Category Archives: Thriller

1980 Films, Action, Crime Thriller, Mob, New York City, Summer, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Top 50 Films

Gloria-1980

Leave a comment

Gloria-1980

Director John Cassavetes

Starring Gena Rowlands

Top 250 Films #32

Scott’s Review #166

Reviewed September 9, 2014

Grade: A

Gloria (1980) is an action/thriller film that features the standard action-crime thriller elements, including shoot-em-ups, guns blazing, and clichéd fare.

It also features an interesting, appealing lead character, a gritty atmosphere, and witty dialogue.

It is a significantly better film than most indistinguishable action films.

Directed and written by independent film master John Cassavetes, who wanted to make a more conventional, mainstream film than was typical for him- think the very left of center, brilliant A Woman Under the Influence, also starring Gena Rowlands.

Gloria was the perfect film for him to create with Rowlands as the focal point.

Made in 1980, Gloria perfectly captures New York City of that era.

New York City was gritty, dirty, rough, crime-infested, violent, and chaotic, and the film frequently moves through Manhattan, the Bronx, and New Jersey, with many scenes shot directly on New York streets.

Several other scenes are set in dingy apartments, hotels, seedy bars, and rundown streets, and they effectively portray a gloomy atmosphere.

The film’s cinematography is perfect.

The heart of the film is Rowlands (Cassavetes’s wife), who delivers a mesmerizing performance as a former mob girlfriend who, by circumstance, must protect a young Hispanic boy from execution by the mob because of an informant’s book he clings to for dear life.

No other actress could have played this role of a tough-talking, brash New Yorker as well as Rowlands does.

The boy’s father, played by Buck Henry, is a scared accountant with ties to a company fronted by the mob.

He fears his entire family will be murdered and hands his kid over to Gloria. Julie Carmen gives a brief but effective performance as Phil’s frazzled mother.

I wish Henry and Carmen had more screen time and fleshed-out characters, because both had huge potential.

The film belongs to Rowlands- she is no-nonsense, tough, and so convincing in the part.

I also enjoyed the casting of John Adames as the kid, Phil. Many critics inexplicably panned his performance, and I’m not sure why.

I also love the unique opening credits, as intense folk/jazz music plays over watercolor portraits that turn into the skyline of New York City, with a melancholy, eerie quality.

Amid the violence, a sweet bond develops between Gloria and Phil that is neither too sentimental nor cheesy.

A great, compelling late 1970s/early 1980s film with definite Godfather and Dirty Harry influences in its texture and characters, especially in some of the mobster roles.

The film’s appeal is that it has a heart without ever delving into schlock. Surprisingly rated only PG, it is gritty, but not lewd or harsh, and seems dirtier than it is, with barely any filthy language.

The chemistry and heartfelt connection between Gloria and Phil are darling without being too sappy or safe.

Gloria (1980) is a fast-paced, action gem that is both appealing and tough.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Gena Rowlands

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Actress- Drama- Gena Rowlands

1943 Films, Favorite Film of the Year, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Top 50 Films

Shadow of a Doubt-1943

Leave a comment

Shadow of a Doubt-1943

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Joseph Cotten, Teresa Wright

Top 250 Films #37

Scott’s Review #117

60010878

Reviewed July 17, 2014

Grade: A

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) is a black-and-white Alfred Hitchcock film set in a quaint California town, where a killer lurks. The town is idyllic and wonderful: People attend church on Sundays and meet at the drug store for ice cream sodas.

The film was shot on location in a small town in California, rather than on a soundstage, adding considerable authenticity.

The Newton family is at the center of the thriller, led by Charlie (Teresa Wright), a young woman who idolizes her recently visiting Uncle, also named Charlie (Joseph Cotton). They are very close- almost like father and daughter.

When Uncle Charlie is suspected of being the notorious Merry Widow Murderer, Charlie is conflicted. Could her Uncle be the murderer?

Shadow of a Doubt is one of Hitchcock’s more straightforward films, and the town itself is a huge plus. It’s quiet and family-oriented- what could go wrong? But evil pervades the city, and events slowly begin to turn dark.

A scene in which the family sits down for a quiet meal that turns into a conversation about death is famous and influential. The train sequence is nicely shot. There is also a fantastic side plot involving two friends playing an innocent game of “How would I murder you?”, unaware of the irony of the game itself.

The film is not as flashy or complex as other Hitchcock films, specifically Vertigo (1958), but that aspect works to its credit.

Hitchcock adored the idea of a small town with foreboding secrets, and this film is quite a gem.

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) is a good, old-fashioned thriller and a must-see for Hitchcock fans.

1951 Films, Favorite Film of the Year, Film noir, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Top 50 Films

Strangers on a Train-1951

Leave a comment

Strangers on a Train-1951

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Farley Granger, Robert Walker

Top 250 Films #43

Scott’s Review #318

70002912

Reviewed January 2, 2016

Grade: A

A thrill-ride-per-minute film, Strangers on a Train is a classic suspense story filled with tension galore, a great Alfred Hitchcock film from 1951 that marked the onset of the “golden age of Hitchcock,” which lasted throughout the 1950s and 1960s.

A British version of the film exists somewhere, but I have yet to see it.

The American version is a brilliant, fast-paced experience featuring complex and interesting characters, including one of the greatest villains in screen history, and a riveting, heart-pounding plot.

Who can forget the essential ominous phrase “criss-cross”?

The film begins with a clever shot of two pairs of expensive shoes emerging from individual taxi cabs. Both are men, well-to-do and stylish.  They board a train and sit across from each other, accidentally bumping their feet.

We are then introduced to the two main characters: tennis star Guy Haines (Farley Granger) and wealthy Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker). They engage in conversation, and immediately, we become aware that Bruno is assertive and Guy is more passive.

Ultimately, Bruno manipulates Guy into thinking they will exchange murders- Bruno will kill Guy’s unfaithful wife, Miriam, while Guy will murder Bruno’s hated father.  While Bruno takes this dire “deal” seriously, Guy thinks Bruno is joking.

A psychological complexity of the film is the implied relationship between Guy and Bruno. Indeed, there are sexual overtones as flirtation and bonding immediately develop while they converse on the train.

They are complete opposites, which makes their relationship compelling—the devil and the angel, if you will. The mysterious, profound connection between these two men fascinates throughout the film.

Robert Walker makes Bruno a deliciously villainous character. He is devious, clever, manipulative, and even comical at times. His wickedness is mesmerizing, to the point that the audience roots for him.

Hitchcock wisely makes the victim, Miriam (wonderfully played by Laura Elliot), devious, adding to Bruno’s rooting value during her death scene. His character is troubled and almost rivals Norman Bates and Hannibal Lecter as a lovable, evil villain.

Later in the film, when Guy is playing tennis, he gazes into the stands to see the spectators turning left and right in tandem with the moving tennis ball, and the audience sees a staring straight ahead, immersed in the sea of swaying heads.

It is a highly effective, creepy scene.

The pairing of Guy and his girlfriend, Anne (a seemingly much older Ruth Roman, and interestingly, despised by Hitchcock), does not work. Could this be a result of the implied attraction between Bruno and Guy? Or is it a coincidence?

Roman’s casting was forced upon Hitchcock by the Warner Bros. studio.

Hitchcock reveals his “mommy complex,” a common theme in his films, as we learn that there is something off with Bruno’s mother, played by Marion Lorde, but the exact oddity is tricky to pin down.

She and Bruno comically joke about bombing the White House, which gives the scene a jarring, confusing edge. Is she he reason that Bruno is diabolical?

The theme of women’s glasses is used heavily in Strangers On A Train. Miriam, an eyeglass wearer, is strangled while we, the audience, witness the murder through her dropped glasses. The scene is gorgeous and cinematic in black and white and continues to be studied in film schools everywhere.

Later, Anne’s younger sister, Barbara (comically played by Hitchcock’s daughter, Pat Hitchcock), who also wears glasses, becomes an essential character as Bruno is mesmerized by her likeness to the deceased Miriam, and a mock strangulation game at a dinner party goes awry.

The concluding carnival scene is high-intensity and contains impressive special effects for 1951.

The spinning-out-of-control carousel, panicked riders, and cat-and-mouse chase scene leading to a deadly climax make for a fantastic end to the film.

Strangers On A Train (1951) is one of Hitchcock’s best classic thrill films.

1964 Films, Favorite Film of the Year, Psychological Thriller, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Top 50 Films

Marnie-1964

Leave a comment

Marnie-1964

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Tippi Hedren, Sean Connery

Top 250 Films #45

Scott’s Review #180

60000769

Reviewed October 4, 2014

Grade: A

When evaluating Alfred Hitchcock’s many films, Marnie (1964) is one of the more complicated.

In recent years, it has earned more praise than it did at release, much like Vertigo (1958).

It features one of Hitchcock’s most complex psychological characters and is as much a character study as a psychological thriller.

Tippi Hedren stars as Marnie Edgar, a troubled young woman who travels from one financial company to another, using a false identity and her good looks to insinuate herself into a clerical job without references.

Over time, she steals thousands from the companies by gaining their trust.

Eventually, Mark Rutland, a handsome, wealthy widower and client of one of the firms, catches her, played by Sean Connery.

Infatuated with Marnie, he strikes a deal with her: She will marry him, but he will not turn her over to the police.

Marnie gives most of her stolen money to her disabled mother, Bernice, in Baltimore, played by Louise Latham.

