Tag Archives: Top 100 Films

#76 Favorite Film, 1963 Films, Action, Anthony Dawson, Bernard Lee, Daniela Bianchi, Desmond Llewelyn, James Bond, Lois Maxwell, Lotte Lenya, Robert Shaw, Sean Connery, Terence Young, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

From Russia with Love-1963

Leave a comment

From Russia with Love-1963

Director Terence Young

Starring Sean Connery, Daniela Bianchi

Top 250 Films #76

Scott’s Review #615

Reviewed February 5, 2017

Grade: A

From Russia with Love (1963) is only the second film in the storied James Bond franchise. It is a sequel to the debut installment, Dr. No, and received twice the budget.

This is evident as the cinematography and the look of the film are exquisite, with scenes of chase and battle galore.

The film is lavish and grand and what a Bond film ought to be, consisting of adventures through countries, gorgeous location sequences, and a lovely romance between Bond (Sean Connery) and Bond girl, Tatiana (Daniela Bianchi), but is not in my top Bond girls of all time.

Terence Young returned to direct the film with successful results.

Vowing revenge on James Bond for killing villainous Dr. No, SPECTRE’s Number 1 (seen only speaking and holding a cat) recruits evil Number 3, Rosa Klebb, a Russian director and defector, and Kronsteen, SPECTRE’s expert planner, to devise a plot to steal a Lektor cryptographic device from the Soviets and kill Bond in the process.

Klebb recruits expert killer Donald “Red” Grant and manipulates Tatiana into assisting. The story takes Bond mainly through Istanbul, Turkey, into a gypsy camp and via the Orient Express through Yugoslavia to the ultimate climax.

The villains in From Russia with Love are outstanding and a major draw to the film.

Klebb (Lotte Lenya) and Grant (Robert Shaw) are perfectly cast. Klebb, militant and severe with her short-cropped red hair, has a penchant for deadly footwear (she has a spike that shoots out from her boot containing venom that kills in seconds) and casually flaunts her lesbianism in front of Tatiana.

I admire this level of diversity in early Bond films—it was 1963, which was extremely rare.

Grant, on the other hand, is handsome and charismatic and has a chest of steel. With his good looks and bleached blonde hair, he is a perfect opponent for Bond as the final battle between him and Bond aboard the Orient Express is a spectacular fight scene and a satisfactory conclusion to the film.

The action sequences are aplenty and compelling, especially the Orient Express train sequence finale, which is grand. As Bond and Tatiana, along with their ally Ali Kerim Bey, a British Intelligence chief from Istanbul, embark on a journey, they are stalked by Grant, who waits for an opportunity to pounce on his foes.

This sequence is the best part of the film for me- Grant, posing as a sophisticated British agent, has a cat-and-mouse conversation with Bond and Tatiana over a delicious dinner of Sole.

Grant drugs Tatiana by placing capsules in her white wine- the fact that he orders Chianti with Sole- a culinary faux pas- gives him away.

Other notable aspects of From Russia with Love are the soon-to-be familiar cohorts of Bond who will be featured in Bond films for years to come: M, Q, and Miss Moneypenny become treasured supporting characters that audiences know and love.

Mere novices in this film, it is fun to see their scenes- especially lovelorn Moneypenny.

An odd scene of sparring female gypsies is both erotic and comical as the two women wrestle and fight over a gypsy chief, only to forget their rivalry and both bed Bond- falling madly in love with him as the two women suddenly become the best of friends.

The chemistry between Connery and Bianchi is good but nothing spectacular, and it is not the real highlight of this Bond entry. Don’t get me wrong—they make a gorgeous couple—his dark looks and her statuesque blonde figure look great, but I found the pairing just decent rather than spectacular.

The action sequences, especially the Orient Express scenes, are a spectacle, and the many location shots in and around Istanbul are ravishing.

From Russia with Love (1963) is a top entry in the Bond series and a film that got the ball rolling with fantastic Bond features- it is an expensively produced film, and this shows.

#77 Favorite Film, 1969 Films, Claude Chabrol, French, International, International Thriller, Maurice Ronet, Michel Bouquet, Michel Duchaussoy, Stéphane Audran, 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.

#78 Favorite Film, 1974 Films, Best International Film Oscar Winners, Drama, Federico Fellini, International, International Drama, Italian, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Amarcord-1974

Leave a comment

Amarcord-1974

Director Federico Fellini

Starring Bruno Zanin, Magali Noel

Top 250 Films #78

Scott’s Review #357

247784

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Federico Fellini’s Amarcord, winner of the Best Foreign Language Oscar and Golden Globe in 1974, is a semi-autobiographical film based on the director’s own childhood.

Set in the small Italian village of Borgo San Giuliano, the film features a diverse array of quirky and eccentric characters inhabiting the town.

The plot centers around young Titta, and his coming-of-age development as he blossoms into a young man- his sexual desires and fantasies are heavily explored in this zany film.

Since the time is the 1930s and Fascism, led by the tyrannical Mussolini, was rearing its ugly head, Amarcord is not all light-hearted fun and games, despite how it appears on the surface- there is a serious undertone to the entire film.

Still, the film lacks any sort of story that can be dissected very well, which both pleases and frustrates- the film is simply to be “experienced”. It can either leave your head spinning, scratching your head, or disliking the film.

That is not to say that I take issue or offense with Amarcord I adore the film, but it is not an easy watch. Scenes meander about in a dream-like fashion as we follow Titta through his sexual blossoming.

In one memorable scene, Titta has a titillating experience with a buxom older female who lives in the village. Some of the other characters we meet are giddy with peculiarities: a blind accordion player and a female nymphomaniac to name but a couple.

Titta and his family are featured heavily as they eat together, fight together, and live together. When one day the family treks to visit their Uncle Teo, who is confined to an insane asylum, they take him out for a day in the country, where he climbs a tree and refuses to come down.

A dwarf nun and two orderlies finally arrive and coax him down- he obediently returns to the asylum. It is a bizarre sequence, but one that sums up Amarcord perfectly.

Amarcord contains one wacky scene after another, but many of the scenes are not just to showcase outlandish behavior nor are created as fluff. Fellini has a distinct message to the film and several scenes mock Christianity or Mussolini’s crazy political ideas.

The film is larger than life but also encrusted with the fear of 1930’s Fascism and the fear that the Italians felt during this time.

The film is also sweet and Fellini successfully adds a nostalgic feel to it- everyone feels cozy in a large sprawling town with unique characters, shenanigans, and a celebratory theme, but seriousness lurks beneath.

Amarcord is a zest for life throughout a tumultuous time and Fellini successfully creates a hybrid of the two creating one fantastic film in the process.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Foreign Language Film (won), Best Director-Federico Fellini

#79 Favorite Film, 1992 Films, Anthony Hopkins, Drama, E.M. Forster, Emma Thompson, Favorite Film of the Year, Helena Bonham Carter, Independent, Independent Comedy, Independent Drama, Independent Romantic Comedy, James Ivory, James Wilby, Period Drama, Romantic Drama, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Vanessa Redgrave

Howards End-1992

Leave a comment

Howards End-1992

Director James Ivory

Starring Anthony Hopkins, Emma Thompson, Helena Bonham Carter

Top 250 Films #79

Scott’s Review #702

Reviewed December 1, 2017

Grade: A-

Howards End is my favorite film adaptation of E.M. Forster’s novel, which was also adapted into a film during the 1980s (1985’s A Room with a View and 1987’s Maurice are the other two notable works).

The novels were written during the early 1900s and set during the same period, focusing on class relations in 20th-century England.

The film is lovely and picturesque, telling an interesting story about romance and drama between the haves and have-nots during this period.

The film was a success and received heaps of Academy Award nominations in 1993.

Margaret Schlegel (Emma Thompson), an upper-middle-class intellectual, part of London’s bourgeoisie, befriends wealthy and sophisticated, yet shockingly conservative Ruth Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave).

The two women strike up a powerful friendship, which results in her beloved country home being left to Margaret when an ailing Mrs. Wilcox dies.

To complicate matters, Margaret falls in love with a businessman (and husband of Ruth), Henry (Anthony Hopkins), while Margaret’s sister Helen, briefly becomes engaged to Paul Wilcox, Henry’s son.

The two families’ lives further intersect when they wind up as neighbors in London and the true owner of the beloved “Howards End” is questioned.

Added to the mix are several other characters of various social backgrounds, having connections to the families.

The writing in Howard’s End is rich and emotional as each character is perfectly fleshed out this includes the supporting as well as the lead characters.

Thompson and Hopkins, both sensational actors, have tremendous chemistry together, and unsurprising was Thompson’s win for Best Actress during this competitive year. She carries the film seamlessly with her upper-middle-class ideals- not conservatively rich, but far from working-class- she epitomizes poise grace, and empathy for those less fortunate than she.

