds of the train. It feels like the actors are on a real train as the tooting horns and the sounds of the tracks are authentic.

Having actors as big as Lee and Cushing gives the film respect in horror circles and both actors do believable work.

This film would not have been as good without the talents (and name recognition) of both.

There are also interesting supporting characters and I didn’t find the acting to be too over-the-top as is known to occur in similar types of horror films.

Specifically, the countess’s role and the appearance of Telly Savalas as a Cossack officer investigating events are interesting.

Fans of this genre of horror will understand that suspension of disbelief is necessary as the plot gets a bit goofy- something about the creature taking the information from the victim’s brain and the victims subsequently turning into zombies- it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

Especially towards the end, as some drunken Russians and some weird resurrections happen, but that is somehow okay.

For a late-night viewing with some spirits, you can’t ask too many questions and Horror Express (1974) is a decent flick.

The Danish Girl-2015

The Danish Girl-2015

Director Tom Hooper

Starring Eddie Redmayne, Alicia Vikander

Scott’s Review #310

80058477

Reviewed December 29, 2015

Grade: A-

The Danish Girl (2015) tells the loosely based story of Danish painters and married couple Lili Ebe and Gerda Wegener and Lili’s struggles as the first known recipient of sex reassignment surgery, unheard of at the time that it was (1930).

The film showcases terrific acting (Eddie Redmayne and Alicia Vikander especially) and a journey of one person’s struggle with gender identity.

The subject matter is important and timely as the recent transgender movement has emerged at the forefront of social issues today.

A happy, young couple living in Copenhagen, and married for six years, Gerda and Einar are inseparable and madly in love. They are best friends and help each other with their art. Because of a female model’s tardiness, Gerda convinces Einar to stand in for the female model.

This event triggers a lifelong identification as a female named Lili Elbe. Lili has emerged sporadically since childhood.

Through painful self-assessment and encouragement from progressive loved ones, Lili decides to go through with a highly experimental and risky sex change operation.

Gushing with sensitivity and tenderness and groundbreaking, though I bet even more so if made ten years ago, one feels for both lead characters as it is important to note that they both go through emotional turmoil.

It would be easy to lessen Gerda’s emotions and, perhaps with a lesser actress this might have happened, but Vikander (unknown to me before seeing this film) gives an emotional performance that is raw and exudes empathy.

One can imagine how they would feel if their spouse identified as the opposite sex. Confusion, blame, anger, and sorrow, would all be common reactions. Gerda is strong, brave, and helpful while crumbling beneath the surface.

Vikander brings all of this to the screen flawlessly.

Similarly, Redmayne brings depth and empathy to his role.  Redmayne’s Einar is masculine, but there is something sensitive and slightly feminine to him from the start.

Was this purposely done to soften the blow? He also appears to be very slightly built. Redmayne lost weight to portray this role and have a softer appearance.

Actors can easily dress up in drag, but the emotional investment needs to be there and Redmayne makes the viewer care about Lili. One is teary-eyed along with Lili as she sees no other choice but to undergo the risky operation. We see the desperation in Lili’s eyes thanks to Redmayne’s acting skills.

I loved how supportive the characters are in the film. Granted, Einar/Lili and Gerda travel in liberal and progressive circles, but for 1930, this was wonderful to see.

Of course, Copenhagen and Paris are open-minded cities, but Lili’s childhood friend Hans, a sophisticated, macho guy, offers support. The same goes for the Doctor taking on Lili’s surgery.

These aspects lend to a delicate, peaceful film of encouragement.

To be clear, Lili is not gay, and this is made crystal clear during the film as she meets a gay man, and the distinction between them is made. She does, however, identify and feel that she is a woman. She was born with the wrong parts.

The greatest aspect of The Danish Girl is its powerhouse acting and compelling subject matter. One’s gender is a given for most, but watching a riveting drama about someone who is unrestful with their gender is eye-opening and still rather taboo.

2015 was a year of progressive transgender films and The Danish Girl is towards the top in its class and graceful in dealing with the subject matter in a judgmental-free way.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actor-Eddie Redmayne, Best Supporting Actress-Alicia Vikander (won), Best Production Design, Best Costume Design

Jurassic World-2015

Jurassic World-2015

Director Colin Trevorrow

Starring Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard

Scott’s Review #307

80029196

Reviewed December 23, 2015

Grade: C

Jurassic World (2015) is a film I expected to like much more than I did.

Sure, it is a summer, blockbuster, popcorn flick. Based on the success of the earlier franchise efforts,  and, if memory serves, finding enjoyment in the 1993 original, Jurassic Park, I expected a fun ride.