Why Bernice is crippled, avoids affection with Marnie, and why Marnie despises most men and is terrified of the color red make up the film’s mysterious nature.

Diane Baker is compelling as Lil, Mark’s sister-in-law and somewhat of a nemesis to Marnie.

The film features three scenes I love each time I watch it.

In one scene, Marnie hides in the bathroom and waits until all the employees have gone home for the night. She carefully steals money from her employer’s safe and prepares to make her escape.

Suddenly, she notices an unaware cleaning woman with her back to Marnie, yet blocking the exit.

How will Marnie escape unnoticed? The surprise in this scene is excellent. Hitchcock plays the scene without music, which adds to the tension—brilliant.

In an emotional scene later in the film, Marnie’s horse, Forio, is injured, and a sobbing Marnie must choose between killing her beloved friend or letting him suffer until a veterinarian can be summoned.

It is a heart-wrenching scene.

The third scene takes place at a racetrack as Marnie and Mark enjoy one of their first dates. However, the date is ruined when a former employer of Marnie’s, who has been victimized, recognizes her and makes accusations.

Marnie turns from a sweet girl to an ice queen seamlessly.

A huge controversial aspect of the film is that, while not shown, it is heavily implied that Mark rapes Marnie on their honeymoon. The following day, Marnie attempts suicide but is rescued by Mark.

The scene was carefully filmed so viewers wouldn’t hate Mark. Perhaps saving Marnie the next morning lessens what he did the night before in the eyes of the audience? This is open to debate.

Hedren excels at portraying the complexities of Marnie’s character throughout the entire film and does an excellent job in a demanding role.

As excellent as Hedren is (and she is fantastic), I struggle to accept her as a poor, icy criminal, and this issue comes up each time I watch the film.

Could this be a result of having identified Hedren as the sophisticated, glamorous socialite in The Birds made a year earlier so many times? This is quite possibly so.

The set of Marnie was reportedly fraught with tension during filming.

This tension was mainly between Hedren and Hitchcock, who reportedly refused to speak to each other throughout filming. This may have added to the tension, and Hedren appears anxious.

Could this be art imitating life? As the ending nears, Marnie and Mark align and form a team as they try to avoid the police altogether; Mark, more or less, becomes an accomplice.

The final reveal seems rushed. It takes place mostly in flashbacks and wraps up quickly. Marnie has blocked much of her childhood from her memory, which seems far-fetched.

Still, Marnie (1964) is a complex, psychological classic from Hitchcock’s heyday.

1946 Films, Favorite Film of the Year, Film noir, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Top 50 Films

Notorious-1946

Leave a comment

Notorious-1946

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Cary Grant, Ingrid Bergman

Top 250 Films #48

Scott’s Review #265

813874

Reviewed August 11, 2015

Grade: A

Notorious is a classic Alfred Hitchcock film from 1946, a period that preceded his golden age of brilliant works in the 1950s and 1960s, but it is a marvel all the same.

Perhaps not as wonderful as future works, but that is like comparing prime rib to filet mignon. Shot in black and white, the subject matter is familiar to Hitchcock fans- political espionage.

The film contains elements familiar with Hitchcock’s films- romance with suspenseful plot.

Starring two greats of the time (and Hitchcock stalwarts), Carey Grant and Ingrid Bergman, one is immediately enthralled by the chemistry between the characters they play- T.R. Devlin and Alicia Huberman. Devlin, a government agent, recruits Alicia, per his bosses, to spy on a Nazi sympathizer, Alex Sebastian (Claude Raines), who is affiliated with her father.

Her father, having been convicted and sentenced to prison, has committed suicide. Alicia’s allegiance is questioned as she takes drastic measures to prove her loyalty and complete the hated assignment.

The film is set between Miami and the gorgeous Rio De Janeiro, where much of the action is set at Alex’s mansion.

A blueprint for his later works, Hitchcock experiments with creative camera shots and angles- specifically the wide and high shot overlooking an enormous ballroom.

I also love the airplane scene- subtly, Hitchcock treats the audience to background views of Rio from the view of the airplane as Devlin and Alicia converse.

The plane is slowly descending for landing, which allows for a slow, gorgeous glimpse of the countryside and landscape in the background.

Subtleties like these that may go unnoticed make Hitchcock such a brilliant director.

The character of Alicia is worth a study. Well known for his lady issues, did Hitchcock hint at her being an oversexed, boozy, nymphomaniac?

I did not think the character was written sympathetically, though, to be fair, she is headstrong and loyal in the face of adversity.

She parties hard, drives at 65 miles per hour while intoxicated, and falls into bed with more than one man. It is also implied that she has a history of being promiscuous.

Made in 1946, this must have been controversial during that period. The sexual revolution was still decades away.

Notorious also features one of Hitchcock’s most sinister female characters: Madame Sebastian (Leopoldine Konstantin). The woman is evil personified, and her actions are reprehensible. She is arguably the mastermind behind all of the dirty deeds and a fan of slow, painful death by poisoning.

My favorite scene is, without a doubt, the wine cellar scene. To me, it epitomizes good, old-fashioned suspense and edge-of-your-seat entertainment.

A cat-and-mouse game involving a secret rendezvous, a smashed bottle, a key, champagne, and the grand reveal enraptures this scene, which goes on for quite some time and is the climax.

Perhaps Notorious is not quite as great a film as Vertigo (1958), Psycho (1960), or The Birds (1963), but it is a top-notch adventure/thriller that ought to be watched and respected.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor- Claude Rains, Best Original Screenplay

1973 Films, Crime Thriller, Favorite Film of the Year, Film noir, Los Angeles, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Top 50 Films

The Long Goodbye-1973

Leave a comment

The Long Goodbye-1973

Director Robert Altman

Starring Elliott Gould, Nina van Pallandt

Top 250 Films #50

Scott’s Review #830

Reviewed November 14, 2018

Grade: A

Nearly a full-fledged character study of one man’s moral fiber, The Long Goodbye (1973) is an edgy piece of direction by the famous mastermind Robert Altman.

The setting of Los Angeles’ underbelly is both fabulous and practical, as is the dim lighting and excellent camera work prevalent throughout. The film is not cheery, but rather bleak, which suits me just fine, given the dreary locale.

Perhaps a more obscure Altman offering, but the film sizzles with zest and authenticity.

The film is based on a story written by Raymond Chandler in 1953.

Altman, however, opts to change the setting from 1950 to present times- 1970s Los Angeles and present a film noir experience involving deceit and shenanigans where all is not as it seems.

I think this is a wise move, and I could not help but draw many comparisons (mainly the overall story) to Chinatown (1974), released the year after The Long Goodbye, but a film much better remembered.

Elliott Gould is wonderful as Phillip Marlowe, a struggling private investigator and insomniac. He is asked by a friend, Terry Lennox, for a ride to the Mexico border one night and agrees to do the favor.

This leads to a mystery involving police, gangsters, and Eileen and Roger Wade after Phillip is questioned regarding his connection to Terry, who is accused of murdering his wife, Sylvia.

The seedy side and complexities of several characters are revealed as the story unfolds and the plot gradually thickens.

My favorite aspects of The Long Goodbye are not necessarily the primary storytelling, though the writing is filled with tension.

As the film opens, an extended sequence featuring a “conversation” between Phillip and his cat is both odd and humorous. The finicky feline refuses to eat anything other than one brand of cat food.

As Phillip tries to reason with the cat by talking and meowing, he is forced to venture out in the middle of the night to an all-night grocery store.

Altman, known for allowing his actors free rein with improvised dialogue, appears to let Gould experiment during this scene.

Phillip’s neighbors, a bunch of gorgeous twenty-something females, seem to do nothing except exercise on their balcony, get high, and ask him to buy them brownie mix for a “special occasion”.

As they stretch topless, usually in the background and almost out of camera range, they are a prime example of an interesting nuance of the film. The girls are mysterious but have nothing to do with the actual plot, adding even more intrigue to the film.

In one of the most frightening scenes in cinematic history and one that could be straight from The Godfather (1972), crazed gangster, Marty Augustine (Mark Rydell), slices the beautiful face of his girlfriend to prove a point to Marlowe.

In a famous line, he utters, “That’s someone I love. You, I don’t even like.” The violent act is quick, unexpected, and fraught with insanity.

Finally, the film’s conclusion contains a good old-fashioned twist worthy of any good film noir. In the end, the big reveal makes sense and begs to raise the question, “Why did we trust this character?”

In addition to the viewer being satisfied, Marlowe also gets a deserved finale and proves that he cannot be messed with or taken for a fool.

The Long Goodbye is undoubtedly the best film of Gould’s career. With a charismatic, wisecracking persona, the chain-smoking cynic is considered a loser by most.

He is an unhappy man and down on humanity, but still wants to do what is right. He lives a depressed life with few friends and the company of only his cat.

While his neighbors marginally entertain him, he goes about his days only barely getting by emotionally. Gould is brilliant at relaying all these qualities within his performance.

The addition of the title theme song in numerous renditions is a major win for the film, and something that becomes more noticeable with each viewing. The ill-fated gangster’s girlfriend hums along to the song playing on the radio at one point, and a jazz pianist plays a rendition in a smoky bar.

This is an ingenious approach by Altman and gives the film a greater sense of mystery and style.

There is no question among cinema lovers that Robert Altman is one of the best directors of all time.

In his lengthy catalog of rich, experimental films, The Long Goodbye (1973) is neither the best-remembered nor the most recognizable.