Hopkins, on the other hand, is calculating and confident, yet charismatic and sexy as an old-school, controlling businessman.

Somehow, these two characters complement each other exceptionally well despite their varied backgrounds

The role of Helen may very well be Helena Bonham Carter’s finest. Not being an enormous fan of the actress-overrated and too brooding in my opinion enjoys portraying an interesting character in Helen.

Lovelorn and earnest, yet somewhat oblivious, she develops a delicious romance with the young clerk, Leonard Bast, my favorite character in the film. Living with Jacky, a woman of dubious origins, he is the ultimate nice guy and sadly winds up down on his luck after heeding terrible business advice.

Bast, thanks in large part to actor Samuel West, who instills an innocent, good guy quality in his character, deserves major props.

The cinematography featured in Howards End is beautiful with extravagant outdoor scenes- the lavish gardens of Howards End- just ravishing and wonderful.

Kudos too to the art direction, set design, and costume department for making the film look so enchanting.

There is something so appealing about the look of this film and director, James Ivory, undoubtedly deserves praise for pulling it all together into a suave picture. Whether the scene calls for sun or rain, tranquil or bustling, every scene looks great.

If I were to knock any points from this fine film it would be at two hours and twenty-two minutes, Howards End does drag ever so slightly, and many scenes involve the characters merely having chats with each other, without much action.

But this criticism is small potatoes when compared to the exceptional writing and well-nuanced character development displayed throughout the piece.

Admittedly, and perhaps shamefully, I have not read any of the Forster novels, but Howards End appears to be the film that is most successfully adapted, gleaming with textured finesse, grace, and style.

With the film’s finest actors along for the experience, and intricate, fine story-telling, Howards End (1992) is a film well worth watching.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-James Ivory, Best Actress-Emma Thompson (won), Best Supporting Actress-Vanessa Redgrave, Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published (won), Best Original Score, Best Art Direction (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

#80 Favorite Film, 1962 Films, Ann Jillian, Harvey Korman, Jack Benny, Karl Malden, Mervyn LeRoy, Musical, Natalie Wood, Rosalind Russell, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Gypsy-1962

Leave a comment

Gypsy-1962

Director Mervyn LeRoy

Starring Rosalind Russell, Natalie Wood

Top 250 Films #80

Scott’s Review #37

567360

Reviewed June 18, 2014

Grade: A

The film version of the iconic Broadway production is a huge success, mainly due to Rosalind Russell’s superb performance as Mama Rose, a muscular and driven stage mother in the Depression-era world of show business.

She is mesmerizing in the role and reminiscent of Joan Crawford and Bette Davis, who would have been wonderful in it.

Russell carries the film with her bombastic, loud, and determined performance- her children will become stars, and Rose will get the stardom and spoils she so richly deserves.

She uses every nook and cranny to her advantage —borrowing money from her father, scraping leftover Chinese food scraps, and stealing silverware.

Rose’s daughters, Baby June and Louise (Natalie Wood), are in tow to help her achieve her goals —June, the talented one, and Louise, along for the ride.

When circumstances develop, Louise blossoms and becomes the famous Gypsy Rose Lee.

From masterpieces “Everything’s Coming up Roses” and “Some People” to her heartbreak at being a driven stage mom, Russell’s performance makes the film.

Her best scene comes at the climax. Rose finally admits that she has spent her life needing to be noticed, hits an empty stage alone in a theater, and has an emotional breakdown.

Natalie Wood and Karl Malden certainly add depth to their characters, especially Wood, who transforms from a mousy wallflower to the seductive stripper Gypsy Rose Lee.

From a casting perspective, I am not sure Wood was quite right for the role- the second time in two years this would occur (her casting in West Side Story being the other misstep), but she was an enormous star at the time and was awarded juicy roles.

Gypsy (1962) is one of the great Hollywood musicals from the 1950s/1960s heyday.

Witty and clever dialogue help this film stand out at the top of the list of similar movies.

Bravura!

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring of Music-Adaptation or Treatment, Best Cinematography, Color, Best Costume Design, Color

#81 Favorite Film, 1955 Films, Arthur O'Connell, Betty Field, Cliff Robertson, Comedy, Drama, Elizabeth Wilson, Joshua Logan, Kim Novak, Nick Adams, Romantic Comedy, Romantic Drama, Rosalind Russell, Susan Strasberg, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, William Holden

Picnic-1955

Leave a comment

Picnic-1955

Director Joshua Logan

Starring William Holden, Kim Novak

Top 250 Films #81

Scott’s Review #550

Reviewed December 19, 2016

Grade: A-

Picnic is a classic 1955 film that is wonderful to watch over Labor Day weekend or anytime during the humid summer season.

The film perfectly depicts summertime in a tiny town in Kansas. It is a slice-of-life story about life in middle America during the 1950s, despite its trials and tribulations.

William Holden stars as a “wrong side of the tracks” type of guy who arrives in a quiet Kansas town on Labor Day weekend, disrupting the town’s events and causing scandals for the townspeople.

He is a hunky former college football player and exudes sexuality.

He then falls in love with his best friend’s girlfriend, Madge Owens, played by Kim Novak. The chemistry between the two stars is the film’s main appeal.

The supporting cast makes this film unique (Arthur O’Connell and Rosalind Russell star as townspeople who are in a relationship of their own).

Picnic also contains a gorgeous and lovely musical score, precisely “Theme from Picnic” and “Moonglow”.

It is shot on location in Kansas, mostly in and around Hutchinson, and is considered classic summer enjoyment.

Based on the Pulitzer-award-winning play.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Motion Picture, Best Director-Joshua Logan, Best Supporting Actor-Arthur O’Connell, Best Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Art Direction, Color (won), Best Film Editing (won)

#82 Favorite Film, 1957 Films, Bibi Andersson, Drama, Gunnar Björnstrand, Gunnel Lindblom, Ingmar Bergman, Ingrid Thulin, International, International Drama, Max von Sydow, Swedish, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Victor Sjöström

Wild Strawberries-1957

Leave a comment

Wild Strawberries-1957

Director Ingmar Bergman

Starring Victor Sjostrom, Bibi Andersson

Top 250 Films #82

Scott’s Review #1,111

Reviewed February 10, 2021

Grade: A

A seventy-eight-year-old man (Victor Sjostrom) reflects on life, loss, and a million other emotions as he ponders his inevitable death in the Ingmar Bergman masterpiece Wild Strawberries (1957).

The film’s melancholy tone forces viewers to imagine themselves in the older man’s shoes and wonder how senior citizens view death. One significant point is that it represents the geriatric demographic, which has traditionally been lacking in cinema.

It’s cerebral and reminds me of A Christmas Carol since an older man struggles over his forgotten and sometimes misbegotten youth.

Bergman creates genius on par with his most famous work, The Seventh Seal, also released in 1957. I’d list these two films as his very best and most inspiring.

Do older people fear death?  Do they whimsically revisit their youth from time to time, or do they live with regret and unfulfilled desires?

My hunch is that it’s probably a bit of all.

Wild Strawberries made me think like the older man and the effect was powerful. They made me worry about my death and relive my glory days.

Isak Borg (Sjostrom) begins to reflect on his life after he takes a road trip from his home in Stockholm to the distant town of Lund to receive a special award. Along the way, a string of encounters causes him to experience hallucinations that expose his insecurities and fears.

He realizes that his choices have rendered his life meaningless, or so he perceives it.

He is accompanied by his daughter-in-law Marianne (Ingrid Thulin), who doesn’t like Isak too much, is pregnant, and plans to leave her husband. They meet a trio of friendly hitchhikers led by Sara (Bibi Andersson), who reminds Isak of the love of his youth.

A bickering couple reminds him of his unhappy marriage, while his elderly mother reminds him of himself.

The best part is when the group stops at Isak’s childhood seaside home and imagines his sweetheart, Sara, with whom he remembered gathering strawberries but who instead married his brother.

Anyone who has returned to their childhood home or neighborhood can easily relate to the powerful memories. I pretended I was in Isak’s character, and several emotions occurred.

Sjostrom infuses a natural range of emotions. At first, crotchety and distant, I admired his sentimentality as he fondly recalls innocently picking strawberries on a summer day. How glorious and innocent it is to reminisce in a mundane yet monumental act.

Although he was an older man, he was once young. How quickly the years pass. I took this as a lesson to appreciate each day and experience. Sjostrom had me mesmerized.

Some find Izak unsympathetic. I found him incredibly likable.

Relationships are a strong element of Wild Strawberries. Izak muses over past loves, his mother, daughter-in-law, housekeeper, and hitchhikers. Peculiar is his relationship with his housekeeper, Agda, who is played stunningly well by Julian Kindahl.

