Category Archives: Roman Polanski

1965 Films, British, British Horror, Catherine Deneuve, Horror, Roman Polanski

Repulsion-1965

Leave a comment

Repulsion-1965

Director Roman Polanski

Starring Catherine Deneuve

Scott’s Review #554

Reviewed December 21, 2016

Grade: A

Repulsion is an excellent British film, and an early film of the great director, Roman Polanski- made in 1965. The film was shot on a low budget, and the action mainly takes place inside a small London apartment.

Repulsion is part of Polanski’s “Apartment trio”, along with Rosemary’s Baby and The Tenant- all set inside apartments.

The film tells the story of Carol (Catherine Deneuve), a beautiful, young, woman who slowly goes insane throughout a weekend, while left alone by her vacationing sister.

Carol is a beauty parlor worker who seemingly is sweet and shy but gradually becomes violent, volatile, and unbalanced. She experiences hallucinations and it is alluded to that she may have been sexually abused as a child.

She loathes men.

The film is shot in black and white with eerie camera shots background noises and very little music. This film has a claustrophobic entity that makes it all the more disturbing.

All of these characteristics make the film a difficult experience to watch, but that is to its credit.

We see Carol unravel and are mystified by the aspects that make her this way. The bathtub scene and the scene with Carol’s landlord are highlights of their brutality.

Repulsion (1965) is difficult to watch, but a wonderful piece of cinema. An in-depth character study of an already unhinged woman reaching her psychological breaking point.

1974 Films, Faye Dunaway, Film noir, Jack Nicholson, Roman Polanski, Scott's Top 100 Films

Chinatown-1974

Leave a comment

Chinatown-1974

Director Roman Polanski

Starring Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunaway

Top 100 Films #30

Scott’s Review #321

374030

Reviewed January 3, 2016

Grade: A

Chinatown (1974) is like a perfectly aged fine red wine- with each passing year or viewing, it becomes more and more spectacular.

A thinking man’s film, if you will, Chinatown is a complex puzzle, just waiting to unravel in a layered, complicated fashion. However, this is to its credit, as it is a fantastic, rich, film noir, and as good as cinematic writing gets.

Set in the 1930s the set pieces and art direction are flawless- as great a film in look as in the story.

Director Roman Polanski and star Jack Nicholson are largely responsible for the success of the film.

The direction is a marvel as the cinematography, flow, and pacing are astounding. A slow build, the film takes off at just the perfect point as the mystery gets deeper and deeper, building to a crescendo.

Nicholson plays Jake Gittes, a handsome Los Angeles private investigator hired by a woman claiming to be Evelyn Mulwray. Evelyn desires to have her husband followed, as she suspects him of an affair with another woman.

Jake begins tailing the woman’s husband, only to uncover an intriguing mystery involving the Los Angeles water supply. Soon, the real Evelyn Mulwray (Faye Dunaway) turns up and the film segues into a masterful web of complications and turns of events.

One will not see the ending coming.

Nicholson leads the film as only he can. With his charismatic, aww shucks attitude, mixed with humor, he is eye candy for the camera, as he takes the case and becomes more and more immersed in the action.

This film was a pivotal point for him as he began a slew of worthwhile and abundant performances in pictures.

Let us not forget to mention the acting performance of Dunaway. Smoldering, sexy, classy, intelligent, and vulnerable, she perfectly plays almost every emotion.

Chinatown, Bonnie and Clyde (1967), and Mommie Dearest (1981) are her best works in a career that spanned decades of success.

Chinatown (1974) is an entity unto itself in film noir. It is incredibly well-written, nuanced, and flawless.

This film simply must be seen.

The final thirty minutes- in addition to the “great reveal” are also violent, shocking, and extraordinary. A blueprint of what great filmmaking truly is.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Roman Polanski, Best Actor-Jack Nicholson, Best Actress-Faye Dunaway, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Original Dramatic Score, Best Sound, Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

2013 Films, Drama, Emmanuelle Seigner, French, International, International Drama, Mathieu Amalric, Roman Polanski

Venus in Fur-2013

Leave a comment

Venus in Fur-2013

Director Roman Polanski

Starring Emmanuelle Seigner, Mathieu Amalric 

Scott’s Review #270

70275370

Reviewed August 23, 2015

Grade: C

Venus in Fur is a French-language film from 2013, directed by the enormously talented Roman Polanski, and based on the American play by David Ives.

Interesting to note that Ives’s play is itself based on a novel by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch entitled Venus in Furs.

Polanski’s film adaptation is a filmed play and takes place entirely within the walls of a theater, except for the opening shot, as the camera pans inside the doorway of the theater as if the audience were the eyes of an approaching theater-goer.

The subject matter is quite adult- sadomasochism and dominance, though there is little nudity, and is not perverse in any way.

The story surrounds Thomas, a stressed-out writer-director of a new play set to open soon in Paris. Finishing touches must be handled as well as casting the lead actress!

His play is an adaptation of Venus in Furs and a frustrated Thomas is on the phone complaining about an unsuccessful day attempting to cast the lead role of Wanda.

A disheveled actress named Vanda wanders into the theater and attempts to convince Thomas to let her read for the part, which she desperately wants.

Initially, Thomas is turned off by Vanda as she is dressed slutty and is on the middle-aged side and, in his mind, wrong for the part. When she finally does convince him to let her read for the part, she becomes Wanda and a strong, bizarre, sadomasochistic, attraction develops between the pair as they run lines together.

Roman Polanski might very well rank within my Top 10 favorite directors of all time list (Rosemary’s Baby-1968, is one of my favorite films), but this work disappointed me.

Containing a cast of only two characters, I found the story to be limiting and became tedious as the story developed. It was tough to distinguish when Thomas and Vanda were in character and when they were expressing their true selves and I did not find either particularly likable.

This may have been intentional, but confusing and dull nonetheless.

The sexual-fetish subject matter is prevalent, but not in a tasteless way. The initial roles reverse as Vanda goes from a whimpering, pleading actress needing some work to a dominatrix, who obtains control over Thomas, who in essence becomes her slave.

Thomas begins as a powerful director with an ego and ends up catering to Vanda’s every whim. They develop a deep emotional connection that they simultaneously realize.

The main issue was not feeling much connection towards either character. I detected no chemistry between them. The dominant soon becomes submissive, but who cares when you are invested in neither character?

On the plus side, I loved the basic theater set. This instantly reminded me fondly of my college days and rehearsing/performing in a theater similar to the one in Venus in Fur, complete with the rustic red audience seats and the moody ambiance of the theater.

Venus in Fur (2013) has an interesting premise as people immerse themselves in the roles they play, but a disappointing film, especially coming from one of the greats.

Whatever the exact reasons, the film did not work for me. Interesting premise, but ultimately failed for me.