I implore film fans, especially fans of plodding mystery and intrigue, to check this great steak dinner of a film out.

1972 Films, Action, Crime Thriller, Guy Films, Heist, Summer, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

The Getaway-1972

Leave a comment

The Getaway-1972

Director Sam Peckinpah

Starring Steve McQueen, Ali MacGraw

Top 250 Films #58

Scott’s Review #439

539604

Reviewed July 3, 2016

Grade: A

The Getaway (1972) is a classic action film directed by Sam Peckinpah, known for films such as Straw Dogs and The Wild Bunch.

His films are known as “guy films” and are a rather violent experience. The Getaway is no exception, though it is not immensely brutal either. Still, there is more than one macabre scene and one dastardly villain.

For fans of Peckinpah, The Getaway is a must-see.

The film features Steve McQueen and Ali MacGraw, who are perfectly cast as lovers Doc and Carol McCoy.

Their chemistry was inescapable, and art mirrored life: they were embroiled in a torrid love affair during the shoot, and later they married.

We meet Doc in a Texas prison, where his parole has just been denied. Doc and Carol make a deal with corrupt businessman Jack Benyon to secure Doc’s release.

One stipulation is that Doc participates in a bank heist with two of Jack’s men (Rudy and Frank).

The heist goes off, but things go awry, and Doc and Carol head for El Paso with a large sum of money, being pursued by Rudy and a double-cross attempt by Jack.

Rudy kidnaps veterinarian Harold and his young wife Fran (Sally Struthers) to aid him with his injuries, taking them along as he pursues Doc and Carol.

Amid the already complicated plot, a con man attempts to steal Doc and Carol’s money.

Doc and Carol are clearly the film’s heroes and are meant to be rooted for, and the characters work very well together. Yes, they are criminals, but they are portrayed as lovely and as not hurting anyone who does not deserve it.

Doc does spare Rudy’s life at one point, and I think this only reinforces Doc’s appeal as an antihero.

The love story is also a significant aspect of the filmmaking, making Doc and Carol likable. A few sweet, tender scenes of their romance are mixed in, adding a nice balance to the otherwise testosterone-fueled events.

The Getaway features spectacular editing, particularly at the beginning of the film, where we watch Doc in prison go through his day-to-day rituals, seamlessly interwoven with other stories in the movie.

The musical score matches the editing perfectly, adding a provocative element of intrigue. These components add the necessary elements to a film like this- edge-of-your-seat!

I love the Texas setting.

Characters are constantly traveling to get somewhere- either by train, by car, or on foot- so we see much of the Texas countryside, almost giving The Getaway a Western flavor.

It is certainly a hot, humid environment, though McQueen always wears a sophisticated suit, and MacGraw looks stylish and put together.

And from a prop perspective, I never tire of seeing those early 1970s sedans driving at high speeds.

Unfortunately, as with most of Peckinpah’s films, he doesn’t portray women in a positive light, though Carol is one of his strongest female characters.

Yet, in one tough scene, she is smacked around by Doc after he realizes she slept with Jack to ensure his release from prison.

The most confusing and weak character is Fran. In a strange bit of writing, she inexplicably falls madly in love with her kidnapper, Rudy, even as he abuses and humiliates her, while her husband is around.

This is odd and tough to watch, and not the best part of The Getaway.

Her character is not developed well, and it is head-shaking that she feels any passion for Rudy.

The heart of the film belongs to Doc and Carol as they are on the lam for much of the time, and this is a successful part of The Getaway- hence the title.

Will they get caught? Will they escape?

The characters remind me of Bonnie and Clyde, so we wonder whether Doc and Carol will meet the same fate, but of course we like them, so we don’t want that.

The Getaway (1972) is a fast-paced, down-home, red-blooded sort of action film. It is stylized, gritty, and sometimes violent.

The chicken wing scene between Rudy, Fran, and Harold starts light and then turns ugly, adding to the film’s unpredictable nature.

A supreme offering by Peckinpah.

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Original Score

1955 Films, Favorite Film of the Year, Gothic, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

The Night of the Hunter-1955

Leave a comment

The Night of the Hunter-1955

Director Charles Laughton

Starring Robert Mitchum, Shelley Winters

Top 250 Films #61

Scott’s Review #351

804679

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The Night of the Hunter (1955) is a fairy tale for adults. Although it is categorized as a thriller, it certainly teeters on the edge of being a horror film. In addition to being well-written, it also contains breathtaking cinematography.

Made in the mid-1950s, it is shot in black and white and tells the tale of good versus evil in a small town. The film is a masterpiece and one of my all-time favorites.

The film is both creepy and intelligent, and director Charles Laughton is responsible for its considerable success. Although it was not a success upon release, it has only finally received its due admiration as the years pass.

The film is way ahead of its time.

It is based on the 1953 novel by Davis Grubb.

The time is the 1930s, and the setting is rural West Virginia along the Ohio River. Ben Harper, a local family man, robs a bank and hides the stolen money inside his daughter’s doll.

His son and daughter (John and Pearl) are central characters in the story. Caught, Ben is out of the picture, leaving his wife, Wilma (Winters), vulnerable and alone.

A serial killer, Reverend Harry Powell (Mitchum), a misogynist, is on the loose disguised as a preacher. In prison with Ben, he knows the money is hidden and is determined to find out where it is. He has designs on wooing Wilma.

When dire events occur, John and Pearl are left along the river to seek refuge with a kindly older woman, Rachel Cooper (Lillian Gish).

The film is majestic, haunting, and artistic. Each scene seemingly glows as the dark black-and-white colors mix gorgeously with tranquility despite the dark tone of the subject matter.

The Night of the Hunter also has a dream-like visual quality. In one pivotal scene, we see a dead body submerged at the bottom of the river. The scene is horrific, with bulging eyes and bloating beginning to set in, but it is also creatively beautiful.

The flowing hair of the victim and the posture are mesmerizing scenes that stick with you for some time.

Poetic and a sense of good versus evil, this is clearly laid out as Powell has two words imprinted on the knuckles of each hand: “L-O-V-E” and “H-A-T-E.”  These words form the basis of the film, as both can be applied to the characters.

My favorite scene is when John and Pearl travel along the Ohio River, fleeing from their rival. The shapes of the trees mirrored by the flowing river are incredible, and I can watch this scene again.

A thriller, written intelligently well, with creativity for miles, is a recipe for pure delight. Director Laughton directed only this one film, encouraging creative collaboration and participation from his actors, which is evident in the resulting masterpiece.

The Night of the Hunter (1955) has had a profound influence on numerous directors.

1986 Films, Favorite Film of the Year, Independent, Independent Thriller, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Blue Velvet-1986

Leave a comment

Blue Velvet-1986

Director David Lynch

Starring Kyle MacLachlan

Top 250 Films #65

Scott’s Review #343

319022

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Based on a 1963 Bobby Vinton tune of the same name, Blue Velvet (1986) is an independent noir thriller directed by David Lynch, the master of the weird and unusual.

It is surreal in look and so mysterious- almost a precursor to Lynch’s fantastic television series, Twin Peaks. I adore the film and discover new facets with each viewing.

Though it’s not an easy or mainstream watch, the payoff can be big, and you know you are watching a deep, layered film.

The story can be tough to follow, but it goes something like this: Beneath a cheerful suburban surface, evil lurks.

College student Jeffrey (MacLachlan) discovers a severed human ear lying in an abandoned lot, delivers it to police detective John Williams, and reconnects with the detective’s daughter, Sandy (Dern).

Sandy, privy to secret information about the case, reveals that a mysterious woman, Dorothy Valens (Isabella Rossellini), lives in an apartment that holds the key to the case. Jeffrey and Sandy decide to investigate further, only to get themselves into deeper trouble as the mystery deepens.

The film’s dreamlike quality is very compelling and intriguing. Layer upon layer comes to the forefront as the story unfolds, and very few answers are ever provided, which adds to the mystery and is really the point of the film.

Many aspects are open to interpretation.

The relationship between Jeffrey and the much older Dorothy is fascinating, but what about his chemistry with the innocent Sandy? And who is the Yellowman? When the youngsters see Dorothy perform “Blue Velvet” at her nightclub, it is a great moment in the film.

Frank Booth, played by Dennis Hopper, must be one of the strangest characters in film history, as he is maniacal and bizarre beyond measure.

With his unusual sexual tastes- he enjoys inhaling gas and sadomasochism- he is a unique character. He is also quite abusive to Dorothy.

The film is a throwback to classic film noir from the 1950s, and a clear femme fatale, Dorothy, is central to the film.

I find the film so compelling since its subject matter is secrets. Many secrets and dark corruption, along with various forms of left-of-center dealings, reside in this small North Carolina town, and the audience must put the pieces of this puzzle together.

Oscar Nominations: Best Director-David Lynch

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Dennis Hopper, Best Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Feature, Best Director-David Lynch, Best Male Lead-Dennis Hopper, Best Female Lead-Isabella Rossellini (won), Laura Dern, Best Screenplay, Best Cinematography

1971 Films, Action, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Best Picture-Drama Golden Globe Winners, Crime Thriller, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

The French Connection-1971

Leave a comment

The French Connection-1971

Director William Friedkin

Starring Gene Hackman

Top 250 Films #71

Scott’s Review #342

60011660

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The French Connection was the first R-rated film to win the Academy Award for Best Picture in 1971.

This praise, similar to The Silence of the Lambs being the first horror film to win Best Picture in 1991, is well worth noting and quite honorary.