Are they secret lovers or platonic friends? They seem like husband and wife.

While the story is astounding, the visual qualities of Wild Strawberries are exceptional.

The video content is crisp and clear, with very bright black-and-white photography. Each shot is mesmerizing and reminiscent of paintings.

There is so much going on in Wild Strawberries. The closest adjectives to describe the experience are hallucinogenic and mesmerizing.

The people gathered over a meal were young, fresh, and carefree. They all have lives ahead of them, and almost every viewer can recount a time when they felt that way.

It’s both nostalgic and sad to realize it doesn’t last, as Bergman makes so painfully evident.

The scene where Isak witnesses a hearse approaching is terrifying. When he realizes it is himself lying in the casket, it gives one a chill. The scene is creepy and powerful in tone and effect.

Wild Strawberries (1957) explores many facets of the human experience, including sorrow, joy, depression, acceptance, frustration, and fulfillment.

This is a work of genius and is highly recommended to anyone who appreciates excellent experiences in cinema.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

#83 Favorite Film, 1944 Films, Favorite Film of the Year, Judy Garland, Leon Ames, Lucille Bremer, Margaret O'Brien, Mary Astor, Musical, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Vincente Minnelli

Meet Me in St. Louis-1944

Leave a comment

Meet Me in St. Louis-1944

Director Vincente Minnelli 

Starring Judy Garland, Margaret O’Brien

Top 250 Films #83

Scott’s Review #845

Reviewed December 19, 2018

Grade: A

With talents such as Vincente Minnelli and Judy Garland involved in a project, it is tough for the results not to be resounding, and this is the case with Meet Me in St. Louis (1944), a treasured musical with enough songs and melodrama to last a lifetime.

The film is a lively and earnest achievement from both stars when each was at their prime. It is rich in flavor and contains a myriad of good touches.

Meet Me in St. Louis is an ensemble piece featuring many actors, but the film belongs to Garland for the musical numbers alone. The film is groundbreaking and sets the tone for the slew of MGM musicals to follow during the 1950s and 1960s.

The film is considered one of the greatest and most memorable musicals of all time, and I share this sentiment.

The story revolves around the upper-middle-class Smith family, set in 1903, St. Louis. In its lovely form, the film has been composed of seasonal vignettes for over a year.

Trials and tribulations erupt, especially involving the romantic entanglements of eldest sisters Rose (Lucille Bremer) and Esther (Garland), as well as the possibility of the family relocating to New York City.

Rose and Esther are two of the siblings, along with the Smith parents, Grandpa, and Katie, the maid.

The household is filled with glee, music, and heartbreak.

The film’s setup is a considerable success, eliciting a warm sensation. As the title card reads, “Summer 1903,” we are welcomed into a sunny and picturesque street, set against the backdrop of St. Louis, which is perfectly midwestern.

The Smith home is showcased, and the viewer is welcomed into the idyllic world of a bonded family.

Meet Me in St. Louis feels homespun and like a good best friend. It can be watched and re-watched often, regardless of the season, as it features a summer fair, a spooky Halloween sequence, and a dazzling Christmastime segment.

Other than Esther, the most memorable and fascinating character is Tootie (Margaret O’Brien). O’Brien gives a startlingly good performance and packs an emotional wallop, enriching a character arguably interpreted as obsessed with death with some needed humor.

She buries her dolls on a dare and throws flour in a man’s face on Halloween, thereby “killing” him.

Her most significant scene, though, occurs during a meltdown when Tootie destroys her beloved snowmen on the family lawn. The actress portrays such rage and despair during this scene that it is easy to forget, at the time, how young she was.

She was honored with an honorary Oscar for her efforts.

The musical numbers by Garland are absolute treasures. Highlights include “The Trolley Song,” performed as Esther rides the afternoon trolley across town, hoping that the boy next door with whom she is madly in love, John (Tom Drake), will be on the same trolley.

The gorgeously performed number “Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas” is my favorite. Following a lavish Christmas Eve ball, Esther sings the song to Tootie, and nestled within its lyrics are emotions such as hope and sadness.

Meet Me in St. Louis (1944) is a film that has it all and can be enjoyed by audiences of all ages. With memorable musical numbers, romance, drama, and a wholesome, timeless sensibility, it is a favorite that deserves to be revisited.

Like the finest wines, this film improves with age.

Oscar Nominations: Best Screenplay, Best Scoring of a Musical Picture, Best Song-“The Trolley Song”, Best Cinematography, Color

#84 Favorite Film, 2019 Films, Al Pacino, Austin Butler, Brad Pitt, Brenda Vaccaro, Bruce Dern, Dakota Fanning, Damian Lewis, Danielle Harris, Drama, Emile Hirsch, Favorite Film of the Year, James Remar, Julia Butters, Kurt Russell, Lena Dunham, Leonardo DiCaprio, Lorenza Izzo, Luke Perry, Margaret Qualley, Margot Robbie, Michael Madsen, Mikey Madison, Quentin Tarantino, Rumer Willis, Scoot McNairy, Sydney Sweeney, Toni Basil, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Walton Goggins

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood-2019

Leave a comment

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood-2019

Director Quentin Tarantino

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, Margot Robbie

Top 250 Films #84

Scott’s Review #926

Reviewed August 1, 2019

Grade: A

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) is another brilliant offering by one of the most (deservedly) respected directors of the modern film era.

This film may be his most personal as it includes many cinematic references and immerses itself in the Hollywood lifestyle. Toned down considerably from the violence standard in his other films, the first half lays the groundwork for a startlingly good second half with every detail of utmost importance.

A bevy of riches awaits any viewer enthusiastically feasting their eyes on this film.

The time is 1969, as actor Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) struggles to reinvent himself and revitalize his career in Hollywood amid a changing cinematic landscape.

Famous for a popular western television series from the 1950s, Bounty Law, a pursued film career has not taken off, and he is reduced to guest appearances as the villain, then considered throwaway roles, in other episodic series.

His stunt double and best friend, Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt), accompanies him almost everywhere, serving as both sidekick and errand boy.

Meanwhile, famous director Roman Polanski and his wife, actress Sharon Tate (played by Argot Robbie), have moved into the house next door, which Dalton hopes will help him revitalize his career aspirations.

As Tate goes about her daily life of running errands and watching her movies in the theater, she is visited by Charles Manson one day, looking for the former resident of her house.

Historical viewers are familiar with the subsequent events that unfolded in real life, as Tarantino presents a fictional and tantalizing version of the events.

The film’s length is two hours and thirty-nine minutes, quite robust but typical for a Tarantino production. Some may complain about the bloated running time, but the film never drags; instead, the director lays out all the pieces carefully like a fine chess game.

By the mid-point, all hell breaks loose with one of the most suspenseful and edge-of-your-seat scenes in film history. When Cliff drives a flirtatious young hippy hitchhiker, Pussycat (Margaret Qualley) to a range populated by Manson followers, he is in for the adventure of his life…..if he survives.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is an orgy of cinematic tidbits, featuring a myriad of clips from forgotten films of the late 1960s and popular songs from that era.

This is just the tip of the iceberg in greatness as Tarantino perfectly immerses the viewer into the time with fury and zest. Every set piece, costume, hairstyle, or car is flawlessly placed. Kraft macaroni and cheese, Velveeta cheese, and popular dog food from the period are featured.

Tarantino is a fan of cinema and makes cinema lovers fall in love with cinema all over again.

The cast is humongous, but each character is necessary and perfectly represented in roles large and small.

The haunting troupe of Manson followers, specifically Tex Watson (Austin Butler), Squeaky Fromme (Dakota Fanning), and Susan Atkins (Mikey Madison), are all real-life figures. They are foreboding, dangerous, and crucial to the story.

Al Pacino shines in the small but pivotal role of Schwarz (not Schwartz), Dalton’s agent, while Steve McQueen’s look-alike, Damian Lewis, on-screen for merely seconds, is memorable.

The list of cameo performances goes on and on and on, and the fun is wondering who may appear next.

Despite the incorporation of big-name stars in important minor roles, the best performances belong to DiCaprio and Pitt. DiCaprio’s best scene takes place alone in his trailer as the washed-up star botches his lines thanks to a hangover, causing a delay in filming.

He abuses himself into nailing the scene, receiving kudos all around, while becoming teary-eyed after a compliment from a young actress.

Pitt has never given a better performance than he does as Cliff, sharing his best scenes with his adorable dog Brandi and with DiCaprio.

Who can ever forget his chest-baring rooftop scene?