Unfortunately, I was treated to a formulaic, escapade with uninteresting characters and mediocre writing.

The premise is standard. A behemoth of an amusement park exists in Central America, on Isla Nublar, where a dinosaur theme park has been running without incident for ten years.

A genetically modified dinosaur, created because a magnificent new attraction is needed, breaks loose and runs rampant.

A silly love story exists between the two leads Owen and Claire (Chris Pratt and Dallas Bryce Howard), as well as the inclusion of two young boys (Zach and Gray) sent by their divorcing parents to be with their Aunt Claire, who works as the Operations Manager at the park.

Owen is the dinosaur trainer. Predictably, there are “bad guys” who are greedy and desire to advance science at the risk of human life.

The special effects are fine, albeit completely CGI-laden, which is to be expected because the main stars are dinosaurs after all. I did anticipate better writing or, at least, more of a creative attempt at coming up with something a bit edgy.

The story was completely redundant. Where was the character development? There was none. We know very little about any of the principal characters.

One might argue that an adventure film does not necessitate this but it’s important. We know that Claire is a workaholic and has none time for her nephews- why? What makes her tick?

Here is a slight complaint. Why kill off only extremely minor characters or villains? I could see this (and the ending) a mile away. The whole film seems forced and sloppy.

Jurassic World is also filled with clichés. Owen and Claire initially dislike each other having had one unsuccessful first date back in the day. The film tries to push the love/hate, opposites attract element and it feels contrived.

How many times have we seen this in film history?

Also, Chris Pratt is perfect as the hunky, muscular “hero saves the day” type, and Dallas Bryce Howard running through the forest in a tight tank top is not unintentional.

This is not to say that the film is bad. It is a decent adventure film and the special effects are cool. I did enjoy the homage to the original 1993 version as the boys stumble upon the original visitor station complete with the 1992 jeep from the original Jurassic Park film.

I thought this was a neat little nod to history and I love that in a franchise film, but that is it for the positives.

Yes, this film was a blockbuster smash and made oodles of money. It, however, feels forced and clichéd and quite formulaic.

I was hoping for much more and deeper, stronger, material.

It Follows-2014

It Follows-2014

Director David Robert Mitchell

Starring Maika Monroe, Debbie Williams

Scott’s Review #306

It_Follows_(poster)

Reviewed December 23, 2015

Grade: A-

It Follows (2014) is a mysterious, unique, dreamlike (or shall I say nightmarish!) independent horror film that is a pleasant throwback to old-school horror films (my favorites!), with a supernatural twist thrown in.

The film is directed very well by newcomer David Robert Mitchell containing wonderful cinematography and creative camera angles.

This film is not glossy and has a raw, almost videotaped feel, which I found quite wonderful. The film was shot entirely in and around Detroit giving it a cold, industrial look.

The film begins on a dramatic note leaving the viewer immediately curious.

A young woman flees her suburban home and nervously stands on the street looking back at her house.  A neighbor asks if she needs help. She returns, collects her things, and hurriedly drives to the beach. She suspects something or someone is watching her. She tearfully phones her father and tells him she loves him.

The next scene appears to be the following morning and the woman is lying murdered on the beach in a grotesque position- her leg strangely bent.

This is a fantastic way to begin the film.

From this point, the premise is quickly revealed. The main character is Jay (Maika Monroe), an attractive college-aged girl. She lives with her sister Kelly and is good friends with their next-door neighbors Paul and Yara. An additional neighbor and classmate, Greg, also figures into the plot.

Jay is on a date with Hugh and things are going well. They attend a classic film. They sneak into a deserted lot and have sex. Afterward, Hugh chloroforms Jay and the weirdness begins.

A strange woman appears and Hugh tells Jay she must pass on a curse. Otherwise, an entity in the form of another person that nobody else can see but the victim will get Jay and she will be doomed.

I love the throwback elements to 1970s and 1980s horror but it’s vague when the film is set- purposely so I imagine- as many cars are 1970s and 1980s models. Only one cell phone is used throughout, but mostly the time could be present or past.

Even the houses appear dated.

Story-wise, It Follows is tough to figure out and open to a certain level of interpretation. Is the film anti-sex? Is the story a metaphor for sexually transmitted diseases?

The victims become possessed by the entity after sex and then must pass it to another unwitting victim, sexually.