The film succeeds, for other critics and me, because of its unique camerawork, shot in a documentary style, and its quick edits.

It is much more intricate in every way than the traditional crime thriller.

Gene Hackman stars as the feisty detective, Jimmy “Popeye” Doyle, who, along with his partner, Buddy “Cloudy” Russo (Scheider), is determined to crack the case of a massive heroin smuggling syndicate from France.

The narcotics are flowing into New York City, and the duo is determined to get to the bottom of the drug ring, figuring out who the mastermind is and defeating their foe.

The primary culprit is a suave French drug lord named Alain Charnier, brilliantly played by Fernando Rey.

Throughout the film, the action is nonstop, traversing Manhattan and Brooklyn by subway and car as Popeye becomes increasingly obsessed with the case.

Director William Friedkin, who also directed the legendary 1973 film, The Exorcist, deserves a heap of praise for creating a movie of this caliber.

All can enjoy The French Connection, and it is well beyond the limitations of a “guy film”- it is much more than that.

The editing and frenetic pacing work wonders for the film, all the while not ruining the experience or overshadowing the good plot. Quite simply, the film is a chase across New York City.

Friedkin distinguishes the boroughs by making Manhattan seem sophisticated and stylish, while Brooklyn comes across as dirty, grizzled, and drug-laden.

The settings are perfect.

The best scene in the film is the well-known car chase throughout New York City. Popeye is determined not to lose his man, the man riding in a subway on an elevated platform.

Popeye steals a car and proceeds to chase the subway, narrowly missing pedestrians, including a woman with a baby carriage, as he recklessly weaves in and out of traffic at a high speed to keep pace with the train.

This is a phenomenal scene as the excitement and tension continue to build.

The film’s conclusion and final scene are cynical, leaving the audience perplexed and unsure of what has transpired.

The French Connection invites reasonable discussion and even interpretation, a novel aspect of the action film.

Providing a tremendous glimpse into 1970s Manhattan and Brooklyn, The French Connection is an exciting film that oozes with thrills, car chases, and a good story.

The film is unique in style and still holds up incredibly well- one of my favorites in the action genre.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-William Friedkin (won), Best Actor-Gene Hackman (won), Best Supporting Actor-Roy Scheider, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Sound, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing (won)

Golden Globe Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture-Drama (won), Best Director-William Friedkin (won), Best Actor-Drama-Gene Hackman (won), Best Screenplay

1955 Films, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

To Catch A Thief-1955

Leave a comment

To Catch A Thief-1955

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Cary Grant, Grace Kelly

Top 250 Films #73

Scott’s Review #455

60000732

Reviewed July 24, 2016

Grade: A

Cary Grant starred in five Alfred Hitchcock films in his day, and 1955’s To Catch A Thief is right smack in the middle of Hitchcock’s prime period of masterful pictures.

Grace Kelly (her third and final Hitchcock film) co-stars, making this film a marquee treat, as both actors were top-notch in their heyday and had great chemistry.

While not my all-time favorite Hitchcock film, To Catch a Thief has mystery, a whodunit, and some of the most gorgeous cinematography of the French Riviera.

The breathtaking surroundings are my favorite part of this film.

Grant plays John Robie, aka. “The Cat,” an infamous jewel thief who has now gone clean. He spends his days quietly atop the French Riviera growing grapes and flowers and keeping out of trouble.

When a new jewel thief begins to strike wealthy tourists, Robie is immediately under suspicion by the police.

He is forced to prove his innocence by catching the real thief in the act, as the thief uses the same style of stealing as Robie once did.

Amid this drama, Robie meets the beautiful heiress Frances (Kelly) and her interfering mother, Jessie Stevens (Jessie Royce Landis), which leads to romance.

Although Grant could be old enough to be Kelly’s father, we immediately accept Robie and Frances as the perfect couple- she is sophisticated, stylish, and rich, and he equally has a bad-boy edge.

To Catch A Thief has a strong romantic element and a glamorous and wealthy tone. After all, the subject matter at hand- jewels- equates to lavish set decorations, women dripping in expensive jewelry, and a posh resort among the gorgeous French waters.

The supporting characters are interesting, too. A triangle emerges as Frances plays catty with a young girl, Danielle, eager for Robie’s affection.

Danielle, much plainer looking than Frances, though no shrinking violet, holds her own in a match of wits with Frances as they bathe in the water one afternoon.

Frances’s mother, Jessie, provides tremendous comic relief as she attempts to bring Robie and Frances together. She is always searching for a handsome suitor for her daughter.

Finally, insurance man H.H. Hughson also contributes to the comic relief by begrudgingly providing Robie with a list of wealthy visitors with jewels.

In their playfully awkward lunch- delicious quiche is the meal of the day- at Robie’s place, Robie proves how Hughson himself is a thief of sorts to accomplish what he needs to get from Hughson.

Despite all of the positive notes, something about To Catch A Thief prevents it from being among my all-time favorite Hitchcock films. Perhaps it is because I never doubted Robie’s innocence, and if dissected, the caper is a bit silly.

I get the sense that the audience is supposed to question whether Robie is truly reformed or playing a game and is back to his dirty deeds, but I wasn’t fooled.

This is a minor gripe, but To Catch A Thief is a fantastic film.

The way the film is shot is almost like being on the French Riviera. Countless coastal shots of the skyline will amaze the viewer with breathtaking awe of how gorgeous the French countryside is and how romantic and wonderful it is.

This is my favorite part of To Catch A Thief.

The visuals of the film rival the story, as the costumes created by costume designer and Hitchcock mainstay Edith Head are simply lovely. And who can forget the costume ball near the conclusion?

Though the story might be the weakest and lightest element of the film,  who cares?

The visuals more than make up for any of that, as To Catch A Thief (1955) will please loyal fans of Hitchcock’s vast catalog.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Art Direction, Color, Best Cinematography, Color (won), Best Costume Design, Color

1970 Films, French, International, International Thriller, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

(Le Boucher) The Butcher-1970

Leave a comment

(Le Boucher) The Butcher-1970

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Stephane Audran, Jean Yanne

Top 250 Films #74

Scott’s Review #273

Reviewed September 14, 2015

Grade: A-

(Le Boucher) The Butcher is a French thriller released in 1970 that is slow-moving at first but builds to a dramatic crescendo as the film progresses, transforming from plodding to a cerebral mind-blower.

Mirroring and inspired by director Alfred Hitchcock, The Butcher is surprisingly not quite horror (based on the title, one might assume it is), but rather an intelligent, dreamy thriller.

Gorgeous schoolteacher Helene Daville is competent, confident, and filled with a zest for life. She tutors children who need extra help, laughs with them, and even lets one sip champagne at a wedding to try it. She enjoys living and occasionally embarking on adventures.

One day, at a wedding, she meets the local butcher, Paul Thomas, and they immediately hit it off as they tenderly walk home together. Cordial and kind, they develop a friendship and laugh together.

As time goes on, a series of killings begins to occur in the town.

Helene begins to suspect Paul of the murders and wrestles with her conflict between her budding love for him and her revulsion at the thought of being in love with a vicious murderer. Her conflict is the film’s point.

The relationship between Helene and Paul is an interesting dynamic and, I now realize, the reason for the picture’s slow pace. Helene and Paul enjoy a nurturing, caring courtship, and the film successfully achieves the intended slow build.

The murder mystery is secondary and serves to support the main plot. We know little- almost nothing- about the female victims. They are strangers to the audience, and the reason for their deaths is unknown.

The killer simply kills- no motivation is revealed. This is what makes the film so cerebral and mysterious.

The Butcher is a love story intertwined with a thriller. It is not a mainstream thriller in the conventional sense, and the final twenty or thirty minutes reeled me in completely and gave me great admiration for the film, which I had been hedging about throughout.

The meat of the film might have started an additional 30 minutes earlier, in my opinion, but then again, the slow build may have been intended to make the result more powerful.

The moral conflict, love versus hate, tenderness, affection, caring, devastation, and betrayal are all explored during this relatively brief finale.

Besides, the blurry camera shots and angles from the vantage point of an automobile driver traveling down a dark, tree-lined street are highly creative and unique.

The comparisons to Hitchcock are evident.

Helene is similar to Tippi Hedren’s character, “Melanie Daniels,” in The Birds. She is glamorous, alluring, blonde, tall, well-dressed, and the heroine of the film. Attractive and blonde are traits featured in many Hitchcock films.

Paul, on the other hand, reminds me of Rod Taylor’s Mitch, also from The Birds, though not as handsome or charismatic. Still, their relationship reminds me of the two of them as the chemistry oozes from the screen and a romance and thriller are combined.

The audience perceives Helene as a wholesome, wonderful person, but is she truly?

In the end, we are left questioning her true feelings and are left with a distaste in our mouths. Her choices confuse us, or is she simply a complex human being like each of us is?

The interesting aspect of The Butcher (1970) is that it leaves one questioning how we would handle Helene’s dilemma, and more importantly, how we would channel our feelings if faced with a similar predicament.

1966 Films, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Blow-Up-1966

Leave a comment

Blow-Up-1966

Director Michelangelo Antonioni

Starring David Hemmings, Vanessa Redgrave

Top 250 Films #75

Scott’s Review #305

60033579

Reviewed December 21, 2015

Grade: A

Blow-up is a mysterious and compelling 1966 (the spawn of more edgy films) thriller that undoubtedly influenced the yet-to-come 1974 masterpiece The Conversation, directed by Francis Ford Coppola, as both films are tense tales of intrigue focusing on technology as a tool to witness a murder.