Quentin Tarantino scores again with a bombastic and flawless picture, his ninth release. Rumored to retire after his tenth film, one can hardly fathom the reality of that statement. Hismovis can be watched and watched again, continuously absorbing new and noteworthy details of rich texture.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) easily joins the ranks of great works, not just of the director’s catalog, but of all time.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Quentin Tarantino, Best Actor-Leonardo DiCaprio, Best Supporting Actor-Brad Pitt (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design

#85 Favorite Film, 1984 Films, Burt Young, Crime Drama, Danny Aiello, Drama, Elizabeth McGovern, Epic, Estelle Harris, Favorite Film of the Year, James Woods, Jennifer Connelly, Joe Pesci, Mob, Robert De Niro, Sergio Leone, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Treat Williams, Tuesday Weld

Once Upon a Time in America-1984

Leave a comment

Once Upon a Time in America-1984

Director Sergio Leone

Starring Robert De Niro, James Woods

Top 250 Films #85

Scott’s Review #218

60028306

Reviewed January 19, 2015

Grade: A

An epic film, the extended directors cut at more than four hours in length, 1984’s Once Upon a Time in America is a film directed by Sergio Leone, who also directed the 1968 masterpiece Once Upon a Time in the West and numerous other westerns starring Clint Eastwood.

This particular film is in a different vein and not to be confused as any sort of sequel or related to the aforementioned film- this time Leone explores the crime drama genre rather than the western and does so in remarkable fashion.

The film tells the story of a group of Jewish friends who became involved in organized crime during the 1920s in New York City.

The main story is told via flashbacks as the central character, Noodles, played by Robert De Niro, returns to Brooklyn thirty years later to reunite with his former mobster friends.

In this way, the film is sectioned- the group of youngsters and kids and the same characters as adults.

Once Upon a Time in America has been met with much controversy since it was made. At the time of its release, the film was butchered as over an hour of footage was cut by the studio heads making the film largely uneven.

Fortunately, the restored version, at over three hours in length, is available for viewing. Furthermore, the director cut clocks in at well over four hours, and is the best version to watch. Due to so many cuts, other versions appear shoddy and out of order making the viewing experience difficult.

Once Upon a Time in America is largely underappreciated except for the die-hard cinema lovers most patient with the film, and deserves mention as an excellent crime epic drama.

The film contains many similarities to The Godfather and The Godfather Part II and the role De Niro plays is not too different from Vito Corleone in Part II.

However, the greatest contrast is that Once Upon a Time in America is more visually artistic than The Godfather films.

The film centers mainly on Noodle’s perspective as he enjoys youth in the Lower East Side of Manhattan where he meets his group of lifelong friends.

The focal point is his friendship with Max, the adult character played by James Woods, and his undying love for Deborah, played by Elizabeth McGovern as an adult.

As kids, they are worry-free, but gradually fall in with a group of older mobsters, first doing their dirty work, followed by venturing out on their own.

The themes of the film are loyalty, childhood friendship, betrayal, and greed as all of the characters change (or die) in the time that the film takes place.

When a mysterious letter forces Noodles to resurface in Brooklyn, we begin to understand the back story and the history between the friends as layers are slowly peeled back.

The film drags slightly in the middle section, but the first part and last parts are very well-made and absorbing.

Leone has a way of pacing the film that works- it is methodical, and nuanced, with wonderful set pieces and each period explored- 1920s, 1930s, and 1960s seem equally as authentic as the next one does.

I especially enjoyed the 1920s art direction- it revealed such a state of genuineness and felt like truly there in that period.

The relationship between Noodles and Deborah is an interesting one worth mentioning. Falling in love as youngsters (when Deborah was played by a very young Jennifer Connelly) they had an innocent, puppy-love relationship.

As adults, due to a violent, disgraceful act, their tender relationship is subsequently ruined and one might argue one of the characters turns quite unsympathetic.

Once Upon a Time in America (1984) is a sprawling epic film sure to be enjoyed by intelligent fans of the crime epic drama genre and specifically Sergio Leone fans- an underappreciated gem.

#86 Favorite Film, 1970 Films, Carrie Snodgress, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Frank Langella, Independent, Independent Comedy, Satire, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Diary of a Mad Housewife-1970

Leave a comment

Diary of a Mad Housewife-1970

Director Frank Perry

Starring Carrie Snodgress, Frank Langella

Top 250 Films #86

Scott’s Review #189

MPW-36461

Reviewed November 5, 2014

Grade: A

The film version of Diary of a Mad Housewife, based on the best-selling novel by Sue Kaufman, is a tremendous, unique story of one woman’s frustration with her irritating life.

A superb Carrie Snodgrass stars as a haggard, insecure, yet affluent housewife named Tina Balser, who lives in New York City, surrounded by an unpleasant family.

The family is led by Tina’s verbally abusive and neurotic husband Jonathan- a successful attorney, played flawlessly and rather comedically by Richard Benjamin, and her two brattish daughters Sylvie and Liz.

Bored, Tina decides to embark on an affair with crude artist George Prager, wonderfully played by Frank Langella. She teeters on the edge of an emotional breakdown throughout the film and trudges through life depressed and disappointed with all aspects of her life except for her affair with George.

George, however, is a womanizer and openly has other conquests besides Tina.

The brilliant idea of the film is that the story is told strictly from Tina’s point of view. All of the action centers on her character, which makes the film so interesting.

On the surface, one might argue she has everything- she is intelligent, well-educated, and affluent. A stay-at-home mother, she is treated like a servant by her husband Jonathan, as he constantly berates her appearance and criticizes her activities- she is always doing something incorrectly.

The film though is not a downer. It is a dry, satirical comedy that reminds me very much of a Woody Allen film. Tina is depressed, yes, but she goes through life with a realistic, almost chin-up, outlook. Her marriage to Jonathan is loveless yet why doesn’t she leave him?

Her affair with George is sexually satisfying, but she has no intention of pursuing anything further with him, nor does he want to. Tina dotes over her husband- planning dinner parties, sending Christmas cards, and various other wife duties.

I’m not sure that the film’s true intent is to show Tina as either a strictly sympathetic character or as completely downtrodden- the film is not a moral tale nor is it a schmaltzy, woman victimized and will rise against the world’s generic drama- it is witty and filled with black humor.

Despite her unkind husband, I found myself envying Tina’s life, in a way, and I think the film expects that of the viewer. I never got the impression that Tina was suicidal in any way.

It’s not that type of film.

Instead, she has wealth, and she goes to fancy restaurants, but she also has a very needy husband- he does not abuse her in a physical sense, nor is she reduced to tears by his outbursts.

She gets annoyed and merely accepts that this is the way life is and gets by with the assistance of an occasional swig of alcohol while doing dishes or preparing dinner, or when the dog has “an accident” on the living room rug and Tina’s kids cannot wait to tattle on her.

She is a sophisticated woman, trapped in an unhappy yet financially secure relationship.

Diary of a Mad Housewife is an interesting character study for all women to view and perhaps even slyly wink at.  Many women would champion Tina. She is a likable, sarcastic, cool chick. Audiences will find themselves drawn to her and even falling in love with her before long- I know I did.

Without the talents of Carrie Snodgrass, who completely carries this film, it would not be the wonder that it is. A wonderful satire, the film is not as wry or satirical as the novel, but how many films are?

The novel delves more into detail and the role of the Balser’s maid is barely mentioned in the film, yet plays a larger role in the Kaufman novel.

I loved the portrayal of Jonathan by Richard Benjamin who must receive some honor for the most annoying character ever in the film when he repeatedly screams for his wife by bellowing “teeeenaaaaa!”, or initiating sex by asking “Would you like a little roll in dee hay?”, one wants to choke him.

The way Tina’s daughters whine “mudder” instead of “mother” is comically brilliant. And her simmering hatred of all of them is dark hysteria.

Diary of a Mad Housewife is a genius and should not be forgotten.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Carrie Snodgress

#87 Favorite Film, 1970 Films, Barry Foster, Christopher Jones, David Lean, Drama, Epic, John Mills, Robert Mitchum, Sarah Miles, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Ryan’s Daughter-1970

Leave a comment

Ryan’s Daughter-1970

Director David Lean

Starring Sarah Miles, Robert Mitchum, Christopher Jones

Top 250 Films #87

Scott’s Review #10

60010843

Reviewed June 17, 2014

Grade: A

Ryan’s Daughter (1970) is a sweeping epic by the masterful director, David Lean (Lawrence of Arabia, A Passage to India, Doctor Zhivago).

The film is sprawling and filled with fabulous locales of oceanic Ireland. Much of the action takes place using exterior scenes and this is arguably as prominent and important to the film as the story is.

Set in WWI-era Ireland, one will immediately notice the gorgeous Irish landscapes and the brilliant photography involved. This gives the film a timeless look, and one can simply escape into the scenery itself, forgetting the story, and dream away through the roaring waves.

The intense “storm scene” is second to none as Lean had to wait over a year to film this pivotal scene- and Mother Nature had to cooperate.