I notice some similarities to John Carpenter films- specifically the classic Halloween from 1978. Jay sits in a classroom (ironically in the back row next to the window ala Jamie Lee Curtis in Halloween) and sees a strange old woman slowly lumbering towards her, eyes fixed on her.

Later, the three principal girls casually walk around the neighborhood engaging in small talk similar to the characters of Laurie, Lynda, and Annie on Halloween.

The ending- a scene in the indoor community swimming pool where the kids try to catch the spirit is a bit hokey and unresolved. However, I did enjoy the final scene- a peaceful one in which I was unsure if the entity had been destroyed or remained.

A sequel perhaps?

I give It Follows (2014) major props for its styling, and creativity while giving classic horror fans a good old-fashioned treat without much CGI necessary.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Director-David Robert Mitchell, Best Cinematography, Best Editing

The Peanuts Movie-2015

The Peanuts Movie-2015

Director Steve Martino

Starring Noah Schnapp, Francesca Capaldi

Scott’s Review #304

80057058

Reviewed December 20, 2015

Grade: B-

Having adored the Peanuts comic strips in the “funnies” papers every Sunday as a wee child, as well as the wonderful classic A Charlie Brown Christmas special (1965) that aired every holiday season, I was eager to see a full-length film released in theaters.

The Peanuts Movie commemorates the Fiftieth anniversary of the Christmas special.  The Peanuts gang is so All-American and ingrained in our culture that I could not resist seeing it.

I expected “cute” and that is exactly what I received. The film is nice but quite safe and predictable.

The Peanuts gang is much more than just the antics of Charlie Brown and his faithful dog Snoopy, who take center stage in the film.

The entire beloved gang is featured. Woodstock, Peppermint Patty, Marcie, Linus, Lucy, Frieda, Pig-Pen, and others, albeit in supporting roles.

There are two main stories featured in the film. The long-suffering and (in his mind) friendless (despite actually being loved by the gang), Charlie Brown is enamored with his new neighbor, the Little Red-Haired Girl, well-known from the original comic strips as Charlie Brown’s schoolyard crush-yet never seen.

The other is Snoopy’s writing of a book about the Flying Ace, in which he saves his crush, Fifi, also a pilot, from the dangerous Red Baron and his army.

As usual, the film is really about Charlie Brown’s endless insecurities prompted by bad luck and always screwing things up no matter that his intentions are noble.

When the Little Red-Haired Girl moves in across the street from Charlie Brown, he is immediately smitten and does numerous things to impress and acquire her attention, with difficulties arising.

A talent show in which he plays a magician goes wrong. To his delight, he is partnered with the Little Red-Haired Girl on a book report, but when she is called out of town he is forced to write the report himself, thereby foiling his attempts at getting close to her.

As usual, all parents remain unseen and speak garbled as the story is about the kids.

An interesting element is, that while the Little Red-Haired Girl is seen and does indeed speak, most of this occurs towards the end. For most of the film, we see her only from behind allowing an element of mystery to surround her.

It would have been interesting to see some of the supporting characters explored more- is Peppermint Patty gay and is Marcie her love interest? How about a love interest or background for some of the others? A side story explored is a growing romance between Pig-Pen and Patti.

The film does a nice job of featuring the familiar settings of the original comic strip- Lucy’s psychiatrist’s booth, the wall,  and the skating pond are prominently featured, which is a treat for long-time fans.

The Peanuts Movie (2015) is a nice film. I would have preferred a bit more of an edge or more creativity as original creator Charles Schultz had, but it is nice to be reminded of a simple time in life and this film is a good time.

The Seven Year Itch-1955

The Seven Year Itch-1955

Director Billy Wilder

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Tom Ewell

Scott’s Review #302

60004542

Reviewed December 18, 2015

Grade: B

Following a string of successful hits by director Billy Wilder (primarily famous for films in the 1940s and 1950s), The Seven Year Itch features Marilyn Monroe in her prime and at her finest.

It is a cute film made charming by the likable legend. While not high art, it is a fun experience in classic romantic comedy cinema, and its innocence is undoubtedly lost in today’s genre.

Playing a familiar character to what she was known for (sexy, flirty, sweet blondes), it is arguably Monroe’s best role (though Some Like it Hot still wins out for me as her best film role).

Richard Sherman, a successful New York publisher, finds himself alone for the summer when his wife and son leave for a vacation in the country. Middle-aged and bored, he immediately is enamored with his gorgeous new upstairs neighbor, known as The Girl, played by Marilyn Monroe.