This film is legendary director Michelangelo Antonioni’s first English-speaking film, and what a film it is.

Set in hip London in the 1960s, it is undoubtedly a fascinating portrayal of the fashion world. The story is about a fashion photographer named Thomas, who is in high demand. He revels in bedding women so they may have their photos taken by this rock star photographer and is chased around London by gorgeous women.

One day, he aborts a photo shoot because he is bored. He is not the nicest guy in the world, but an unlikable character.

But perhaps that is secondary or even intentional. One day, while walking in Maryon Park, he encounters a couple in the distance. They appear to be having a secret rendezvous and nervously kissing, so he begins photographing the woman, Jane (played by a very young Vanessa Redgrave). Jane realizes they have been snapped and is furious, demanding the film.

This sets off the mystery and the meat of the film.

The film is a tremendous achievement in cinematic intrigue. It is pretty psychological and open to much interpretation, which is its genius. The main questions are: “What exactly transpired in the park, and who is responsible?”

We feel little sympathy for Thomas, which perhaps is intentional. And what about Jane?

Talk about a mystery!

We know little about her beyond the fact that she has secrets, but is she responsible for the crime? Throughout the film, Thomas and Jane engage in a cat-and-mouse game, seemingly trying to outwit and outmaneuver each other.

The unique aspect of the film is that the viewer will often ask questions: “Was there even a crime committed?” “Are the events all in Thomas’s imagination, or has he misinterpreted the series”? One will revel in the magnificence of these questions.

I immediately recognized similarities to The Conversation (1974). Both feature one of the senses as a means of solving or realizing the crime committed—in The Conversation, it is hearing; in Blow-Up, it is sight.

In both, the main character uses these senses for a living, and both are arguably not the most likable characters. Both films feature mimes.  Both films are pretty cerebral, and both are cinema gems for the “thinking man.”

Blow-Up has weird, little intricate moments- a very tall female Russian model experiences an odd photoshoot with Thomas. Later,  a giggling pair of young girls end up in a grappling match with Thomas after asking him to take their photos.  A topless (from behind) Jane prancing around Thomas’s apartment is an unusual scene.

As a first-time viewer, I adored this film. It is a good example of a movie that requires multiple viewings to appreciate fully, and I look forward to doing just that.

A fantastic, creative achievement, Blow-Up (1966) is a masterpiece that can be dissected with each subsequent viewing.

Oscar Nominations: Best Director, Michelangelo Antonioni, Best Story, and Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen

1969 Films, French, International, International Thriller, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

La Femme Infidele-1969

Leave a comment

La Femme Infidele-1969

Director Claude Chabrol

Starring Stephane Audran, Michel Bouquet

Top 250 Films #77

Scott’s Review #397

220px-UnfaithfulWifePoster

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 by Adrian Lynde.

Having seen the remake a few times before watching the original, I cannot help but compare the two films, which is fun for me since they are vastly different, especially as I ponder each further.

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: they enjoy every luxury imaginable, a beautiful house, a stunning 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, a bored housewife, has embarked on an affair with Victor Pegalla, a writer living in Paris.

When Charles grows suspicious of Helene, he hires a private investigator to track her activities and uncover the truth about 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 somewhat 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 midpoint, the film takes 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? Indeed, 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 worth analyzing 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, and engaging, and left me thinking about the film, which is a perfect sign.

The remake, while very good, is more of a blockbuster-style 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.

1940 Films, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Favorite Film of the Year, Thriller, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Rebecca-1940

Leave a comment

Rebecca-1940

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Laurence Olivier, Joan Fontaine

Top 250 Films #96

Scott’s Review #345

895272

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The only Alfred Hitchcock film to win the coveted Best Picture Oscar trophy, Rebecca is a very early offering in the famous director’s repertoire.

His heyday being well ahead of this film (the 1950s and 1960s saw his best works), Rebecca is a blueprint of fine things to come and, on its own merits, is a great film.

Shot in black and white, the film is a descent into mystery, intrigue, and madness with a gothic look.

Laurence Olivier stars as wealthy widower Maxim de Winter, whose first wife, the title character Rebecca, died sometime before the story begins. In a clever twist, the character of Rebecca is never seen but takes on a life of her own through the tellings of the rest of the cast.

Joan Fontaine plays a nameless, naïve young woman who meets the sophisticated Maxim and marries him, becoming the new Mrs. de Winter.

This development is met with disdain by the servants who work in the Grand de Winter mansion, Manderley, a character in its own right.

The housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson), is cold and distant from Maxim’s new wife. She begins to reveal an obsession with the deceased Rebecca, which creates jealousy and intimidation for Fontaine’s character, to the point where she starts to doubt her sanity and decision-making capabilities.

Thanks to Hitchcock’s direction, Rebecca is a fantastic, old-style film with layers of mystery and wonderment. The mansion, Manderley, is central to the story, as is Mrs. Danvers’s creepy obsession with Rebecca.

She keeps the dead woman’s bedroom neat, a sort of shrine to her memory, so much so that, despite the time the film was made, 1940, a lesbian element is crystal clear to attention-paying audiences.

This aspect may not have been noticed at the time, but it is apparent now.

The film is also a ghost story since the central character, Rebecca, is never seen.

Could she be haunting the mansion? Is she dead, or is this a red herring created to throw the audience off the track? Is the new Mrs. de Winter spiraling out of control? Is she imagining the servant’s menacing actions? Is Maxim in on the tormentor, simply seeking a replacement wife for his steadfast love?

The pertinent questions are asked not only of the character but also of the audience as they watch with bated breath.

The climax and finale of Rebecca (1940) are fantastic.

As the arguably haunted mansion is engulfed in flames and the sinister Mrs. Danvers can be seen lurking near the raging drapes, the truth comes to the surface, leaving a memorable haunting feeling to audiences watching.

Rebecca is a true classic.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Outstanding Production (won), Best Director-Alfred Hitchcock, Best Actor-Laurence Olivier, Best Actress-Joan Fontaine, Best Supporting Actress-Judith Anderson, Best Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Art Direction, Black and White, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing, Best Special Effects

1972 Films, Adventure, Guy Films, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Deliverance-1972

Leave a comment

Deliverance-1972

Director John Boorman

Starring Jon Voight, Burt Reynolds

Top 250 Films #104   

Scott’s Review #324

433193

Reviewed January 5, 2016

Grade: A

Deliverance is a disturbing, gritty, yet terrific 1972 thriller directed by John Boorman and starring a all-male cast.

The film is an adventure, albeit a dark one, with a subject matter that is difficult to watch; the film takes dark twists along the way, which is also its beauty.

The viewer gets a harsh look at the backwoods of Georgia, along with gorgeous outdoor scenery.

A group of middle-aged, metropolitan businessmen, (played by Burt Reynolds, Jon Voight, Ned Beatty, and Ronny Cox), from Atlanta, decide to go rafting for a weekend getaway along a remote river in a desolate area of Georgia.

It is a guys’ weekend.

Lewis and Ed (Reynolds and Voight) are experienced canoeists and therefore lead the group.

The guys are jovial, but soon come upon a strange group of very poor townspeople. The men ask for a ride to the river, and one of the men, Drew (Cox), engages a peculiar young boy in a friendly duel of banjo versus guitar, but the boy then snubs Drew.

Later, events take a dark turn when a hunter-versus-hunted game emerges between the city-dwelling men and the country rednecks.

The film is interesting as it begins as a light-hearted adventure, nearly a buddy movie. The men laugh and joke as they relish the excitement of the weekend ahead.

The film then becomes slightly eerie during the banjo scene. We know that something strange or sinister has occurred, but we cannot put our finger on it.

Does the redneck boy hate the city men, or is he mentally challenged? Why the strange looks of the poor people of the tiny town?

From this point, Deliverance takes a dark turn as a brutal event occurs involving two deaths- one under mysterious circumstances- and a male rape scene that is disturbing in its intensity and humiliation.

The rawness of these aspects is unprecedented, especially when contrasted with the beautiful nature that is also at the forefront.

The acting is spot-on. In my opinion, Jon Voight makes this film and gives a layered, character-driven performance, so much so that the audience becomes invested in his life.

Ed is a good guy- arguably the kindest of the bunch- and is forced to become a different person as the film progresses, far from his true self.

He struggles in one scene- one beautifully peaceful scene- to shoot and kill a deer calmly grazing in the woods. He cannot do it. I love this scene as it shows Ed’s true nature. He doesn’t dare tell the other men about his perceived shortcomings.

Ironically, he is then forced to make another painful decision involving human life.

On the surface, it is a straightforward mainstream film, but as the film progresses, it becomes a layered masterpiece—happy, tragic, strange, depressing, peaceful, and brutal—like Deliverance (1972).

The film is a disturbing, memorable gem and deserves a watch to appreciate the golden age of 1970s cinema.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-John Boorman, Best Film Editing

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Picture-Drama, Best Director-John Boorman, Best Actor-Jon Voight, Best Screenplay, Best Original Song-“Dueling Banjos”

1999 Films, 90's Horror, Ghost Story, Horror, Psychological Horror, Psychological Thriller, Thriller, Top 20 Horror Films, Top 250 Films, Top 40 Horror Films

The Sixth Sense-1999

Leave a comment

The Sixth Sense-1999

Director M. Night Shyamalan

Starring Bruce Willis, Haley Joel Osment

Top 250 Films #106

Top 40 Horror Films #20

Scott’s Review #182

Reviewed October 8, 2014

Grade: A

The Sixth Sense is a psychological thriller/horror film directed by M. Night Shyamalan, released in 1999, about ghosts, and was an incredible box-office and critical success at the time of its release, making the line “I see dead people” universally imitated.