The story is twofold: a love story involving a woman torn between her schoolteacher husband and a strapping, yet English (at this time there was no love lost between the Irish and English), officer. Rosy (Sarah Miles) is headstrong yet kindhearted, the daughter of a local, prominent man.

Her husband, Charles (Robert Mitchum) is dutiful and loyal to a fault. After Rosy’s affair with the British officer, she is deemed a tyrant by the townspeople, as her husband chooses to stand by her side.

The second story is political. A feeling of extreme nationalism exists among the townspeople against the British. Both stories blend nicely as small-town gossip and a subsequent witch hunt come into play.

The village idiot is played brilliantly by John Mills, who won an Academy Award for his efforts.

Character-driven is the story’s main appeal and the audience will surely feel perplexed about whom to root for or feel empathy for. I know I did. In fact, at different times one’s loyalties can fluctuate or be challenged.

The film is reminiscent of Doctor Zhivago to me as romance and politics intertwine and a dilemma involving the central female characters are similar. At over three hours in length, the film does not drag and remains interesting throughout as the conflict and drama reach a crescendo during the final act.

At no time is there any filler or unnecessary scenes, which, in itself is a positive.

Sadly, Ryan’s Daughter is not considered as worthy as other aforementioned David Lean efforts, but I disagree with this- the film ages exceptionally well- like a fine wine.

This film also focuses largely on a female character and, therefore, is female-driven, a wonderful aspect of the film, circa 1970.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Actress-Sarah Miles, Best Supporting Actor-John Mills (won), Best Sound, Best Cinematography (won)

#88 Favorite Film, 1959 Films, Billy Wilder, Comedy, Jack Lemmon, Joe E. Brown, Marilyn Monroe, Tony Curtis, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Some Like It Hot-1959

Leave a comment

Some Like It Hot-1959

Director Billy Wilder

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis

Top 250 Films #88

Scott’s Review #388

60010910

Reviewed March 26, 2016

Grade: A

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

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

Some Like It Hot feels refreshing and brilliant.

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

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

For that, it is a masterpiece.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bumbling around in stockings, heels, and dresses, attempting to be feminine but never quite succeeding, makes all the other characters think they are women, which is excellent.

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

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

In my opinion, although not looking her best, slightly plump and tired, Marilyn Monroe still gives the film added life and charm, and who is not mesmerized by her on stage singing “You Wanna love me”?

To think that Monroe died only three short years later is sad, and it highlights the appreciation for her career in its final stages.

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

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

It is a blueprint for all witty comedies to follow.

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

#89 Favorite Film, 1967 Films, Arthur Penn, Biography, Crime Drama, Denver Pyle, Drama, Estelle Parsons, Faye Dunaway, Gene Hackman, Gene Wilder, Michael J. Pollard, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Warren Beatty

Bonnie and Clyde-1967

Leave a comment

Bonnie and Clyde-1967

Director Arthur Penn

Starring Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway

Top 250 Films #89

Scott’s Review #628

Reviewed March 25, 2017

Grade: A

Bonnie and Clyde is an excellent 1967 crime drama that is not only a great film, but also successfully and surprisingly influenced an entire generation, becoming somewhat of a rallying cry for the youth generation of the time.

Released in a tumultuous period in history (the Vietnam War, the Sexual Revolution, and Civil Rights), the film fits the times and was groundbreaking in its use of violence, blood, and sex.

The film holds up tremendously well to this day and is beloved by intelligent film lovers everywhere.

The film begins with snapshots of the honest Bonnie and Clyde- a duo of bank robbers who rampaged the southwest during the Great Depression.

Set in steamy Texas, circa the 1930s, the film tells its story.

Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty) meets Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway) when he tries to steal her mother’s car one hot day. Instantly infatuated with each other, the steamy duo team up and become partners in crime.

Over time, they enlist others and become more successful bank robbers, with the stakes rising with each heist.

Rounding out the crew of criminals are gas-station attendant, C.W. Moss, and Clyde’s older brother Buck, played by Gene Hackman, along with his wife, Blanche (Estelle Parsons), an innocent-minded and sometimes hysterical preacher’s wife.

Bonnie and Clyde is a unique film in many different ways- the quick-cut editing style influenced Sam Peckinpah in his movies to come, and the film uses a fast-paced rat-a-tat-tat style that symbolizes the gunfire, a significant element of the film.

Blood spurts from victims’ bodies in a style never before seen on the big screen, which led to many filmmakers’ comfort with using increased violence.

You could say that Bonnie and Clyde took away the innocence of Hollywood films and shook all of the traditional elements inside out.

The film’s conclusion is one of the greatest in cinematic history.

Far from an idyllic, happy ending, the traditional one in those days, the law finally catches up with Bonnie and Clyde, with grim results for the pair, and their demise is gruesome but true to form.

We have fallen in love with the characters, so their hasty exit from this world is tough to stomach, and as they writhe and twitch with each gunshot wound, the bullets pummeling the bodies, the scene is a difficult one to watch.

The love story between Bonnie and Clyde is intense yet sweet, and the casting of Beatty and Dunaway is spot-on. Smoldering with sexuality- as Bonnie fondles Clyde’s gun, who does not see this as a phallic symbol- their relationship is fraught with stamina and emotional energy.

The two actors feed off of each other and fill the scenes with gusto. Their chemistry is part of what makes the film so great.

One of the best scenes is the shoot-’em-up showdown at a ranch where the robbers are hiding out. The scene is laden with intensity and violence. As Buck is mortally wounded, Blanche is blinded and captured, soon to make a grave mistake in revealing one of the identities of the others.

Bonnie, Clyde, and C.W. barely escape with their lives, and their antics from this point become bloodier and bloodier. The cat-and-mouse play during this scene makes it the most suspenseful of them all.

Amid all the violence, a fantastic scene unfolds when Bonnie and Clyde meet at a secret location with Bonnie’s mother. A local townswoman, not an actress, was cast in the pivotal role of Bonnie’s mother, and the scene is an emotional experience.

The woman’s kindness and sensibility, and the sheer “regular person” she encompasses, humanize Bonnie and Clyde, and ominously, their downfall is soon to occur.

A highly influential film, Bonnie and Clyde is a film that is still quite relevant, especially for those who appreciate good movies and rich, intelligently written characters who are flawed yet humanistic, layered with complexity.

This is what director Penn carves out, and the film is an all-time Hollywood classic.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Arthur Penn, Best Actor-Warren Beatty, Best Actress-Faye Dunaway, Best Supporting Actor-Gene Hackman, Michael J. Pollard, Best Supporting Actress-Estelle Parsons (won), Best Story and Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Costume Design, Best Cinematography (won)

#90 Favorite Film, 1967 Films, Brian Keith, Drama, Elizabeth Taylor, John Huston, Julie Harris, Marlon Brando, Robert Forster, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Zorro David

Reflections in a Golden Eye-1967

Leave a comment

Reflections in a Golden Eye-1967

Director John Huston

Starring Marlon Brando, Elizabeth Taylor

Top 250 Films #90

Scott’s Review #678

Reviewed September 3, 2017

Grade: A

Reflections in a Golden Eye is a film made during the beginning of a rich and creative time in cinema history (the latter part of the 1960s and the beginning part of the 1970s), where films were “created” rather than produced.

Less studio influence meant more creative control for the director- in this case, John Huston, who cast the immeasurable talents of Elizabeth Taylor and Marlon Brando in the key roles.

Worth mentioning is that Montgomery Clift was the intended star, but died before the shooting began. Richard Burton had turned down the role.

The film is an edgy and taboo story of lust, jealousy, and sexual repression set amid a southern military base. In the novel 1967, repressed homosexuality is explored in full detail, as well as heterosexual repression and voyeurism.

Initially a box-office flop, the film has since become an admired and cherished part of film history.

Reflections in a Golden Eye is based on the 1941 Carson McCullers novel.

Major Weldon Penderton (Brando) resides with his spoiled wife, Leonora (Taylor), at a US Army post somewhere in the South during the 1940s and 1950s.

A neighboring couple, Lieutenant Colonel Morris Langdon (Brian Keith) and his depressed wife, Alison (Julie Harris) are also featured and the trials and tribulations of Army life are exposed. Playing key roles are Langdon’s effeminate houseboy, Anacleto, and a mysterious Private Williams, played by a young and dashing Robert Forster.

Weldon is a repressed homosexual, rigid, and very unhappy with himself and his life, despite being successful professionally. To make matters worse, he is repeatedly needled and tormented by Leonora, who is having an affair with Morris.

Leonora adores her prized horse, Firebird, who becomes a significant part of the story. When Weldon and Leonora spy Private Williams completely naked in the woods riding bareback, Weldon feigns disgust, but his secret desires for the young man are revealed.

The two men then begin a secret cat-and-mouse game of spying and following each other around until a tragedy occurs.