The Girl is a commercial actress and former model and is quite friendly and bubbly. She is conveniently staying in New York City while filming a new television ad for toothpaste. Richard finds himself awkwardly tempted by the curvaceous Girl in one situation after another.

The Seven Year Itch is pure innocence and fantasy. The Girl has no designs on Richard, and his flirtation with her is harmless and juvenile. Richard is nerdy and socially awkward, not to mention fearful of his wife’s stern nature if she discovers that he is even spending a moment with The Girl.

Much of the film includes scenes where Richard imagines conversations with his wife or imagines her with another man, justifying his attraction for The Girl. These scenes are done hilariously as he imagines conversations with his wife, and his thoughts are exaggerated.

Humorous scenes transpire, such as the “champagne scene,” in which The Girl and Richard attempt to open a champagne bottle while cooling off with Richard’s new state-of-the-art air conditioner.  The Girl keeps her underpants in a freezer to cool off.

The Girl appearing in her toothpaste commercial, comically, is also a treat. And who can forget Marilyn Monroe’s famous scene in which she stands over a subway grate, clad in a sexy white dress and high heels, the wind from the subway blowing her dress in the air, is one of the most memorable in film history and priceless.

Some would argue that The Seven Year Itch (1955) is nothing but fluff, and they essentially are correct. Still, in an age of crude and obnoxious films disguised as romantic comedies, with cheesy jokes and canned humor, it is refreshing to look back to the 1950s culture, primarily an innocent era, and enjoy a fun film romp with one of cinema’s forever stars.

Tangerine-2015

Tangerine-2015

Director Sean Baker

Starring Mya Taylor, Kitana Kiki Rodriguez, James Ransone

Scott’s Review #301

80037676

Reviewed December 17, 2015

Grade: A

On the rare occasion that I am lucky and privileged enough to stumble upon a gem like Tangerine (2015), it reaffirms my faith in film and creative filmmakers in general.

Here is a universal lesson- it does not require oodles of money to make a great film. This film was shot with three smartphones!!

It takes talent and creativity.

Tangerine is a groundbreaking film- the first (that I am aware of anyway) to feature transgender actresses at the forefront of the feature.

The film has been honored with multiple Independent Spirit Award nominations.

Shot documentary style, with grittiness and a frenetic pace, while mixing in unique styles of music (hip hop to classic) as the musical score (a child-like tune begins the film), Tangerine is unique from both a story perspective and a visual style.

The film’s first scene begins with two transgender sex workers- Sin-Dee Rella and Alexandra, having a conversation in a coffee shop. Sin-Dee has just been released from jail and learns that her boyfriend, and pimp, Chester (James Ransone), has been cheating on her.

It is Christmas Eve.

The film explores Sin-Dee’s rage and subsequent search all over Los Angeles for Chester, and the girl he has been with. She vows revenge on them both.

However, beyond this story point, the heart of the film is of loneliness and isolation that most of the characters (trans and otherwise), share, in one form or another.

Interspersed with the Sin-Dee story, are stories involving Alexandra’s feud with a “john”, and her pursuit of a singing career.

Another interesting story is that of a straight male, Razmik, an Armenian cab driver who is enamored with transgender sex workers.

This may sound bizarre or too out there for some, but Razmik’s story is quite tender and compelling. He has a wife, child, and other relatives and is the breadwinner. He is also very conflicted. He does not “use” the sex workers, but rather cares for them and admires them.

I found all three principal characters interesting in different ways- Sin-Dee and Alex are over-the-top, yet sensitive. While Sin-Dee is aggressive and vengeful, Alex is the kinder of the two and the more sensible and rational.

She is a sex worker but aspires for more out of life. Razmik is even more interesting- does he have a fetish? Is he shameful for spending money on prostitutes while supporting a wife and child?

All of the characters are victimized in one form or another and all are dysfunctional- at the same time, they are all weirdly likable.

I witnessed moments of Quentin Tarantino’s film style coming across the screen- most notably in the coffee-shop scenes (the beginning and final scenes) as all hell breaks loose, and the characters delve into all sorts of crazy behavior.

Tangerine is a sweet tale about friendship too.

It is a memorable and powerful film experience.

In the end, all the characters are hurting, living such sad lives, especially since the time is present-day Christmas Eve, which might make this film sound depressing, but it is not.

I found it almost uplifting in a way.

Tangerine (2015) is a completely original, groundbreaking film that I hope will be remembered and appreciated fifty years from now.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Feature, Best Director-Sean Baker, Best Female Lead-Kitana Kiki Rodriguez, Best Supporting Female-Mya Taylor (won), Piaget Producers Award