Bruce Willis stars as Dr. Malcolm Crowe, a successful and admired child psychologist who lives a perfect life with his wife, Anna, in Philadelphia.

Enjoying a romantic night at home, Malcolm and Anna are interrupted by a deranged former patient, played by an unrecognizable Donnie Wahlberg.

Malcolm is shot by the patient, who also shoots himself, and the story picks up a year later as Malcolm takes an interest in Cole, a troubled 9-year-old boy, played by Haley Joel Osment.

Cole is a peculiar boy- an outcast taunted at school- who can see the dead.

He’s worried about his overworked mother, Lynn, who Toni Collette plays.

Meanwhile, Malcolm and Anna appear to be experiencing marital problems and lack meaningful communication with each other.

Anna begins to be pursued by a new beau, much to Malcolm’s chagrin. Malcolm and Cole develop a special bond as Malcolm convinces Cole to speak to and help the ghosts that he sees rather than be terrified of them.

As the plot slowly unfolds, Cole helps a recently deceased girl named Kyra Collins, who is around his age. Kyra gives Cole a videotape that reveals she was murdered and proves who killed her.

The subsequent scene is my favorite- there is a haunting quality to it, and the camera follows the events interestingly, slowly, and sedately.

The setting is a service at Kyra’s house, where family and friends gather to pay respects and support Kyra’s parents. Malcolm and Cole arrive and present Kyra’s father with the plain videotape.

The entire scene is powerful in its simplicity, yet it carries great emotional weight. It is slow, but devastating in its climax and reveals. Small nuances are revealed- why is Kyra’s mother wearing bright red when the other guests are all wearing black? Will Kyra’s younger sister be the next victim?

Superlative filmmaking.

A scene involving Cole’s teacher is riveting: sensing aspects of his teacher’s past, Cole realizes his teacher had a stuttering problem as a child.

When his teacher is condescending towards Cole, the young boy explodes with rage and begins a chant of “tuttering Stanley,” which reduces the teacher to childhood traumas.

Yet another powerful scene involves Cole and his mother sitting in a car caught in traffic- Cole admits the truth of his skill of seeing dead people to her and introduces an emotional story to her as proof.

This is a scene where Toni Collette shines brightly.

Well over a decade since The Sixth Sense was released, most people know the twist and the subsequent surprise ending, and it is such a joy to go back, see the manipulations in the story and in individual scenes, add them up, and revel in the clever way Shyamalan puts them together.

The Sixth Sense is not dated and is quite fresh, holding up tremendously well, and I still get chills during the big reveal all these years later.

But beyond this pleasure, the film is beautifully written. Somewhere between horror and psychological thriller, it successfully tells a ghost story with interesting characters and jumps-out-of-your-seat thrills that are not contrived or predictable in the traditional horror-film way.

From an acting perspective, Bruce Willis is amazing and under-appreciated as Malcolm- he is calm, cool, and collected. His performance is quite understated as the inquisitive and pensive psychologist.

More praise should have been reaped for Willis.

Haley Joel Osment gives an astounding performance of a lifetime- he emits an image to the audience of being strange yet sympathetic, and he relays his very frightening fear of the ghosts so well that the pain and conflict he endures are evident on his face.

Toni Collette is effective as the scared, concerned, haggard mother. Collette and Osment were rewarded with Academy Award nominations- sadly, Willis was not.

Shyamalan was subsequently ridiculed for his later films (The Village, 2001, and Unbreakable, 2001) – perhaps the manipulation and trickery from The Sixth Sense angered some people.

The Sixth Sense (1999) is a film that remains with you for days, weeks, even years, and can be revisited and rediscovered for an intelligent, chilling good time.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-M. Night Shyamalan, Best Supporting Actor-Haley Joel Osment, Best Supporting Actress-Toni Collette, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Film Editing

1992 Films, Crime Thriller, Independent, Independent Thriller, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Reservoir Dogs-1992

Leave a comment

Reservoir Dogs-1992

Director Quentin Tarantino

Starring Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth, Chris Penn

Top 250 Films #107

Scott’s Review #1,332

Reviewed January 9, 2023

Grade: A

Reservoir Dogs (1992) is the film that began an essential transition in cinema history.

The 1980s saw way too many watered-down or oversaturated films with enough sappy or melodramatic thematics to make a seasoned cinema lover want to gag and run for a good television series.

The 1990s were different.

It’s impossible to think of the decade in film and not speak the name Quentin Tarantino, an iconoclast who took the crime thriller genre and riddled it with violence, dark humor, comic book-style characters, and dozens of other eccentricities and spun the world on its head.

It was needed.

But before anyone assumes Reservoir Dogs is the most fantastic Tarantino film, it’s not. Many list it as his weakest catalog entry.

That’s open to debate, of course, but in my view, the film’s influence accounts for much of my enjoyment of it.

It’s not as developed and stylized as Django Unchained (2012) or as powerfully fucked up or odd as Pulp Fiction (1995). Still, the rawness, the gore, the go-for-broke scenes shot like a play, and the small budget make watching Reservoir Dogs a reminder of the genius that is Tarantino.

Countless scenes mirror sequences to come in his later films, so much so that a game can be played to discover where something from another Tarantino film played out.

The film gave new recognition and merit to the independent film genre, which was huge and opened doors for young filmmakers everywhere who had ideas and just needed to get their films known.

The influence of Reservoir Dogs is immeasurable, and a double feature of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction is suggested.

Even though the latter was released later, most people saw Pulp Fiction first and then discovered Reservoir Dogs.

A group of unsavory thieves assembles to pull off the perfect diamond heist. It turns into a bloody shit show when one of the men turns out to be a police informer.

But which one is it, and who is responsible for the ambush?

As the group begins to question each other’s guilt, the tensions and suspicions threaten to blow up the situation before the police step in and save the day. But how many will die first?

Tarantino cleverly casts himself in a small role as Mr. Brown and refers to all the men by the same formal title. There are Mr. White (Harvey Keitel), Mr. Orange (Tim Roth), Mr. Blonde (Michael Madsen), Mr. Blue (Edward Bunker), and, finally, Mr. Pink (Steve Buscemi), who is my favorite of all.

In 1992, many scenes were shocking. When sinister Mr. Blonde cuts off the ear of a cop and prepares to set him on fire, the brutality and sadism are hard to watch.

The blood-soaked Mr. Orange lies in a pool of blood throughout nearly the entire film. As his skin turns whiter and whiter and his clothes redder and redder, it’s a masterful example of cinema and creativity.

The few exterior shots are in Los Angeles, which gives the film a low-budget, raw look.  It’s to be celebrated, as the potent sun and the city of angels’ grizzled veneer are on display.

I’m not a fan of the lack of female representation, but it only enhances the characters’ muscles and masculinity. As they sit in a diner mulling over whether tipping is necessary, we could easily be in a men’s locker room, witnessing banter about getting laid, or watching an episode of Seinfeld.

There are no romantic entanglements to mess up the plot, nor is there any need to rescue the girl from criminals. The closest we come is a couple of homoerotic moments of men embracing men amongst bullets and blood.

Reservoir Dogs succeeds as a whodunit, a heist film, and a vile look at the inhumanity of some of the characters.

The influence and relevance of Reservoir Dogs in 2023 are as abundant as they were in 1992. Cinema is like fine wine, and sometimes the more time that passes, the more appreciation a film warrants.

It’s not perfect and is unpolished and sometimes underdeveloped, but it’s been emulated so many times that it’s become a blueprint of the crime thriller.

Independent Spirit Awards: 1 win-Best Supporting Male-Steve Buscemi (won)

1954 Films, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Dial M for Murder-1954

Leave a comment

Dial M for Murder-1954

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Ray Milland, Grace Kelly

Top 250 Films #120

Scott’s Review #995

Reviewed February 28, 2020

Grade: A

A fabulous offering by stylistic director Alfred Hitchcock, Dial M for Murder (1954) arrived on the scene when the cinematic genius was at the height of his success in the United States, following his success in England.

The late 1950s and early 1960s revealed his best offerings, but this is no slouch. The film mixes thrills, double-crosses, and murder in a way only Hitchcock can —perfectly.

It is fast-paced and shot almost like a play, using primarily one set. It is based on the Broadway hit, which came first.

An English former tennis champion, Tony Wendice (Ray Milland), hatches a scheme to kill his wealthy but unfaithful wife, Margot (Grace Kelly), who’s embroiled in a liaison with handsome writer Mark Halliday (Robert Cummings).

When Tony’s plans go awry, he attempts the second act of deceit, but events spin out of control when Margot, Mark, and a sly Scotland Yard inspector (John Williams) begin putting the pieces together.

The film is popular because of its conventional, pure Hitchcock story. The viewer immediately knows who the killer is and his motivations—his hunger for wealth and jealousy of another man.

The most fun is when hiccups begin to form, and Tony must fly by the seat of his pants to cover his tracks and think of another way to seal Margot’s fate. If he cannot murder her, why can’t he send her to prison?

Milland is perfect in the role with eye shifts and head turns.