Reflections in a Golden Eye is not a happy film; rather, it is a depressing piece about troubled lives and emotions. Passions are unfulfilled and repeatedly repressed as each character can be dissected in a complex fashion.

I am most intrigued by the character of Private Williams. A bit of an oddity, he mainly watches the action from afar, learning Weldon and Leonora’s secrets- they keep separate bedrooms and repeatedly squabble.

We wonder- is Williams obsessed with Weldon or Leonora? Or both? He sneaks into her room and rummages through her lingerie and perfume drawers. Would he, in a different time, consider himself to be transgender? Or merely intrigued by cross-dressing?

Weldon can also be carefully examined- he has fits of rage and violence that frequently erupt. Poor Firebird suffers a violent beating at his hands, to say nothing of the main character’s fate at the end of the film.

Having a macho and masculine exterior, his job is that of a leader, but the perception of a homosexual male during that time, if it was thought of at all, was more like the femininity portrayed by the Filipino male, Anacleto.

Huston wisely casts both male roles well in this department, as the men, along with Williams, could not be more different or nuanced.

A wise and telling aspect of the film is how it was initially shot with a muted yet distinguishable golden haze- appropriate to the film’s title- and much of the action seems to be viewed from the viewpoint of the horses.

The color theme was reportedly changed because it confused audiences, but my copy has the intended golden haze, and I find this tremendous. It works brilliantly in capturing Huston’s original intentions.

The film is reminiscent of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf or Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, the latter made only the year before. Arguably, Taylor’s character in that film is very similar to Leonora’s.

In ways, Reflections of a Golden Eye (1967) could have been a stage production. One thing is clear: the film explores the human psyche deeply. I look forward to repeated viewings and further digging into the feelings and motivations of every principal character in a groundbreaking film by Huston.

#91 Favorite Film, 1977 Films, Drama, Feminist, Independent, Independent Drama, Robert Altman, Shelley Duvall, Sissy Spacek, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

3 Women-1977

Leave a comment

3 Women-1977

Director Robert Altman

Starring Shelley Duvall, Sissy Spacek

Top 250 Films #91

Scott’s Review #578

Reviewed January 1, 2017

Grade: A

Robert Altman is one of my all-time favorite directors and what a pleasure it is to uncover additional gems that he has directed over the years.

I have seen 3 Women (1977) before but some films (the true greats) are like fine wines and get better and better over time, in addition to being appreciated more and more with each passing viewing.

3 Women is a prime example of this. The level of psychology and the changing personalities of the characters make it a unique and brilliant experience.

3 Women is a psychological feast and the study of three complex characters, hence the title.

How fantastic how Altman claimed to have dreamed the entire film, complete with Duvall and Spacek in the roles, and then attempted to recreate the dream on film- he has done a masterful job.

The film is dream-like with an interpretive element that will leave the viewer pondering not only the relationships between the three women but who exactly each woman is- consciously and sub-consciously. Lots of questions will abound as the film concludes.

The main relationship is between the characters portrayed by Duvall and Spacek.

Duvall plays Millie Lamoreaux, a chatty and confident woman, who works at a California health spa for elderly clientele. She is statuesque and gorgeous, but surprisingly not well-liked by her colleagues, two of whom are mysterious identical twins.

New employee Pinky Rose is a shy and vulnerable mousy type, who takes an immediate liking to Millie, becoming somewhat obsessed with her. The pair eventually move in together and begin to engage in a mysterious and sometimes volatile friendship dripping in jealousy and lust.

Eventually, they switch personalities, only adding to the mystique of the film. They reside in the Purple Sage Apartments, run by Edgar and Willie Hart.

Willie is the third woman referenced in the title and is a pregnant painter, creating unsettling murals marveled at by Pinky.

It has been argued that 3 Women was an influence on the David Lynch masterpiece, Mulholland Drive (1992), and the more I ponder this the more that I agree with it.

The dream-like, surrealistic qualities are prevalent in both films.

Peculiar, strong-willed women are the central characters in both films and psychology and amnesia are the main themes. The southern California setting is identical as are the interpretive elements, and the fantastically odd characters- both lead and supporting.

When Pinky’s elderly parents are introduced, this is uncanny to a pair of grandparents featured in Mulholland Drive. Both are superior films so the comparisons are a joy to think about and ponder the complexities.

Ingmar Bergman’s 1966 psychological film Persona is most certainly a large influence on 3 Women. That film dared to explore merging personalities among women.

The final scene of 3 Women is intense and thought-provoking. The lives of the women carry on following a tragic event, but each takes on a certain persona and role within the family unit that they have forged.

Among other qualities, I view 3 Women as a feminist film, despite being directed by a male. Altman was famous for allowing his actor’s free reign in dialogue and development and this most certainly had to be the case with 3 Women.

One of Altman’s masterpieces.

Altman is a genius in nearly every film that he creates, but 3 Women is probably his most cerebral, and the film that can be talked about and analyzed more than the others.

What a pure treat for a complex film lover to explore. 3 Women (1977) is not for mainstream audiences nor is it meant to be.

#92 Favorite Film, 2009 Films, Action, Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Daniel Bruhl, Diane Kruger, Eli Roth, Favorite Film of the Year, Léa Seydoux, Melanie Laurent, Michael Fassbender, Mike Myers, Quentin Tarantino, Rod Taylor, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Inglourious Basterds-2009

Leave a comment

Inglourious Basterds-2009

Director Quentin Tarantino

Starring Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz

Top 250 Films #92

Scott’s Review #589

Reviewed January 7, 2017

Grade: A

Inglorious Basterds (2009) is simply a great movie. Blending many film genres, it is hard to categorize, but that is because it is a Quentin Tarantino film, and that says it all.

The film as a whole contains excellent acting, is wonderfully shot, and is extremely detail-oriented, plus it has the familiar “Tarantino” style of music and sound, the chapter breakdown, and the heavy violence.

Set mainly in German-occupied France during the early 1940s, during World War II, the action centers around two stories- Shosanna (Melanie Laurent), a teenage girl whose entire family is killed after being discovered hidden by a dairy farmer.

He is a Jewish sympathizer, and Shosanna barely escapes with her life when an SS Colonel, brilliantly played by Christoph Waltz, interrogates the man.

Three years later, now living in Paris and owning a cinema, she plots her revenge. The other story is also of a revenge plot by a group of Jewish-American soldiers to kill as many Nazis as possible.

Both stories eventually intersect with a grand finale inside a cinema.

The story itself is richly nuanced and unlike many generic films of today. The fantastic set design and the perfection of every last set-piece are amazing. Long scenes play out slowly but bristle with authenticity and good dialogue.

Take the first scene for example- as the SS Colonel, aptly nicknamed the “Jew Hunter” plays cat and mouse with the dairy farmer, politely asking for two glasses of milk, the audience knows the payoff will be huge, but the conversation crackles with good dialogue.

What strikes me most about the film is the intelligent writing. The many scenes of conversations between characters- a chat over strudel and cream, a trivia game at a bar, and the aforementioned scene at the farmhouse, bristle with unique, clever written dialogue so that the scenes are far from mere filler.

Of course, this is also a characteristic of Tarantino.

At over two and a half hours Inglourious Basterds (2009) is long but satisfying.

My only criticism is of Brad Pitt. I didn’t buy him as a Tarantino guy and found his character the only weak point of the film. His southern drawl just did not draw me in like I thought it might.

He was touted as the main character (perhaps because he was the biggest star), but he plays a supporting role.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Quentin Tarantino, Best Supporting Actor-Christoph Waltz (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

#93 Favorite Film, 1965 Films, Art, Camp, Haji, John Furlong, Lori Williams, Russ Meyer, Sexploitation, Stuart Lancaster, Susan Bernard, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Tura Satana

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!-1965

Leave a comment

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!- 1965

Director Russ Meyer

Starring Tura Satana, Haji

Top 250 Films #93

Scott’s Review #406

220px-Faster_pussycat_kill_kill_poster_(1)

Reviewed May 28, 2016

Grade: A

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! is a 1965 masterpiece that has eluded me for many years, primarily because it is not available on Netflix.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In Hollywood, these female characters are often portrayed as molls to even rougher men or as supporting characters who aid the men in some way. These female characters are the film.

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

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

She is a character skillfully written by Russ Meyer and is a quintessential femme fatale.

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

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

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

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

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

All three principal characters are layered, each developing feelings for other characters. At one point, Billie questions Rosie’s sexuality. Still, the female characters are neither monsters nor caricatures. They are complex with real emotions.

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

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

#17 Favorite Horror Film, #94 Favorite Film, 1961 Films, British, British Horror, Deborah Kerr, Horror, Jack Clayton, Megs Jenkins, Michael Redgrave, Peter Wyngarde, Top 100 Films, Top 20 Horror Films, Top 250 Films, Top 40 Horror Films

The Innocents-1961

Leave a comment

The Innocents-1961

Director Jack Clayton

Starring Deborah Kerr

Top 250 Films #94

Top 40 Horror Films #17

Scott’s Review #639

Reviewed April 29, 2017

Grade: A

The Innocents is a 1961 British psychological horror film that tells a ghost story, based on the novella “The Turn of the Screw” by Henry James.

Although it is a horror film, it contains few traditional elements, such as contrived frights, jumps, and blood. Instead, the film succeeds by using lighting and magnificent cinematography by Freddie Francis.

And, of course, fantastic storytelling and direction from Jack Clayton.

Deborah Kerr gives an excellent turn as a beleaguered governess hired by a wealthy bachelor (Michael Redgrave) to tend to his young niece and nephew, Flora and Miles.

The setting is a lavish yet creepy mansion located outside London. As the Uncle goes away to India on business, Miss Giddens, with no previous experience, is left to tend to Flora and Miles, who both begin acting strangely.

To complicate matters, Miss Giddens sees sinister ghosts lurking around the property. The ghosts are former household servants who have passed away, of whom Miss Giddens has never met.

Miss Giddens is assisted only by the kindly housekeeper, Mrs. Grose, who tells her about the servants’ tragic deaths.

The Innocents, shot in black and white, uses sound to its advantage. This, combined with the interesting camera angles and focus shots—mainly of the ghosts Miss Giddens sees—makes the film unique and scary.

When she hears strange voices, she becomes convinced that Miles and Flora are playing tricks on her, engaging in games with her. The whispers’ sounds are haunting and do wonders for the effects, chilling the viewer as the film progresses.

Is Miss Giddens imagining the voices and visions, or is this an actual reality? Could the children be sinister and playing a vicious prank on her? Could Mrs. Grose be evil?

Nobody else within the household sees or hears anything amiss- or admits to it.

Kerr, a treasured actress, plays the part with emotional facial expressions and genuine fear, so much so that she wins the audience over as we side with and empathize with her character. Still, is she a woman on the verge of a mental breakdown? Does she have past mental problems?

Like her uncle, we know nothing of her past, only that she claims to be the daughter of a minister. How, then, does she have stylish, expensive clothes? Could she only be pretending to be a governess? Has she run away from her past?

The Turn of the Screw is a true ghost story, but The Innocents is a bit different —it relies, successfully, on being more of a character-driven story.

As Miss Giddens becomes convinced that the spirits of the servants have possessed both children, she makes it her mission to rescue them from these spirits. We have an ominous feeling that events will not end well, and they do not.

Several scenes will frighten the viewer, as Miss Giddens sees a haggard ghost (the female servant) quietly standing in the distance near a lake as Flora dances chirpily; the image of the faraway ghost figure is eerie and well-shot.

The film draws comparisons to the classic Hitchcock film Rebecca (1940). Each is set in a large mansion and features complex villains who are portrayed as deceased characters.

Also, the sanity of the main character is in question.

With a compelling story and the nuts and bolts surrounding the tale to add clever effects and a chilling conclusion, the film succeeds as an excellent and intelligent horror film.

With great acting all around, including fantastic performances by child actors, The Innocents (1961) scares the daylights out of any horror fan and uses exterior and interior scenes to make the film an all-around marvel.

#3 Most Disturbing Film, #95 Favorite Film, 2000 Films, Darren Aronofsky, Drama, Dylan Baker, Favorite Film of the Year, Independent, Independent Drama, Jennifer Connelly, Marlon Wayans, Top 10 Most Disturbing Films, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Requiem for a Dream-2000

Leave a comment

Requiem for a Dream-2000

Director Darren Aronofsky

Starring Ellen Burstyn, Jared Leto

Top 250 Films #95

Top 10 Most Disturbing Films #3    

Scott’s Review #172

60001134

Reviewed September 21, 2014

Grade: A

Requiem for a Dream (2000) is a disturbing film and, at times, tough to watch. Still, it is also a brilliant masterpiece, visually as well as from a storytelling perspective, that I appreciate more and more with each painful (in a good way!) viewing experience.

The film is easily one of the most disturbing films I have ever seen.

The subject matter is drug trafficking/addiction that affects more than one character in the cast- a myriad of different films have tackled this subject- think Traffic, released around the same time as Requiem for a Dream, for a comparison.

At the risk of directly comparing Requiem for a Dream to Traffic, which is unfair, I will say that as gritty as Traffic is, Requiem for a Dream makes it look like a kid’s film.

Director Darren Aronofsky’s direction is superb.

The story revolves around a young man (Harry) from Brooklyn, played by Jared Leto, his girlfriend Marion, played by Jennifer Connelly, Harry’s mother Sara, played by Ellen Burstyn, and Harry’s best friend Tyrone, played by Marlon Wayans.

Each individual falls into a trap of drug addiction in their way, but all are written sympathetically so that the audience cares about them and feels their sorrows intensely.

Harry and Tyrone are involved in drug selling but aspire to be successful and both love their mothers and their significant others- in Harry’s case that is Marion.

Marion (Connelly) falls in over her head and is forced to turn tricks to feed her heroin habit. She is an intelligent young woman from an affluent family, which makes her downward spiral into prostitution all the more shocking.

The standout among the central characters is Sara Goldfarb, who is a lonely widowed woman obsessed with a television game show. She develops delusions of grandeur of becoming a contestant and is tragically determined to lose weight to fit into her favorite red dress.

She becomes dependent on diet pills and begins hallucinating that her refrigerator is attacking her.

Aronofsky perfectly mixes in fantasy sequences showcasing Burstyn’s real attractiveness contrasted with the desperation of Sara. Sara is a sad character and Burstyn is mesmerizing in the role.

How she lost the Oscar to Julia Roberts in 2000 is and always will be one of the biggest Oscar travesties in my opinion.

The special part of this film is the visual and cerebral aspects. The film is dreamlike in its texture and extreme, fast-paced close-ups of the diet pills or heroin being consumed.

The viewer feels the highs and lows that the characters feel and there is immediately a sense that all of the characters are doomed and hopeless.

Besides, this film has one of the most effective and haunting scores I have ever experienced, right up there with John Carpenter’s Halloween.

The slow-motion sequences combined with frenetic images make this quite cerebral to watch. I cannot watch this film very often as it is too disturbing and upsetting, but I sure am glad it was made at all.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Ellen Burstyn

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best Feature, Best Director-Darren Aronofsky, Best Female Lead-Ellen Burstyn (won), Best Supporting Female-Jennifer Connelly, Best Cinematography (won)

#96 Favorite Film, 1940 Films, Alfred Hitchcock, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Favorite Film of the Year, George Sanders, Gladys Cooper, Joan Fontaine, Judith Anderson, Laurence Olivier, Leo G. Carroll, Nigel Bruce, 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

#18 Favorite Horror Film, #97 Favorite Film, 1978 Films, Comedy, Dario Argento, David Emge, Gaylen Ross, George A. Romero, Horror, Horror Zombie, Horror-Comedy, Ken Foree, Satire, Scott Reiniger, Tom Savini, Top 100 Films, Top 20 Horror Films, Top 250 Films, Top 40 Horror Films

Dawn of the Dead-1978

Leave a comment

Dawn of the Dead-1978

Director George A. Romero

Starring Ken Foree, Gaylen Ross

Top 250 Films #97

Top 40 Horror Films #18

Scott’s Review #289

423744

Reviewed November 26, 2015

Grade: B+

One of the better installments by the famed horror-comedy director, George A. Romero, though inferior to my favorite film of his, Night of the Living Dead (1968), Romero focuses slightly more on the comedy aspect with Dawn of the Dead (1978).

For horror fans, there is plenty of gore to satisfy bloodthirsty viewers.

This film is glossier and slicker than its predecessor was.

On a slightly larger budget than Night of the Living Dead, the events are in suburban Pennsylvania, at a local mall.

An unknown phenomenon has made non-buried humans change form into flesh-eating zombies that prey on other human beings.

A group of survivors hunker down in a suburban mall and begin a life of adequacy. They utilize the contents of the mall until events threaten their existence. They must form a militant operation to survive.

The four survivors are Stephen (David Emge) and Francine (Gaylen Ross), two staff members of a local television station, and Roger (Scott Reiniger) and Peter (Ken Foree), two SWAT team members whom they meet in the ensuing chaos.

The quartet steals a helicopter and travels a short distance to the mall.

Having viewed Dawn of the Dead many times, I am a fan of the film, but not an enormous fan, and it hovers below my Top Twenty Five Horror Films list (as of this review).

The main flaw is how it delves into the personal lives of Stephen and Francine midstream, a fact I find meaningless and stalls the plot.