Set pieces, such as a key and a handbag, add zest to the film. The plot gets juicier and juicier when it is revealed that there are multiple keys. The flat where Tony and Margot reside is beautifully designed with state-of-the-art furniture and decorations, making the set a character.

Lavish curtains and French doors are utilized during the late-night attempted murder scene, which is thrilling to witness, leaving the viewer with heart palpitations.

The brilliance is that the viewer does not intend to hate Tony, at least not this viewer. While he is not likable, his motivations can be somewhat understood. Conversely, Margot and Mark are not heroes; their shenanigans come back to haunt them.

I dare say that Grace Kelly has had better roles in Hitchcock films. To Catch a Thief (1955) immediately comes to mind. Margot is not a particularly strong character and is relatively weak.

Dial M for Murder has commonalities with two other Hitchcock gems. As with Strangers on a Train (1951), a tennis star is utilized as a significant character, and twisted strangulation is the game. Also, a tit-for-tat technique is used.

Like the underappreciated Rope (1948), the one-take sequence style and the film’s potential as a stage play are noticeable traits. Those films are good ones to be in the same company with.

The final thirty minutes pass at breakneck speed as we wonder what will happen next. The cat-and-mouse activities are delightful and remind us that the film is essential and stripped down compared to his later films.

One set, good actors, and a full-throttle story do wonders to satisfy a fan. The camera movements and techniques are key to the entire film, as a shot here or there is timed with flawless precision. Hitchcock used 3-D filming, which was inventive for the time.

Although perhaps not as famous as Hitchcock’s delights like Psycho (1960), Vertigo (1958), or North by Northwest (1959), Dial M for Murder (1954) serves as much more than a warm-up act for those classics.

This film is one to remember with a fast pace, twists and turns, and good British sensibilities. Its setting is a stylish London flat, and the sophistication is suitable.

1999 Films, Cerebral, New York City, Psychological Thriller, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Eyes Wide Shut-1999

Leave a comment

Eyes Wide Shut-1999

Director Stanley Kubrick

Starring Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman

Top 250 Films #125

Scott’s Review #464

5670434

Reviewed August 14, 2016

Grade: A

Eyes Wide Shut is a film that I saw in theaters upon its release in 1999 and found fascinating, to say the least.

I have watched the film twice more in the years following, and it is even more fascinating today- it gets better and more nuanced with each viewing.

It is not an easy film to follow or explain, but it is rich in mystery and psychologically challenging.

A huge Stanley Kubrick fan, I found this film an eerie, plodding, cerebral psychological/sexual thriller.

The creepy piano score is very effective, and Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman are both excellent as affluent, yet restless, thirtysomethings living in New York City.

Cruise plays Bill, a successful doctor, and Kidman his gorgeous wife, both sexually restless and escaping into fantasy and otherwise real dalliances with other partners as they bicker about fidelity and jealousy as they lounge in their underwear and smoke pot.

It’s a film about relationships, temptation, and desire, and does not always make perfect sense, but boy, will it leave you thinking.

The supporting characters are some of the most interesting I’ve ever seen, as they compel and mystify, and one wonders how they fit with the main characters.

The naughty Long Island orgy is as bizarre and surreal as one can imagine.

The movie reminds me somewhat of The Ice Storm (1997), Magnolia (1999), and Mulholland Drive (1992), which is the ultimate compliment as the aforementioned are film masterpieces.

1987 Films, Psychological Thriller, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Fatal Attraction-1987

Leave a comment

Fatal Attraction-1987

Director Adrian Lyne

Starring Michael Douglas, Glenn Close

Top 250 Films #128

Scott’s Review #329

60010341

Reviewed January 8, 2016

Grade: A

Fatal Attraction is a film that was a monster smash hit at its time of release (1987) and has all the makings of a trashy, forgettable, slick Hollywood film from a disastrous period in Hollywood.

Guess what? It is a fantastic, gripping thriller that still holds up well after all these years.

Say what you will about Anne Archer, who is very good, but this film truly belongs to Michael Douglas and Glenn Close, who made it the believable thriller it is.

The subject matter is adultery, which made it the water-cooler topic of its day.

The plot is quite simple- Douglas plays Dan Gallagher, a successful New York City attorney, happily married to Beth (Archer), and raising a cute young daughter, Ellen.

When Beth and Ellen are away looking at new houses one rainy weekend, Dan embarks on a torrid affair with the sexy, successful businesswoman Alex (Close), not realizing that she is an unbalanced, needy woman who is not about to let Dan out of her life.

I adore this film in large part because it’s a film that can be debated.

Many seem to blame either Dan or Alex (mostly). Still, the question of monogamy can always be a topic of conversation after viewing this film, so in that regard, it is multi-faceted, rather than solely a well-acted Hollywood potboiler.

Was it okay for Dan to cheat? Does Beth overreact, or does she forgive too easily? Do we sympathize with Alex? Is she a victim?

The film is unique because many folks rooted for Dan and Alex, despite her being the other woman.

Many memorable lines and scenes make this film unforgettable; who can forget the infamous “boiling pet rabbit” scene or Alex’s line to Dan, “I will not be ignored, Dan.”

They are so ingrained in pop culture that thinking of these aspects of Fatal Attraction brings a smile.

The real selling point, though, is the natural, honest chemistry Douglas and Close share. Their scenes, especially the romantic weekend they spend together, flow so smoothly that you really root for them, and I instantly bought them as a couple.

Without this undeniable chemistry, Fatal Attraction would be a standard romantic thriller- and not much else. And the smoldering sexuality during their love scenes is erotic and intense.

Surely not suffering from the dreaded “1980s look”, Fatal Attraction is a gem that holds up very well and is a slick thrill-ride, easily watched and enjoyed time and again.

Dozens of carbon-copy films cropped up in the years that followed, but none were ever as fantastic as Fatal Attraction (1987).

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-Adrian Lyne, Best Actress-Glenn Close, Best Supporting Actress-Anne Archer, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Picture-Drama, Best Director-Adrian Lyne, Best Actress-Drama-Glenn Close, Best Supporting Actress-Anne Archer

1976 Films, Drama, Psychological Drama, Psychological Thriller, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Taxi Driver-1976

Leave a comment

Taxi Driver-1976

Director Martin Scorsese 

Starring Robert De Niro

Top 250 Films #130

Scott’s Review #776 

Reviewed June 20, 2018

Grade: A

It is incredibly tough to choose a favorite among Martin Scorsese’s films, since nearly all of them are exceptionally well-made.

Goodfellas (1990), Raging Bull (1980), and Taxi Driver (1976) come to mind immediately. Taxi Driver may be Scorsese’s darkest film of all.

The thriller is intense, dangerous, and ferocious, led by a riveting performance by Robert De Niro, a regular in the director’s earlier films. The film is nail-biting and compelling, and a great, character-driven watch.

Set in the bustling and (at that time) decrepit New York City shortly following the Vietnam War, Travis is a veteran suffering from some degree of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Lonely and angry, he works as an overnight taxi driver who falls for a snooty presidential campaign worker, Betsy (Cybill Shepherd).

He also forges a relationship of a protective nature with an underage prostitute, Iris (Jodie Foster). As he gradually spirals out of control due to the unhappiness surrounding him, he plots to kill Betsy’s boss while protecting Iris from her pimp (Harvey Keitel).

One great aspect of Taxi Driver is De Niro’s extremely strong performance. Along with Jake LaMotta’s later role in Raging Bull, Travis Bickle’s role is my second favorite of his.

With Bickle, he is unpredictable, on edge, and angry, as De Niro infuses the character with those qualities in a seamless fashion.

As he teeters on the brink of insanity and is ready to snap at any given moment, the character is impossible not to watch with both fear and marvel.

De Niro is that brilliant. 

While not to be outdone by the aforementioned negative and dangerous qualities, Travis also possesses a few benevolent traits, making the character complex.

Much of this comes through in the protective nature he develops toward Iris.

Almost like a big brother/kid-sister dynamic, the deranged man treats her with kindness rather than taking advantage of her as he easily could have.

The diner scene, which the two actors (De Niro and Foster) share, is rich in interesting dialogue and binds the characters together.

Travis also feels both love and hate toward Betsy (Cybill Shepherd). As a political volunteer for a potential presidential candidate, Travis first sees her while spying on her through the large glass windows where she works.

Coaxing her to accept a date, they have coffee and eventually attend a film together. Betsy is offended by the pornographic film, and their date goes south fast.

After a vicious showdown between the pair at the campaign office, Travis goes off the deep end and plots revenge.

Scorsese’s gritty, atmospheric approach in Taxi Driver is an enormous highlight of the film. Dingy, dark, and dangerous, the director creates numerous scenes that show just how seedy New York City was in the 1970s.

Working the night shift, sure to bring out the rancid and most decaying elements of the city, Travis experiences many cretins and undesirables in his work- and arguably is one of them!

Many scenes feature the notorious 42nd Street and its accompanying porn theaters that made New York City famous (or infamous!) at the time.

In one of the film’s most frightening (and best) scenes, Travis can get his hands on a gun. He practices drawing his weapon in the mirror, repeatedly uttering the famous line “You talkin’ to me?” as we wonder if he will pull the trigger.

The scene is fraught with cerebral tension and quite frightening. Later, when Travis shaves his head and brandishes a mohawk, his new look is downright terrifying.

Scorsese creates a dark world enriched by his incredible cinematography and astounding portrayals of compelling characters in dangerous, unstable times.

Taxi Driver (1976) is a treasure to watch closely and appreciate as a timeless piece of art. Instead of decaying in the vaults of cinema, the film gets better and better with age.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor-Robert De Niro, Best Supporting Actress-Jodie Foster, Best Original Score

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Actor- Drama- Robert De Niro, Best Screenplay

1973 Films, Crime Thriller, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Magnum Force-1973

Leave a comment

Magnum Force-1973

Director Ted Post

Starring Clint Eastwood, Hal Holbrook

Top 250 Films #148

Scott’s Review #336

60021588

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The follow-up to the original action thriller to end all action thrillers, Dirty Harry, 1973’s Magnum Force, is as good as the original in my opinion, but flies under the radar compared to the acclaimed Harry.

Both films are similar in style and grit, but Magnum Force holds sentimental memories for me, as I remember watching the film countless times on rainy Saturday afternoons as a kid.

The similarities abound between the two films, as the screenwriter and the score are by the same writer and composer, respectively.

Admittedly, Magnum Force is more conventional and less dirty than its predecessor.

Playing not just the same role of Harry Callahan, the grizzled, hard-nosed Inspector from Dirty Harry, but also Clint Eastwood plays him in quite the same manner.

Not one to blow anyone away with his dazzling acting talent, Eastwood is smart to keep to the status quo. The character is tough and no-nonsense, but has a take-prisoner vulnerability we love and admire.

In this chapter, a syndicate of vigilante cops is taking matters into their own hands by assassinating known criminals who have been let off the hook either by connections or some other form of loophole.

The pattern is for uniformed patrol officers to pull over a criminal for a mundane reason, only to shoot and kill them on the side of the road at point-blank range. They deserve it, but are the cops justified in their actions?

The appeal and mystery of the film is that the police officers wear dark helmets that hide their identities from the audience, adding a level of intrigue.

The film offers up a moral question: do the criminals get what they deserve, and do the police officers have the right to justify their actions?

Especially relevant is the final thirty minutes of the film, as Harry and the central “villain”, Lieutenant Briggs (Holbrook), have a standoff and discuss the topic.

Magnum Force is a shoot-’em-up action flick, so this debate is skirted over largely in favor of car chases and fight scenes. But the point can be thought about.

The best sequence of the film is the finale, as Callahan is lured to an abandoned garage and chased by three remaining cops. The big reveal is that Briggs is running the show, and as he drives around in his early 1970’s Ford LTD, soon to become battered and weathered, it is a great scene, especially for those who enjoy car chases.

Magnum Force (1973) is a no-frills “guy” film, but one done very well and with an interesting, semi-controversial premise.

The film is the 1970s action genre at its very best.

Surprisingly, and to the film’s credit, one can discuss the film after watching it instead of it being a generic, forgettable flick.

1966 Films, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Torn Curtain-1966

Leave a comment

Torn Curtain-1966

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Paul Newman, Julie Andrews

Top 250 Films #149

Scott’s Review #109

70038983

Reviewed July 15, 2014

Grade: A-

Torn Curtain is an under-appreciated and largely forgotten Cold War political thriller directed by Alfred Hitchcock circa 1966.

The film is very good, but was troubled from the start, which presumably led to its poor reception and a trip to film oblivion.

The trouble with the film lies with the casting; otherwise, it is a compelling, suspenseful adventure.

Starring Paul Newman and Julie Andrews- two enormous stars when the film was made, the studio chose both, and neither did Hitchcock desire on the set.

This led to conflict, especially with Newman, who disliked the script.

His continued script “rewrites” and method of acting annoyed the famous director.

Newman plays Michael Armstrong, an American physicist who is attending a conference in Copenhagen. Andrews plays his assistant and fiancée, Sarah Sherman.

Michael mysteriously flies to East Germany, behind the Iron Curtain, unknowingly with a concerned Sarah in tow. This event sets off political intrigue and espionage as Michael attempts to secure a formula and return it to the United States.

But is he a patriot or a defector, colluding with the Germans?

Presumably, the main reason for the poor reviews of Torn Curtain is the lack of chemistry between Newman and Julie Andrews, as well as behind-the-scenes problems with the film (both stars were unhappy throughout the shoot, and Hitchcock did not want either actor in the film).

In truth, there is little chemistry between the pair, and I cannot help but think how delicious it would have been if Sean Connery and Tippi Hedren had been cast instead! After all, this duo had great chemistry in Marnie, released just two years prior.

Despite the backstage drama, the film is complex, exciting, and taut. The bus escape scene is fantastic and edge-of-your-seat.

The best scene, though, occurs in the middle of the film, when Michael is in East Germany. He is revealed to be part of a syndicate that enables him to sneak out of the country. He then goes to a remote farm, where he is involved in a torturous fight with a security officer and a farmer’s wife.

The scene is spectacular in its long length and edge-of-your-seat drama.

The scenic locales are excellent, and the film is bright, colorful, and sharp, especially on Blu-Ray. The gorgeous opening scene is aboard a cruise ship in the breathtaking Fjords of Scandinavia.

Frankly, I am surprised this film has not been rediscovered on a larger scale. Along with Topaz (1969), Torn Curtain (1966) is another forgotten gem of Hitchcock’s, worthy of praise.

2019 Films, Best International Film Oscar Winners, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Comedy, Dark Comedy, International, International Comedy, International Thriller, South Korean, Thriller, Top 250 Films

Parasite-2019

Leave a comment

Parasite-2019

Director Joon-ho Bong

Starring Song Kang-ho, Jang Hye-jin

Top 250 Films #157

Scott’s Review #963

Reviewed November 28, 2019

Grade: A

Parasite (2019) is a South Korean language film that has it all. The writing is powerful and thought-provoking, the direction is unique and intriguing, the acting is stellar, and the story is perfectly paced with dizzying twists and turns.

The film is uncomfortable and unsettling (in a good way), shifting from dark humor to horror by the time the shocking finale unfolds—an experience that will both dazzle and ravage the viewer with the emotions it instills.

The story centers on two families. The affluent Park residents live in the lap of luxury, enjoying the finer things in life, such as a lavish residence, a personal driver, and a live-in housekeeper.

Park Dong-ik is the CEO of an IT company; his beautiful wife, Park Yeong-gyo, stays at home with their two children, Park Da-hye and Park Da-Song. They are rich and, on the surface, somewhat spoiled and superficial.

The struggling Kims reside in a semi-basement that constantly floods, accept menial jobs to pay the bills, and are grifters.

Patriarch Kim Ki-taek and his wife, Kim Chung-sook, have two teenage children, Kim Ki-woo and Kim Ki-jeong. They are cagey and resourceful, devising schemes to generate money. Each is good-looking but struggles to find much success in life.

Kim Ki-woo’s friend tutors the Park family’s daughter and will soon travel abroad for further studies. He convinces Kim Ki-woo to interview for the position, who easily gets the job by charming the gullible Park Yeong-gyo.

He and the rest of the Kims devise an elaborate scheme to infiltrate the Park family by deceiving Mr. and Mrs. Park into dismissing their driver and housekeeper. The Parks are unaware that their new staff are related!

The underlying theme of Parasite is one of class distinction and social inequality. The tension builds more and more with each scene, and the monetary differences between the haves and have-nots are always on the surface.

Once the Kims get a taste of the good life, they have no intention of being satisfied merely as hired help- they want it all for themselves.

The fact that the Kims are clever and manipulative is no accident on the part of the director, Joon-ho Bong.

Conversely, the Parks are gullible and easily outsmarted by the Kims. Why are they rich, and the Kims poor? The audience wonders. Are we to root for the Kims to overtake the Parks? The Kims are no saints, as they resort to firing other people to get what they want.

Allegiances to characters will shift along the way.

As the Kims get comfy one night in the Park house, when the family goes on a weekend camping trip, the film takes off. Drunk and sparring with each other, the doorbell rings, and the haggard former housekeeper begs to be let in.

When she claims to have left something behind in the basement, this leads to a shocking secret and dramatic turn of events. I did not see the revelation coming, and events only catapult the film into something else.

The pacing and tension during this scene are outstanding.

It’s tough to rival this scene, but the film does just that with the gruesome and bloody birthday party sequence. The proverbial “sh## hits the fan” as the tensions among the characters come to life.

The scene results in several deaths, and the rage of a prominent character reaches a crescendo.

The scene is set on a gorgeous sunny day, perfect for birthday cake, balloons, and shiny wrapped presents. After a lovely start, the party becomes laden with blood, screams, and intensity.

Bong portrays the Kim patriarch as the most sympathetic character, and a montage at the end of the film reinforces this. The other characters are less benevolent and more complicated.

When Mrs. Kim shoves the family dog, she is unlikeable, but then she is kind to the former housekeeper.

Mrs. Park appears innocent at first, but then she becomes a shrew when she plans her son’s birthday party, expecting everyone to cater to her every whim. Finally, Mr. and Mrs. Park mock Mr. Kim behind his back and insinuate that poor people “smell funny”.

Do the Parks deserve their fates?

Parasite (2019) is a dark film characterized by clever writing and effective character development, taking audiences on a rollercoaster ride.

The subtitles do little to detract from the fantastic experience this film offers as Bong spins a spider web of deceit, desperation, and tragedy.

Viewers will undoubtedly be discussing this one for days to come.

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Bong Joon-ho (won), Best Original Screenplay (won), Best International Feature Film (won), Best Production Design, Best Film Editing

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