Francine has realized that she is pregnant and I do not understand the point of slowing down the action for this purpose.

I am a huge fan of character development (even in the horror genre!), but this development does not work.

Still, the lengthy portion of the film of over two hours (highly unusual for horror), enamored me.

The scenes in the mall are fantastic and the action in the final act is thrilling.

Reminiscent of my youth and hours spent as a child, along with my mother and siblings, being paraded around the local mall, the look of the mall in Dawn of the Dead brings back a flood of memories.

From the fake green plants to the mannequins, the pool of water filled with coins, and the redundant, but lovely Muzak in the background.

Romero, as he did with Night of the Living Dead, provides a social element to the film.

The onset of materialism and consumerism captured the United States in the late 1970s and 1980s and Romero focuses on it. It’s taken me a couple of viewings to catch onto this point. The zombies stupidly walk around the mall in a numbing fashion mirroring how many people did during the day.

One character mentions that the zombies are drawn to the mall because it is familiar, much like people frequented the malls at that time frivolously spending away their time and money.

Some of the deaths, including one main character, are haunting. As the character suddenly “turns”, it is frightening to see them in this new light compared to how they once were.

And, comically, my favorite zombie character is the nurse. Wearing a uniform (white shoes, classic nurse cap, and white suit) she is creepy yet mesmerizing in her body and facial expressions as she lumbers around the mall.

It makes me smile each time I see her.

Dawn of the Dead (1978) is one of the better, more interesting zombie films. I just wish the relationship drama, mainly in the center, had been modified since it slows down the pace.

Still, a good, fun, late-night flick.

#98 Favorite Film, 2003 Films, 2004 Films, Action, Daryl Hannah, David Carradine, Favorite Film of the Year, James Parks, Lucy Liu, Martial Arts, Michael Madsen, Michael Parks, Quentin Tarantino, Samuel L. Jackson, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films, Uma Thurman, Vivica A. Fox

Kill Bill: Volume 1 and Volume 2-2003/2004

Leave a comment

Kill Bill: Volume 1 and Volume 2- 2003/2004

Director Quentin Tarantino

Starring Uma Thurman, David Carradine

Top 250 Films #98

Scott’s Review #322

6003123660032563

Reviewed January 3, 2016

Grade: A

Despite being released as separate films (Fall of 2003 and Spring of 2004), Kill Bill: Volume 1 and Kill Bill: Volume 2 are one grand, sprawling feature.

The films were shot as one, but at a running time of over four hours, it was impossible to release them as one, so director Quentin Tarantino decided to release his masterpiece martial arts film as two sequential films.

I have decided to review them as one since Volume 2 is a clear continuation of Volume 1.

From a story perspective, Kill Bill is a basic revenge thriller. The plot is not complex nor ingenious and is rather ordinary containing B-movie components- think the really bad Kung-Fu films of long ago.

What makes Kill Bill an extraordinary masterpiece, however, is the style that exudes from the film, thanks to the direction and creation of Tarantino.

The film is brimming with good flavor and crackling dialogue of an intelligent sort.

Characters have long conversations with each other-not for redundancy’s sake- in between the endless martial arts and bloody sequences.

We meet our heroine, The Bride (Uma Thurman), in a chapel in El Paso, Texas. About to be married to her groom, the entire wedding party is suddenly assassinated in a bloody fashion by the Deadly Viper Assassination Squad.

Their leader, Bill (David Carradine), shoots The Bride after she reveals to him that she is carrying his baby.

The film flashes forward four years later- The Bride has survived the massacre but has been comatose ever since. When a hospital worker rapes her, she escapes and vows revenge on each one of her attackers- the revenge culminating with Bill.

Her path of destruction leads her to Japan.

Like most of Tarantino’s films, Kill Bill is divided into chapters and often goes back and forth from past to present.

The brilliance of Kill Bill is its pizazz. We know The Bride will get her revenge on the assassins, we just do not know in what way or how bloody the slaughters will be.

The film contains copious amounts of blood and swords and machetes are everywhere to be found.

The slow drawl dialogue as The Bride has conversations with her prey before she kills them, oftentimes ends in a big fight scene. Her first revenge, against Vernita (Vivica A. Fox), is unique in that it takes place in Vernita’s kitchen as her young daughter is happily eating her breakfast cereal.

The entire battle ensues in the kitchen and we are left watching blood and cereal.

It is Tarantino’s unique style of filmmaking and storytelling, adding violence, and long character conversations, that give Kill Bill, and all of his other classic films, his unique brand, and stamp of approval.

I dearly hope he continues to make films that challenge the norm, for years to come.

#99 Favorite Film, 1965 Films, Action, Adolfo Celi, Anthony Dawson, Bernard Lee, Claudine Auger, Desmond Llewelyn, James Bond, Lois Maxwell, Luciana Paluzzi, Sean Connery, Terence Young, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Thunderball-1965

Leave a comment

Thunderball-1965

Director Terence Young

Starring Sean Connery, Claudine Auger

Top 250 Films #99

Scott’s Review #364

1046268

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

By 1965, the James Bond franchise was embarking on its fourth segment, and the budget reflected the success of the preceding films.

Thunderball reaps the benefits of an enormous budget and is. As a result, it is a grand, epic film. Its sheer magnitude makes it one of my favorite Bond films simply because of its look.

The special effects are a marvel.

By this time, Sean Connery had comfortably immersed himself in the role of Bond, utilizing his charm and ability to exude charisma.

In this story, two NATO atomic bombs have been stolen by SPECTRE and held the world to ransom for millions in diamonds. They are threatening to detonate one of the bombs in a major city in either the United States or England. Mr. Bond must race against time to deter this from happening.

For starters, the opening sequence is one of my favorites. Bond attends the funeral of a deceased SPECTRE agent (number 6) at a lavish chateau in France. The agent is disguised as his widow, but Bond is not fooled.

This sets the stage as a dramatic fight scene ensues between the two “men.”

The main villain of Thunderball is Emilio Largo (Adolfo Celi), a handsome, suave SPECTRE agent (number 2). He is rich and sophisticated, a quality that is reflected throughout the film.

His grand estate is set and filmed in the Bahamas, giving most of the film a steamy, posh look, with bluish-green waters and white, crispy sand.

It’s the most gorgeous backdrop.

Largo is a great Bond villain and on par with Bond. He also has charm, good looks, and charisma.

The main Bond girl is Domino, played by Claudine Auger. Largo’s mistress is typically clad in black and/or white, hence her name.

Auger has the perfect balance of beautiful looks, sophistication, and intelligence, and is an ideal match for Bond. The chemistry between Connery and Auger is palpable and a significant factor in the film’s success.

What sets Thunderball apart from some Bond films is the central portion of the film, mainly in the second half, which takes place underwater.

In a clear example of showcasing the modern technology of the time (1965), some complained that these sequences went on too long and did not advance the plot.

These points may have some validity, but oh, are they so visually appealing! The exotic underwater world is majestic.

Thunderball has it all and is one of the most gorgeous Bond films. It is big, bombastic, and filled with bright colors.

It contains all the elements of a great Bond film, so it has held up remarkably well over the years.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Special Visual Effects (won)

#100 Favorite Film, 1971 Films, Action, Bernard Lee, Connie Mason, Desmond Llewelyn, Guy Hamilton, James Bond, Jill St. John, Laurence Naismith, Lois Maxwell, Sean Connery, Top 100 Films, Top 250 Films

Diamonds Are Forever-1971

Leave a comment

Diamonds Are Forever-1971

Director Guy Hamilton

Starring Sean Connery, Jill St. John

Top 250 Films #100

Scott’s Review #328

60000705

Reviewed January 6, 2016

Grade: A

Despite Diamonds Are Forever (1971) being one of the lower-rated James Bond films, this is actually one of my favorite films of all time and many would disagree with me.

Some say Sean Connery phoned this performance in, some say there was little chemistry between him and Jill St. John and tension-filled the sets leading to a sub-par offering, but I think this is a great film.

I love the Las Vegas locale, the bright lights, flashy costumes, and a ritzy underbelly- and the Vegas car chase is amazing.

A bright, shiny Ford Mustang takes center stage throughout the sequence, and if one looks closely, one will realize that nearly all the cars are Ford- fun fact!

The title song by Shirley Bassey is great- sultry and stylish only enhanced by the glitzy setting. One immediately imagines the film oozing with diamonds as it does.

The villains are interesting and Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd were the first openly gay Bond villains, which, in 1971 was groundbreaking.

Yes, they are evil and slightly silly, but what a risky and surprising blatant scene to see the gentlemen holding hands.

St. John is a sophisticated and intelligent Bond girl and the action in this film is plenty.

Diamonds Are Forever (1971) contains all the elements for an enjoyable Bond experience.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound