1966 Films, Best Film of the Year, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Drama, Elizabeth Taylor, Mike Nichols, Richard Burton, Scott's Top 100 Films

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?-1966

December 3, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? -1966

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton

Top 100 Films #41

Scott’s Review #200

Reviewed December 3, 2014

Grade: A

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? directed by Mike Nichols (The Graduate), is a dark film based on the play from the early 1960s.

Thankfully, by 1966, the Production Code had been lifted, allowing for edgier, darker films to get made- think The Wild Bunch or Bonnie and Clyde from the same period.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is dreary, bleak, and with damn good acting by all four principles.

George and Martha (Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor) are an associate history professor and daughter of the college president respectively, living in a small New England town.

They have a bitter love/hate relationship.

One night they invite young newlyweds, Nick (George Segal) and Honey (Sandy Dennis), a new professor and his wife, over for drinks at 2:00 in the morning.

From this point, a destructive night of verbal assaults and psychological games ensues with damaging and sad results for all parties involved, as their personal lives are exposed and dissected.

At the forefront are George and Martha, who have a relationship based on insults, neediness, secrets, and booze. After an evening out, they return home and have a vicious fight.

When their young friends arrive, the tension is thick.

Eventually, the young couple becomes sucked into the older couple’s web of dysfunction, aided by endless drinks throughout the night.

The film is shot very much like a play and filmed in black and white, which I found highly effective- most scenes take place in George and Martha’s house.

While all four actors are great (and were all Oscar-nominated), the standouts for me are Taylor and Dennis.

This role is Taylor’s finest acting performance in my opinion- she is overweight, bitter, angry, frustrated, drunk, and at times vicious to her husband. It is a different performance from many of her other film roles and it is just dynamite.

As her anger flares up, one can feel the heat and intensity oozing from the screen. She goes from vulnerable and soft one moment to a grizzled, bitter woman the next.

Dennis, conversely, is a pure innocent- kind, vulnerable, impressionable, and somewhat of a ninny. Having had too much brandy and spending more than one occasion in the bathroom, Dennis successfully plays giddiness and innocence to the hilt.

Both Martha and Honey harbor dark secrets, which eventually are revealed.

The ambiance is just amazing- black and white cinematography, a hot, suffocating feel to the film, it feels like a quiet little college hamlet, and the setting of the eerily quiet wee hours of the morning is conveyed successfully.

Each story told- mainly by George and Martha- is captivating in its viciousness (both usually belittling the other) that the film becomes mesmerizing in its shock value at the insults hurled.

What will they say or do next?

I loved the scene where Honey does an awkward dance at a late-night bar that the four of them go to. Also, the shotgun scene where George obtains the gun from the garage during one of Martha’s insulting tales is disturbing- what will he do with the gun?

The stories involving George and Martha’s son are sad and mysterious- the viewer wonders what is going on.

The final reveal still gives me chills.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) is one of the greatest film adaptations of a play that I have ever seen.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Mike Nichols, Best Actor-Richard Burton, Best Actress-Elizabeth Taylor (won), Best Supporting Actor-George Segal, Best Supporting Actress-Sandy Dennis (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Original Music Score, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White (won), Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (won), Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing

2014 Films, Biography, Drama

The Theory of Everything-2014

December 2, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Theory of Everything-2014

Director-James Marsh

Starring-Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones

Scott’s Review #199

Reviewed December 2, 2014

Grade: A-

The Theory of Everything tells the uplifting true story of renowned theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking (played by Eddie Redmayne) and his lifelong battle with a debilitating illness- motor neuron disease, which he was diagnosed with in college.

He and his future wife, literature student Jane Wilde (played by Felicity Jones), meet in 1963 at the prestigious Cambridge University in England and fall madly in love.

From this point, the film focuses both on their life-long love affair and Stephen’s subsequent health battles.

Redmayne is wonderful in the lead role. Portraying a character with both speech and mobility deterioration is not an easy task, especially as the problems become worse and worse over time forcing the actor to portray varying levels of disability.

Redmayne rises to the occasion with both believability and conviction making his portrayal as real as possible. The performance fondly reminded me of another great physical performance- that of Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot from 1989. Redmayne is certainly a rising star in Hollywood.

Felicity Jones is also very good- though I feel many actresses could have handled the role and there is certainly not as much meat in her part as Redmayne’s.

The remainder of the cast is comprised of very British actors making the film an authentic feeling. Emily Watson, who plays Jane’s mother, shamefully receives only one scene- was this talented actress’s role cut? One wonders.

I get the sense that the filmmakers had Oscar on the mind as the film certainly is geared towards mainstream audiences with a wholesome slant to it.

The film skims past the complex theories and mathematical aspects-sure to confuse most- and focuses more on the inspirational tale of a person overcoming an immense challenge. Furthermore, the subsequent quadrangle between Hawking, Jane, Jane’s choir leader (Jonathan), and Hawking’s nurse (Elaine) is very toned down and safe from what transpired- Hawking’s family accused his nurse of abusing him which is never mentioned in the film.

The film presents their relationship as wonderful, so clearly some facts have been softened or omitted altogether- another example of how the film goes for a moral feel.

The situation involving the four real-life characters was messy, but the film makes it seem sweet- presumably, this is because all the characters are still alive.

This is an interesting aspect of the film and is not necessarily a criticism as much as a perception- certainly many films embellish reality for entertainment value.

A few thoughts I was left pondering- the pairing of Jane and Jonathan seemed inevitable to me from the moment they laid eyes on each other- they had much in common (religion), whereas Stephen and Jane were complete opposites- she catholic, he atheist.

The sexual chemistry between Stephen and Elaine was evident from the moment they laid eyes on each other. Elaine’s energetic sexiness perfectly contrasted with Jane’s at that point in the film- haggardness and weariness.

The film is not designed to be a downer as it very well could have been- the focus might have been more downtrodden than it was. Rather, it is sentimental and empowering.

The Theory of Everything is a heartwarming, conventional, human story about a man rising above adversity, and at the center of the film is one dynamic performance by Eddie Redmayne.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor-Eddie Redmayne (won), Best Actress-Felicity Jones, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score

2014 Films, Drama, HBO, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films

The Normal Heart-2014

December 1, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Normal Heart-2014

Director-Ryan Murphy

Starring-Mark Ruffalo, Matt Bomer

Scott’s Review #198

Reviewed December 1, 2014

Grade: B+

The Normal Heart is a 2014 HBO television movie based on the true story of Ned Weeks, an openly gay AIDS activist/writer, played by Mark Ruffalo.

The film is set during the period when the epidemic first surfaced, from 1981-1984, and the challenges and frustrations faced, mostly within the gay community, to bring exposure and assistance to the disease.

Weeks was famous for establishing a group of passionate members who banded together to attempt to hurdle these struggles.

The film was produced by Brad Pitt- wonderful to know as films with this content (AIDS) are often tough to produce- nice that Pitt’s wealth and influence were used effectively.

Certainly, at a vastly different time in the country to be gay, the government did very little to assist with financing funding for treatment or researching a cure for it, which is the main point of the story.

The talented cast makes this film what it is. Matt Bomer plays Ned’s closeted gay lover, Felix Turner, one of the many casualties of the deadly disease. Bomer lost 40 pounds in preparation for the role.

Julia Roberts plays polio-stricken doctor, Emma Brookner, who was instrumental in helping the sick when few others within the medical community wanted to.

Other actors providing support are Alfred Molina, who plays Ned’s supportive, and powerful, attorney and brother, and Joe Mantello, who has a terrific meltdown scene as his anger and anguish over the disease not being taken seriously by the government finally bubble to the surface.

Finally, Mark Ruffalo plays Ned competently, but why the slight feminization of the character? The real Ned Weeks was masculine. A needless stereotype the film (or Ruffalo) chose to pursue.

The film shows the discrimination faced by the AIDS victims- from an airline pilot refusing to fly a plane carrying a sick patient, to an electrician refusing to enter a sick patient’s hospital room to fix a television set- sad when one realizes how ridiculous these unfounded fears proved to be.

According to the film’s statistics, and a major point of the film is how the United States Government, specifically President Reagan, did very little in the way of funding or even wanting to discuss the issue for years following the initial outbreak, resulting in thousands of lost lives.

And why exactly is Reagan considered a great President?

It makes one ponder. It was only due to beloved Hollywood star Rock Hudson acquiring and dying from the disease and Elizabeth Taylor using her star power to get people involved that finally led to the topic being discussed and action taken on a federal level.

My one slight criticism of the film is that it looks and feels like a television movie similar in texture to Behind the Candelabra, another HBO film.

The colors are bright and vivid and it looks television-like and could have used darker lighting and perhaps a gloomier more dower feel, especially given the subject matter involved in the story.

Otherwise, thumbs up and respect for bringing this story to millions of viewers and hopefully educating the many who were not there at the time.

1974 Films, Al Pacino, Best Film of the Year, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Danny Aiello, Diane Keaton, Drama, Epic, Francis Ford Coppola, Harry Dean Stanton, James Caan, John Cazale, Mario Puzo, Mob, Robert De Niro, Robert Duvall, Scott's Top 100 Films, Talia Shire

The Godfather: Part II-1974

November 25, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Godfather: Part II-1974

Director Frances Ford Coppola

Starring Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro

Top 100 Films #3

Scott’s Review #197

Reviewed: November 25, 2014

Grade: A

Frances Ford Coppola’s sequel (and technically also a prequel) to the highly regarded and successful The Godfather (1972) is one of the rare sequels to equal and even surpass the original in its greatness, creativity, and structure.

The Godfather Part II (1974) feels deeper, more complex, and ultimately richer than The Godfather- and that film itself is a masterpiece. Part II is much darker in tone. Ford Coppola had complete freedom to write and direct as he saw fit with no studio interference.

The results are immeasurable in creating a film masterpiece.

The film is sectioned into two parts, which is a highly interesting and effective decision.

The story alternates between the early twentieth century following Don Corleone’s life, now played by Robert DeNiro, as his story is explained- left without a family and on the run from a crime lord, Don escapes to the United States as a young boy and struggles to survive in the Little Italy neighborhood of New York City.

He obtains a modest job as a grocery stockboy and finally celebrates his eventual rise to power in the mafia.

The other part of the film is set in 1958 as Michael Corleone is faced with a crumbling empire, through both rivals and the FBI- investigating him and holding Senate committee hearings in Washington D.C., and a failing marriage to Kay (Diane Keaton).

Betrayal is a common theme of the film from Michael’s wife, brother, and mobster allies revealed to be cagey enemies. Michael grows uncertain and mistrustful of almost everyone surrounding him. Is Kay a friend or foe? Is Fredo plotting against him? He even begins lashing out at Tom Hagen on occasion.

What makes The Godfather Part II so brilliant, and in my opinion richer than The Godfather, is that it is tougher to watch- and that is to its credit. Now, instead of being a warm, respected member of a powerful family, Michael is questioned, analyzed, and betrayed.

New, interesting characters are introduced- Hyman Roth, played by Lee Strasburg, a former ally of Don’s, and Frankie Pentangeli, played by Michael V. Gazzo are intriguing characters and their allegiances are unknown throughout most of the film- are they loyal to the Corleone’s or deadly enemies?

The character of Michael goes from conflicted to all-out revenge-minded, including revenge sought on members of his own family. Michael is now a dark, angry character- gone is the nice, decorated war hero with his whole life ahead of him. He is much older and a changed man.

Similar to the original Godfather, the opening scene is a large celebration- this time Anthony Corleone’s first communion celebration. Also in comparison, the finale of the film involves major character deaths one after the other.

Unique to this film are the multiple location scenes- New York, Nevada, Italy, Florida, and Cuba are all featured making for an enjoyable segue throughout and a bigger budget.

The blow-up confrontation between Michael and Kay is devastating and shocking in its climax. When Michael punches Kay in a sudden rage, the audience also feels punched.

The wonderful scene at the end of the film with the entire family gathered around for Don’s fiftieth birthday in 1942 is a special treat for viewers; familiar faces make cameo appearances.

I love these aspects of the film.

The rich history of Don is the greatest aspect of The Godfather Part II simply known as “Godfather” and patriarch of the family, his life as a boy and young father are explained so we see how he became one of the most powerful men in the crime world.

I love how he remains a decent man and helps the poor and the victims of ruthless Don Fanucci, his predecessor. He loves his wife and children, but also loves his neighbors, and helps them, believing in fairness.

Ultimately, the characters of Don and Michael are worlds apart.

The Godfather Part II (1974) is one of the most complex and well-written films in movie history- studied in film school, discussed, imitated, and championed. It remains vital and should be viewed and analyzed again and again and again.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Francis Ford Coppola, Best Actor-Al Pacino, Best Supporting Actor-Robert De Niro (won), Michael V. Gazzo, Lee Strasberg, Best Supporting Actress-Talia Shire, Best Screenplay Adapted from Other Material (won), Best Original Dramatic Score (won), Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction (won)

1972 Films, Al Pacino, Best Film of the Year, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Diane Keaton, Drama, Epic, Francis Ford Coppola, James Caan, John Cazale, Mario Puzo, Marlon Brando, Mob, Robert Duvall, Scott's Top 100 Films, Talia Shire

The Godfather-1972

November 24, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Godfather-1972

Director Frances Ford Coppola

Starring Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan

Top 100 Films #10

Scott’s Review #196

Reviewed November 24, 2014

Grade: A

The Godfather (1972) is one of the most identifiable and brilliant film masterpieces of all time. It is so ingrained in pop culture and film history and was such a blueprint of 1970s cinema that its legend deservedly lives on.

The film has not aged poorly nor been soured by over-exposure. It is as much a marvel today as it must have been when originally released in theaters.

The film revolves around the Corleone family- a mob family living in New York. They are high-powered, wealthy, and influential with politicians and law enforcement alike. They are the cream of the crop of organized crime families.

The patriarch of the family is known as “The Godfather”, the real name is Don Corleone, played by Marlon Brando.

The eldest son is hot-headed Sonny, played by James Caan. Middle son Fredo, played by John Cazale, is dim-witted and immature and the weak link in the family.

Finally, the youngest son is the central character in the film. Michael, played by a very youthful Al Pacino, has just returned home from World War II, a decorated and Ivy League-educated hero.

Throughout the film, Michael wrestles with either steering the Corleone family business toward the straight and narrow or continuing the death, blood, and corruption that currently encompasses the family.

Rounding out the Corleone family is Tom Hagen, an Irish surrogate son of sorts, who serves as the family attorney. Connie- the temperamental and emotional sister, and Mama Corleone, the passive wife of Don complete the main family.

The various supporting characters are immense, from family friends, relatives, corrupt mob figures, and characters introduced when Michael lives in Italy.

The brilliance of The Godfather is the richness of the enormous amount of characters on the canvas and the structure and pacing of the film.

Even small characters are vital to the film and every scene is important and effortlessly paced so that they neither seem rushed nor dragged, and the film is immeasurably character-driven.

My favorite character is Michael Corleone as he is the most troubled and complex. Pacino plays him to the hilt as, initially, a nice guy trying to do the right thing, going against the grain, and non-traditional- he proposes to a waspy woman who has no Italian heritage.

When events develop in a particular way, Michael suddenly becomes the leader of the family, despite being the youngest son, and the complexities of the character deepen from this point.

Specifically, the revenge killing sequence is brilliant as the viewer is kept on the edge of their seat through a car ride, a meal in a restaurant, and a men’s room scene, until finally, all hell breaks loose, all the while Michael is conflicted, unsure, and intense.

Has he veered too far from being a nice guy? Can he salvage the family business without being ruthless? Michael faces a battle of good vs. evil.

The scenes are brilliantly structured- the grand opening scene alone is beautiful as the audience is introduced to the entire family- cheerfully dancing and frolicking during a bright and sunny outdoor wedding (Connie’s) at the Corleone estate, while inside a dark interior study, a man begs Don Corleone to help avenge his raped and beaten daughter by having her attackers killed.

Several scenes in The Godfather are my personal favorites- the aforementioned restaurant scene, where Michael is faced with a dilemma involving a corrupt policeman and a high-powered figure, one can feel the tension in this extended scene.

The scene in a Hollywood mansion where poor, innocent, horse Khartoum meets his fate in the most gruesome way imaginable.

Later, Michael’s beautiful Italian wife, Apollonia, has an explosive send-off.

Towards the end of the film, the improvised tomato garden scene with an elderly Don Corleone playing with his young grandson.

Finally, the brutal scene involving Corleone’s son Sonny at the toll booth is mesmerizing, brutal, and flawlessly executed.

The lack of any strong female characters and how women are treated (either beaten or passively following their husbands) is bothersome, but unfortunately, circa 1940s mafia, this is the way things were.

One could make the argument that Kay Adams, played by Diane Keaton, is the strongest female character as she questions the Corleone family’s motives and attempts to keep Michael honest and trustworthy. She has little in common with the other female characters.

Lines such as “I’m gonna make him an offer he can’t refuse” and “Don’t forget the cannolis” are unforgettable and quote-worthy.

The finale of the film is breathtaking- a combination of bloody kills mixed in with a peaceful scene of Michael accepting the honor of becoming his nephew’s godfather. As he pledges his devotion to God and denounces Satan, the murders he orchestrated are simultaneously being executed.

The character, while complex, suddenly becomes a hypocrite.

Some view Michael as strictly a hero whose choices should not be questioned or analyzed- others view Michael as not a hero, but rather a complex, tortured, bad guy.

One simply must watch The Godfather and The Godfather Part II (1974) as companion pieces, as Part I is slightly more straightforward and easier to follow than the more complex and layered sequel.

The Godfather (1972) is storytelling and filmmaking at its absolute best and continues to influence films to this day.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Francis Ford Coppola, Best Actor-Marlon Brando (won), Best Supporting Actor-James Caan, Robert Duvall, Al Pacino, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium (won), Best Costume Design, Best Sound, Best Film Editing

1981 Films, Camp, Drama, Faye Dunaway, Joan Crawford, Scott's Top 100 Films

Mommie Dearest-1981

November 20, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Mommie Dearest-1981

Director Frank Perry

Starring Faye Dunaway

Top 100 Films #44

Scott’s Review #195

Reviewed November 20, 2014

Grade: A

Camp, camp, camp!

By this point in film history, Mommie Dearest and this description go hand in hand, but when made in 1981, it was meant to be a much more serious film than it turned out to be.

Sadly, due to a few very over-the-top lines, it is forever inducted into the halls of cult classic memory.

Based on the scandalous tell-all book written by Christina Crawford (Joan’s adopted daughter), Mommie Dearest tells the story of Joan Crawford, a Hollywood screen legend, from her heyday in the 1930s, until she died in 1977, and mostly focuses on the tumultuous relationship with Christina- played as an adult by Diana Scarwid.

Convinced a baby was missing from her life and unable to conceive after several miscarriages with a former flame, Crawford’s beau at the time, an attorney, wrangles a way for her to adopt both Christina and later, Christopher Crawford.

Dealing with her mother’s demands and abuse, Christina goes from a happy little girl to a rebellious teen sent to live in a convent and later struggling to find her way as an actress in New York City with no financial support from Mom.

The film also wonderfully describes the career of Crawford- from highs (winning the Academy Award for Mildred Pierce) to lows (being cut from MGM and reduced to screen tests). The film also recounts Joan Crawford’s continuing battles with booze and neuroses.

From start to finish the film belongs to Dunaway as she simply becomes Crawford- the eyelashes, the mannerisms, every detail is spot on.

Unfortunately for Dunaway, due to the unintentional comedic view of this film, she was robbed of an Oscar nomination, shamefully so. The film was awarded several Razzies- a derogatory honor given to the year’s worst films. Dunaway must have put her heart and soul into this performance.

During the infamous wire hanger scene, Dunaway looks frightening as her face, caked with cold cream, reveals a grotesque mask- reminiscent of Batman character The Joker- as she shrieks at her daughter in the middle of the night, during a drunken tirade, after finding beautiful clothes on wire hangers.

She then trashes her daughter’s bathroom insisting it is already filthy.

One will shriek with gales of laughter as Crawford berates her maid Helga for not scrubbing beneath a potted plant, only to insist, “I’m not mad at you Helga, I’m mad at the dirt”.

In another haunting scene, Joan throws a birthday party for Christina complete with a merry-go-round, balloons, presents, and the paparazzi. Joan’s attire is a little girl dress matching young Christina’s- a morbid foreshadowing of the competition that is to exist between them as the years go by.

The secondary characters are merely an extension of Dunaway’s character and do their best to support her- her harried live-in assistant, Carol Ann, played by Rutanya Alda, both of her love interests, lawyer, Greg Savitt, played by Steve Forrest, and later, Pepsi-Cola mogul Alfred Steele, played by Harry Goz.

The actors do their best with the material given and are neither exceptional nor flawed. None of these supporting characters have any backstory other than to react to Crawford’s drama and, if written better, may have given the film a bit more depth.

The look of the film is pleasing- Crawford’s house is beautifully decorated with lavish furniture and the colors throughout the film are both bright and vivid. The now-legendary lines of “No wire hangers ever!”, “Christina! Bring me the ax!”, and “Don’t fuck with me fellas, this ain’t my first time at the rodeo” are hysterical in their melodrama and effect.

Crawford is portrayed as an obsessive-compulsive, demanding, control freak. One may debate the authenticity of the claims Christina made against Joan Crawford until the end of time.

Not the masterpiece it was intended to be, Mommie Dearest (1981) can be enjoyed viewing after viewing for some campy silliness, with one hell of a great performance by Dunaway mixed in.

1974 Films, Adventure, Disaster, Faye Dunaway, Fred Astaire, Jennifer Jones, O.J. Simpson, Paul Newman, Scott's Top 100 Films, Steve McQueen, Susan Blakely, William Holden

The Towering Inferno-1974

November 15, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Towering Inferno-1974

Director John Guillermin

Starring Paul Newman, Steve McQueen

Top 100 Films #43

Scott’s Review #194

Reviewed November 15, 2014

Grade: A

The Towering Inferno (1974) epitomizes the disaster film craze heaped on audiences throughout the 1970s (Airport, Airport ‘75 and ‘77, The Poseidon Adventure (1972), and Earthquake (1974) to name a few).

I am (guilt-free) a huge fan of this 1970s movie genre, though some certainly look down on it, I am not one of them and feel The Towering Inferno is one of the greatest.

The film is enormous and has such a sense of adventure and danger.

The grand film tells of the trials and tribulations of an enormous cast of characters trapped inside an inferno-flamed skyscraper – led by Paul Newman and Steve McQueen (fun fact- the two actors reportedly despised each other).

An incredible skyscraper is erected in San Francisco, at one hundred and thirty-eight floors it is professed to be the tallest building in the world and incredibly state-of-the-art. At the ribbon-cutting ceremony, an elaborate party is held atop the building overlooking the gorgeous Pacific Ocean.

Due to faulty electrical wiring, the building catches fire and the cast of characters faces one challenge after another to escape the grips of death.

The stellar cast features stars like William Holden, Faye Dunaway, Fred Astaire, Robert Wagner, Jennifer Jones, and O.J. Simpson in addition to Newman and McQueen.

The film is quite a soap opera style- numerous characters are introduced, many having affairs with each other or suffering some sort of conflict.

Wagner having a torrid office romance with his secretary played by then up-and-coming star Susan Flannery is deliciously sexy and I yearned to know more about both characters.

Holden’s son-in-law is responsible for the faulty electrical system yet blames his father-in-law for cutting budgets.

Another subplot involves Astaire’s character attempting to swindle Jones’s character but then falling in love with her. The plots are so melodramatic that, given the period of the film, it has a definite primetime television soap opera style to it- think Dallas or Dynasty in a state of peril.

I enjoyed the enormous cast and trying to guess who will be killed off next and in what elaborate way the film will burn them to death is a joy to watch- several victims fall or jump to their deaths, which eerily (and sadly) bring back morbid images of jumpers from the World Trade towers on 9/11.

The beginning of the film shows a dedication to firemen everywhere and the film has a definite moral and heroical quality to the firemen sent to rescue the people in the building. They are portrayed as heroes and intended not to be forgotten amid all the drama encompassing the story. This is admirable.

The special effects are elaborate and quite impressive- the glass elevator rescue scene is amazing! The beautiful set designs are a treat to watch as each lobby, apartment, or lounge in the skyscraper is exquisitely designed at the height of the 1970s style.

Every sofa or carpet featured is plush, colorful, and sophisticated. The skyscraper, made of glass, is an amazing element of the film, and the aerial views of the building, especially while ablaze are impressive, to say the least- remember- 1974 was long before CGI. I am assuming small replicas of the building were used, but what an achievement from a visual perspective.

The effects certainly champion the syrupy story elements.

My only small gripe with The Towering Inferno is, assumed to be 138 stories high, the action taking place at the top of the tower- the rooftop as well as the party scenes on the top floor- do not feel that high- The scenic outlook overlooking the water and some land feel about twenty-five stories high, not one hundred and thirty-eight.

Some find The Towering Inferno (1974) to be nothing more than schmaltzy drama- I say schmaltz was never done better.

Enjoy this feast of a big film.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Fred Astaire, Best Original Dramatic Score, Best Song-“We May Never Love Like This Again” (won), Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography (won), Best Film Editing (won)

1962 Films, Best Film of the Year, Bette Davis, Horror, Joan Crawford, Robert Aldrich, Scott's Top 100 Films, Scott's Top 20 Horror Films

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?-1962

November 14, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? -1962

Director Robert Aldrich

Starring Bette Davis, Joan Crawford

Top 100 Films #71 Top 20 Horror Films #18

Scott’s Review #193

Reviewed November 14, 2014

Grade: A

Kicking off a trend, prominent throughout the 1960s, of aging Hollywood actresses starring in horror films (interestingly Bette Davis and Joan Crawford each did two- the others being Dead Ringer and Strait-Jacket), with varying degrees of success, Baby Jane is top of the heap.

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane, directed by Robert Aldrich, stars aforementioned Davis and Crawford as, ironically enough, two aging Hollywood actresses, Jane and Blanche Hudson.

Jane (Davis), a child star in the 1920s nicknamed Baby Jane, with an adorable signature song, “I’ve Written a Letter to Daddy”, has long since faded from the spotlight, but continues to dress in her Baby Jane costume, consisting of a little girl dress with hair in curls and ribbons.

Blanche, however, garnered her success as an adult in the 1930s and until a tragic accident, which left her wheelchair-bound and subsequently ruined her career, was a popular film star- much more popular than Jane.

Blanche and Jane now wither the years away in a crumbling mansion in Los Angeles. Blanche is completely dependent on her unbalanced sister for care. Jane, resentful of Blanche’s success and popularity, plans to re-launch her career in her once-famous alter ego.

The film certainly has macabre comedic elements but never veers too far over the edge as to reach camp or foolishness. It is also a very psychological film as Jane mentally abuses Blanche and plays mind games with her to achieve the upper hand.

Davis had a ball with this role as her appearance alone is frightful- a grown woman of a certain age in blonde curls, pancake makeup, and a baby doll dress- she looks positively hideous!

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane reminds me quite a bit of Billy Wilder’s masterpiece Sunset Boulevard in several ways- both feature successful stars of years past with delusions of returning to their former fame, both feature older women more than a tinge unbalanced, and both films are set in sunny Los Angeles.

Two of the film’s supporting actors are well cast, adding much to this film and simply must be given recognition- Victor Buono, later made famous for his role of King Tut in the popular late 1960’s television series Batman, is highly effective as the opportunist sloth, Edwin Flagg, who aids Jane in her comeback attempt.

Maidie Norman as the Hudson sisters’ black housekeeper, Elvira, loyal to Blanche, but never a fan of Jane’s, slowly becomes wise to Jane’s sinister plot and does a wonderful acting job when she stands up to the manipulative sister- for 1962, a black maid verbally assaulting a white woman employer was still rather taboo and kudos to the film for bravely going there is a highly effective scene.

The fact that Davis and Crawford famously despised each other in real life adds an edge that does wonders for the audience during scenes where the two women fight and claw at each other, both physically and verbally.

The film has wonderfully quotable dialogue- “We got rats in the cellar”, Jane utters matter-of-factly, as she serves Blanche a cooked rat on a bed of lettuce for lunch one day and cackles fiendishly when she hears Blanche screams of disgust.

One aspect of the film that has taken me three viewings to become aware of and that I simply love is the musical score throughout the film- it features multiple and creepy versions of Jane’s signature song “I’ve Written a Letter to Daddy” with varying tempos.

Suspension of disbelief must be used in this film- why couldn’t Blanche pound and scream at her bedroom window to alert the neighbor of trouble instead of casually tossing a note out the window?

Blanche struggling to descend steps by sliding down them and then is unable to slide across the floor to escape the mansion is silly, but alas, the film is so gripping that I happily overlook these errors and instead enjoy the suspenseful film with two actresses, rivals onscreen and off-screen, that make this film a bit too realistic, a realism that makes for delightful film watching.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actress-Bette Davis, Best Supporting Actress-Victor Buono, Best Sound, Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won)

2014 Films, Drama, Independent, Musical Drama

Whiplash-2014

November 13, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Whiplash-2014

Director-Damien Chazelle

Starring-Miles Teller, J.K. Simmons

Scott’s Review #192

Reviewed November 13, 2014

Grade: A

Whiplash is a film about an aspiring nineteen-year-old Jazz drummer- Andrew Neyman, played by rising star Miles Teller (known for 2013’s indie teen drama The Spectacular Now), who is attending one of the most revered musical schools in the country, the Schaffer Conservatory in New York.

There, he is both mentored and terrorized by his intense and sometimes sadistic conductor- Terence Fletcher, portrayed by J.K. Simmons.

Andrew aspires to be the best drummer that he can be and worships Buddy Rich- a famous Jazz drummer from the 1930s and 1940s, who he constantly listens to and emulates.

While Andrew aspires to make the school orchestra that desperately needs a new drummer, he meets a cute girl, Nicole, at the concession stand of his favorite movie theater, and they bond.

Also in the mix is Andrew’s father, played by Paul Reiser. Once an aspiring writer, who never made it big, he struggles as a high school teacher. Andrew’s mother left the family when Andrew was just a toddler leaving just father and son.

The film mainly centers on the tumultuous relationship between Andrew and Terence and Andrew’s determination to be the best drummer in the world.

J.K. Simmons is simply mesmerizing in his role of Terence and this is wonderful to see as Simmons has struggled as a character actor for years. He gives a powerhouse performance and plows full steam ahead in his viciousness and extreme brutality towards the students, and on more than one occasion reduces a student to tears- if the tempo is not to his liking he shakes his clenched fist in disapproval.

The audience wonders if Terence is simply mean and sadistic or is tough on the students simply to make them work harder and achieve all that they are capable of.

Throughout most of the film, I wondered if I should hate this character or have sympathy towards him for wanting the students to excel. The sexuality of Fletcher is ambiguous.

He belittles and ridicules the students with fat jokes- he hatefully taunts an overweight student about Mars bars and happy meals, uses Irish digs, and inevitably gay slurs on other students, but is he hiding something in his personal life? Is he a closet case? His private life remains a mystery.

As brutal as Terence can be, there are moments of sensitivity that the character exhibits- he tearfully tells the orchestra a heartbreaking story of a former student, whom he admired, who recently died in a car accident.

In another scene, he warmly bonds with a friend’s young daughter.

As brilliant as Simmons is we must not forget to recognize the immense talent of Teller. The young actor does a fantastic job of portraying determination, drive, anger, and vengeance.

Andrew has a wonderful relationship with his dedicated father, a love/hate relationship with Terence, (are they bitter enemies or do they have the respect of a mentor/student?), and a sweet yet uneven relationship with Nicole. He successfully portrays a myriad of different emotions throughout the film.

Paul Reiser is wonderful in an overlooked and, quite frankly, thankless role as Andrew’s unsuccessful, yet forever faithful father.

Thankfully the film chose to center on the conductor/student dynamic and Andrew’s romantic relationship with Nicole did not take center stage and usurp the main point of the story, as I felt that the dynamic between the two was of lesser importance to the greater whole of the film.

The finale, an intense concert performance scene focusing on the intensity between Terence and Andrew, is superbly done. The close-up camera shots of the two added much to the climax of the film.

In fact, throughout Whiplash, extreme close-up shots of sweat and blood and intensity during performances and practices add to the overall rawness of the film.

Whiplash is an intense, sometimes brutal, assaulting experience, but what an amazing film it is.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-J.K. Simmons (won), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Film Editing (won)

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Director-Damien Chazelle, Best Supporting Male-J.K. Simmons (won), Best Editing (won)

1983 Films, Al Pacino, Brian De Palma, David R. Ellis, F. Murray Abraham, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Michelle Pfeiffer, Mob, Oliver Stone

Scarface-1983

November 13, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Scarface-1983

Director Brian De Palma

Starring Al Pacino

Scott’s Review #191

Reviewed November 13, 2014

Grade: B

Scarface is a 1983 mob film directed by Brian De Palma and is an atypical film for the acclaimed director of several stylistic thrillers such as Dressed to Kill (1980), Sisters (1973), and Carrie (1976).

The subject matter centers on the mob and the world of drug trafficking, in this case, cocaine, a very popular, powerful drug that ran rampant throughout the 1980s.

Jealousy, greed, and deceit are common characteristics of Scarface and the story focuses on a temperamental, cocky, and arrogant Cuban refuge sent to Miami by Fidel Castro, as a way of banishing criminals from Cuba and shipping them off to the United States to survive on their own.

Tony Montana, played by Al Pacino, goes from dishwasher to crime lord by selling drugs and creating an empire for himself.

He manipulates, tricks, and makes enemies left and right including stealing his boss’s girlfriend (Michelle Pfeiffer) and eventually falling into a troubled marriage with her.

He loves his financially struggling mother and sister, giving them money and opening a salon for his sister, but he also controls them, especially his sister, and is filled with rage whenever she attracts the affection of a potential suitor.

In his mind, nobody is good enough for her and he is filled with machismo and over-protectiveness. Tony eventually self-destructs due to jealousy, rage, and heavy drug use.

I found the film overall quite compelling but kept thinking to myself how much it resembles a light version of The Godfather (1972) or Part II (1974) and Goodfellas (1990).

I am fully aware that Scarface preceded Goodfellas, but seeing it for the first time in 2014 this was my initial reaction.

I was also kept aware of the fact that it must have been influential in the creation of the popular NBC television series Miami Vice, which debuted a year or two after Scarface was released.

Similarities such as crime lords, Miami Beach, and drugs mirrored the slick feel of the hit television drama as well as the look, style, and fashions.

The performance of Al Pacino is problematic- in my view, this is not at all his best work. For starters, his accent keeps going in and out and I found him slightly unbelievable in the role. A phenomenal actor, something with his performance did not sit well.

The musical score to the film is cheesy- almost shockingly so. Granted this was 1983, but the silly dance beats sporadic throughout now seem completely dated.

Parts of Scarface dragged a bit, however, a sudden dramatic scene (the dismembering of Tony’s friend by mobsters and Tony’s meltdown in a fancy restaurant) more than makeup for the occasional lags in drama.

Scarface (1983) is not on the level of other contemporary violent mob films, but for fans of the genre, it will be enjoyed.

2014 Films, Art, Best Feature- Independent Spirit Award Winners, Best Film of the Year, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Dark Comedy, Drama, Independent, Independent Drama

Birdman-2014

November 6, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Birdman-2014

Director-Alejandro G. Inarritu

Starring-Michael Keaton, Edward Norton

Scott’s Review #190

Reviewed November 6, 2014

Grade: A

Birdman is a very unique art film, which happily, has garnered major exposure and publicity because a movie like this runs the risk of receiving praise and notice only from the art-house crowd itself.

The film’s star-Michael Keaton, portrays Riggan Thomson, a former action hero superstar from the 1990s, who was made famous for the “Birdman” character he created. Having made sequels to the film, his career has since dried up and he hopes to establish credibility and prove himself a real actor by writing, directing, and starring in his play.

The film is set in and around the Broadway theater in New York City.

As opening night approaches, he struggles to pull everything together and emit a successful production while faced with an injured terrible actor, a difficult actor, his insecurities, and a miserable theatre critic destined to ruin his big chance.

To make matters worse, his daughter Sam, played by Emma Stone is a recovering drug addict who hangs around the theatre distracting actors with her charm and good looks.

Naomi Watts and Edward Norton play Leslie and Mike, other cast members in the production. Watts is sympathetic as the emotional actress with the heart of gold who finally has her dream of performing on Broadway realized. Norton, outstanding as Mike, is blunt yet socially awkward and can only perform truthfully on the stage.

Keaton is simply a marvel as he plays a dark and vulnerable man-hating and wishing to shed his ridiculous movie persona of yesteryear and secretly cringes when recognized by fans. He communicates with a voice inside his head, the voice he used when he played “Birdman” years earlier.

The uniqueness of the film is the use of what seems like one long take as the action rarely stops and seems to be ongoing. In my opinion, the film belongs to Keaton- he wonderfully relays vulnerability, pain, and fear within with an outward persona of bravery and masculinity.

Throughout the film I wondered, is Riggan suicidal? What is real and what is imagined? Are certain scenes foreshadowing for later events?

The film has much depth.

One marvel at how art imitates life- Is Keaton portraying himself? Keep in mind that Keaton was the original Batman in the successful superhero franchise beginning in 1989 and his career tanked shortly thereafter.

Birdman is a comeback film for him and he is devastatingly good.

Norton’s character Mike impressed me- blunt and honest he is also flawed and scared and in some ways addicted to the stage.

Stone has one particularly brilliant scene as she lambasts her father and with regret, later on, tells him that the world has moved on without him and that he is irrelevant just like everyone else- it is a powerful scene.

In another, Riggan is locked outside of the theater during the performance, clad only in his underwear- how on earth will he return to the stage and complete the show? The quick slights at current Hollywood superstars playing superheroes, specifically Robert Downey Jr. are deliciously naughty.

A dark comedy for sure, it is impossible to predict what will come next and the film is very New York theater style. Keaton’s run-in with a theater critic in a cocktail bar is the best scene in the film as the critic’s vicious critique of “You’re a celebrity, not an actor” resonates with both pain and tremendous anger for Riggan.

Riggan is a sensitive, struggling man and Keaton so wonderfully shows his vulnerability in every scene.

Bravo!

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture (won), Best Director-Alejandro G. Inarritu (won), Best Actor-Michael Keaton, Best Supporting Actor-Edward Norton, Best Supporting Actress-Emma Stone, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography (won)

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature (won), Best Director-Alejandro G. Inarritu, Best Male Lead-Michael Keaton (won), Best Supporting Male-Edward Norton, Best Supporting Female-Emma Stone, Best Cinematography (won)

1970 Films, Carrie Snodgress, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Frank Langella, Independent, Independent Comedy, Satire

Diary of a Mad Housewife-1970

November 5, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Diary of a Mad Housewife-1970

Director Frank Perry

Starring Carrie Snodgress, Frank Langella

Scott’s Review #189

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

1961 Films, Best Film of the Year, Best Picture Oscar Winners, Musical, Natalie Wood, Rita Moreno, Robert Wise, Russ Tamblyn, Scott's Top 100 Films

West Side Story-1961

November 3, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

West Side Story-1961

Director Robert Wise, Jerome Robbins

Starring Richard Beymer, Natalie Wood

Top 100 Films #64

Scott’s Review #188

Reviewed November 3, 2014

Grade: A

West Side Story is a musical from 1961 (based on the Broadway stage production from the 1950s), during a period in Hollywood where every other film released seemed to be a version of an enchanting musical.

This particular film version is much darker than most contemporaries within this genre. The dreary ending, fantastic and compelling in its dramatic elements, does not dour the rest of the musical and its hum-along tunes.

West Side Story was crowned the 1961 Best Picture Oscar winner.

West Side Story is certainly based on the Shakespearean tragedy of Romeo and Juliet- the Capulets and Montagues becoming rival teen street gangs of the Puerto Rican “Sharks” and the Polish”Jets”, with the lovesick teens Tony and Maria serving as Romeo and Juliet.

And yes, spoiler alert, the story does not end happily ever after fashion.

Loads of suspension of disbelief must be taken- How many gangs sing and dance to each other, snapping their fingers in unison to perfectly choreographed beats?

Additionally, some of the gang characters are not so authentic looking- either in clearly dyed hair, bronzed with tan, or some other phony-looking get-up, but the film is a cherished friend and these can be overlooked for my enjoyment of the film.

The story, set in 1950s New York City, pits the Sharks (a gang led by Bernardo) against the Jets (led by Riff), who have been bitter rivals for the turfs of the rough streets of Manhattan’s west side for many years.

In tow are the gang’s girlfriends, along with one female, named “Anybodys”- who longs for the day when she will be allowed to join the Jets and fight alongside the boys.

The other supporting characters largely include various policemen (Lieutenant Schrank and Officer Krupke) attempting to keep the gangs apart, as well as a local shopkeeper, Doc, who is the moral compass of the story, encouraging the gangs to get along with each other and questioning the logic of gang fights.

After a scuffle, the gangs decide to have at it after an upcoming dance and the Jets elect Tony to square off against Bernardo.

The story is surprisingly dark- especially in the inevitable final act. Amid all this darkness, however, lies a musical with cheery and catchy numbers (I Feel Pretty, Jet Song) as well as love-struck tunes (Maria and Somewhere).

A musical about diversity and rivalry, the story centers on lovesick Maria and Tony, a la Romeo and Juliet, and their struggle to be together despite adversity from their friends and family due to their extremely different backgrounds.

Throughout the film we get to know other characters well- Anita, the girlfriend of Bernardo, for example, played by Rita Moreno, is the stubborn yet likable, best friend of Maria, who thinks that Maria and Tony are wrong for each other and that things just are not supposed to be that way when you mix cultural diversity.

The film moves along at a quick pace with standoffs, fights, and plots to get the other gang, a failed attempt at a dance to co-mingle the two groups and girlfriends, and Tony and Maria sneaking off to meet together.

The lack of chemistry between Natalie Wood (Maria) and Richard Beymer (Tony) is quite noticeable, especially upon multiple viewings, but all of these decades later it is also tough to imagine anyone else in either role- so ingrained are the duo in film culture.

The cultural diversity of much of the cast (Rita Moreno was the only Puerto Rican) is interesting, as is the fact that most of the singing was dubbed by other singers.

Yet, the film still somehow works very well.

Oscar Nominations: 10 wins-Best Motion Picture (won), Best Director-Robert Wise and Jerome Robbins (won), Best Supporting Actor-George Chakiris (won), Best Supporting Actress-Rita Moreno (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Scoring of a Musical Picture (won), Best Sound (won), Best Art Direction, Color (won), Best Cinematography, Color (won), Best Costume Design, Color (won), Best Film Editing (won)

1985 Films, Brazilian, Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, Raul Julia, William Hurt

Kiss of the Spider Woman-1985

October 24, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Kiss of the Spider Woman-1985

Director Hector Babenco

Starring William Hurt, Raul Julia

Scott’s Review #187

Reviewed October 24, 2014

Grade: B+

1985 was not the best year for film nor was much of the 1980s, as I think about it, but unique standouts do exist and Kiss of the Spider Woman is an unusual and artistic film.

Set in present-day South America (Brazil) two men are imprisoned for very different reasons and are cellmates in the prison where they are captives.

Complete opposites, they form an unlikely bond, centering on friendship, but also skirting toward romance, flirtation, and at times, love.

Luis Molina is outwardly homosexual and extremely flamboyant and perhaps out of touch with reality as he fantasizes and describes romantic Nazi films. He is imprisoned for not only being homosexual but for having sex with an underage male.

The other man, Valentin Arregui, is a liberal, political activist, who has been beaten, tortured, and interrogated due to his revolutionary-leaning politics. He has a rough, macho edge to him.

On the surface, the two men have nothing in common, but due to proximity, forge a close bond and mutual respect as their lives pre-imprisonment are explained to each other as well as to the audience.

The true strength of this film is the performance, very against type, of William Hurt- the best performance of his career by a mile. He completely embodies the character of Luis in his effeminacy, yearning, pain, and obsession with escaping reality through film.

Raul Julia has the same effect, though in a completely different way, as he portrays Valentin. Luis tenderly comforts Valentin, who is being poisoned by prison officials, by incorporating his stories of films into Valentin’s real life, as he yearns for his separated lover, Marta.

As Luis begins falling in love with Valentin, and one is seemingly double-crossed by the other, it leads to a test of courage and dedication to each other.

The ending of the film is a sad one, dark, yet thought-provoking, and shows love, tenderness, and bravery.

My only negative from Kiss of the Spider Woman (1985) is at moments, using the flashback series or through the film that Luis explains, it is tough to follow and surmise what is exactly going on in the story, but the performances of Hurt and Julia, and the chemistry between them, are the films major strengths.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Hector Babenco, Best Actor-William Hurt (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium

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

2014 Films, Horror

Annabelle-2014

October 17, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Annabelle-2014

Director-John R. Leonetti

Starring-Annabelle Wallis

Scott’s Review #186

Reviewed October 17, 2014

Grade: B+

Annabelle is a classic, edge-of-your-seat, ghost story that is effective in its creepiness and element of surprise.

Set in California circa 1969, John and Mia Gordon are the all- American happy young couple. He is a Doctor and she is beautiful and pregnant with their first child. They attend church each Sunday, are friendly with the neighbors and have a strong sense of community.

As a surprise, John bestows a life-sized doll on Mia as a present and as an addition to her existing collection of interesting dolls. Before long strange events begin to occur- a home invasion, a fire, a bizarre experience in an elevator, and creepy drawings by the neighbor’s children.

The film eventually dives into murkier territory when a strange, religious woman, played by Alfre Woodard, is introduced, and the film then shifts focus a bit to spirits, taking one’s soul, and the occult.

What sets Annabelle apart from similar horror contemporaries is the power of suspense- we as the audience know something bad is going to happen- we just do not know when.

Unlike many horror films that slice and dice for shock value, Annabelle has none of these qualities. Rather, foreshadowing and anticipation are common within the film, making the eventual jumps scarier! – Mia’s constant use of an electric sewing machine and Mia attentively watching news coverage of the Manson murders are clues as to what will come next.

A scene set in the middle of the night as a home invasion takes place next door is shot exceptionally well- think Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window- with no dialogue- that the audience sees inside the house from across the yard as violence occurs- frightening.

Within the same scene we know the home invasion will gravitate to Gordon’s house- but when will it strike? Another effective scene shows a seemingly innocent little girl running towards another character in a separate bedroom, but she quickly turns into a maniacal fiend and the foot thudding makes this terrifying- I found myself genuinely scared during a few scenes!

Wisely choosing to avoid the all too frequent CGI effects, Annabelle instead goes the traditional route with genuine scares harvested from the unknown and the feeling of anticipation and dread of events to come.

The fantastic musical score composed by Joseph Bishara adds to the anticipation. Annabelle is a prequel to the equally scary The Conjuring and the very first scene is, in fact, the same first scene from that film where two nurses explain how they obtained the doll, named Annabelle, and cannot get away from her.

The final act of Annabelle delves into the spiritual world of evil- a soul (presumably Mia’s or her babies) must be sacrificed to relinquish the curse put upon by Annabelle’s original owner.

A surprising figure aids in the conclusion of this film. Annabelle is old-school horror done very well.

1975 Films, Al Pacino, Drama, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films

Dog Day Afternoon-1975

October 13, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Dog Day Afternoon-1975

Director Sidney Lumet

Starring Al Pacino, Chris Sarandon

Scott’s Review #185

Reviewed October 13, 2014

Grade: A-

Director Sidney Lumet successfully sets the smoldering hot summer afternoon in New York City for his 1975 film Dog Day Afternoon, as Al Pacino plays Sonny, an unemployed, desperate man who, while married with two kids, has a gay lover, Leon, (brilliantly played by Chris Sarandon) who he is attempting to help finance a sex change operation.

Based on a true story, Sonny, along with his dimwitted friend Sal- played by John Cazale, decides to rob First Brooklyn Savings Bank.

Predictably, their plans go awry when Sonny burns a ledger during the robbery attempt and a pedestrian sees the smoke and alerts the police.

As the police become aware of the attempted heist, a standoff ensues between Sonny and the cops, led by Detective Moretti, played by Charles Durning, and the robbery receives media coverage.

Most of the action is set inside the stifling hot bank and directly outside on the street and gradually the supporting characters come into play- the hostages, Sonny’s mother, wife, and lover all make contact with Sonny in some way or another and his motivations become clearer to the audience.

Dog Day Afternoon is a somewhat message movie that is anti-establishment, in this case, anti-police and questioning of the government and the financial establishment, (Lumet also directed Network, challenging establishment).

This is evidenced when after a standoff with police, the crowd sides with Sonny as he chants Attica! Attica!, which is a direct reference to a recent prison riot.

Sonny speaks for the working class- the poor, struggling, underpaid workers who cannot afford to feed or adequately take care of their families.

The heat and humidity compare perfectly to the pressure felt by most middle-class people that still resonates today and leaves the viewer contemplating his or her life.

Sonny relates to the bank tellers who do not make much money. Besides, Sonny is sympathetic to the audience in another way. Leon, recently hospitalized at Bellevue Hospital, is emotionally dependent on Sonny. He would be lost without him.

They share a lengthy and heartfelt phone conversation that is the heart of the film- gay romance had not been explored this way by 1975 in cinema, and the romance was neither shoved down the audience’s throat nor was it looked past entirely.

Their relationship is tender and deep, yet still somewhat ambiguous.

Would they stay together? What would become of Sonny’s wife and two children? Would he leave them for Leon in a world that was not ready to accept two homosexual men together? Is that the reason for Leon’s desire for a sex change operation?

Chris Sarandon, in too small a part, is wonderful as the gay lover, struggling with a sexual identity crisis. Al Pacino gives, per usual, a brilliant portrayal as he takes on a complex character who is far from one-dimensional.

Perhaps not a masterpiece, Dog Day Afternoon, is a very good film, but neither is it strictly a gay-themed movie nor an action/thriller- it’s more complex than that.

Ironically, Sonny is portrayed as the hero of the film as it is not a standard good police versus bad bank robber type of film- quite the contrary. It is much, much more than that.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Sidney Lumet, Best Actor-Al Pacino, Best Supporting Actor-Chris Sarandon, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Film Editing

2013 Films, Eric England, Horror, Independent, Independent Horror, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ Horror, Najarra Townsend

Contracted-2013

October 12, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Contracted-2013

Director Eric England

Starring Najarra Townsend

Scott’s Review #184

Reviewed October 12, 2014

Grade: B-

It seems that many reviewers of Contracted (2013) are looking for a deeper meaning to the film or debating whether a particular scene was a rape or a consensual sexual act.

I looked for neither and just took the 2013 independent horror film at face value. I do not view the film as particularly worth over-analyzing or delving too much beneath the surface.

The plot is rather basic. Samantha is a young woman on the outs with her girlfriend Nikki. She goes to a party where her friend Alice gets her drunk and Samantha winds up talking to a handsome stranger named BJ.

Samantha agrees to have sex with him in his car, but at one point begs him to stop. It is unclear what transpires.

The next morning Samantha wakes up feeling strange- she assumes she is hung-over, but gradually her hair, teeth, and fingernails begin to fall out and her eyes are hideously bloodshot.

Her symptoms slowly worsen as she transforms into a strange monster.

In the mix are supporting characters, Riley, who is in love with Samantha even though she is a lesbian and rebuffs all of his advances, and Samantha’s Mom, who is convinced that Samantha is using drugs again (which she is).

I did not find the film to be a metaphor for punishing women or lesbians for a one-night stand- I viewed it as a fun, Saturday late-night, horror flick.

If I were to dissect the film critically, the premise is rather absurd- a young woman turning into a zombie/monster after having sexual relations with a stranger.

Silly, but I am not expecting highbrow art from this type of film. The acting- especially of the actress portraying Samantha is below average at best- and horrid at worst.

The three central female characters (Samantha, Nikki, and Alice) are presumably all lesbians or bisexual, especially, Nikki, is irritated when a man dares to hit on her as if they should magically already know she is a lesbian.

The character of Nikki is very unlikeable- she seldom returns Samantha’s phone calls and continually pushes her away.

I did not buy any of the three as lesbians- not to be stereotypical, but they each had feminine only, qualities.

The way Samantha’s mother kept insisting that Samantha was on drugs became irritating by the fifth time she brought it up. Why did Riley pursue Samantha ad-nauseam when he was aware that she was a lesbian? What is BJ’s motivation for presumably giving Samantha a drug? She was already drunk enough to have sex with him- why did he want to turn her into a monster?

This plot point is unclear.

The film is not character-driven, is strictly plot-driven, and like most horror films, is meant to be that way. The finale of the film is quite satisfying as Samantha’s fate, along with her mother’s, is left up in the air.

The same cannot be said for Nikki or Alice as both receive their just desserts.

Contracted (2013) is not a masterpiece, but is a fun little horror film to be enjoyed. Just don’t ask too many questions.

1975 Films, Art, International, Italian, Scott's Top 10 Most Disturbing Films, Scott's Top 100 Films

Salo-1975

October 9, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Salo-1975

Director Pier Paolo Pasolini

Starring Paolo Bonacelli

Top 100 Films #32 Top 10 Disturbing Films #1

Scott’s Review #183

Reviewed October 9, 2014

Grade: A

Salo is a deeply disturbing, highly controversial, Italian art film from 1975 that is not for the squeamish nor the prudish. Many people will revile this film for its distastefulness and despise the film entirely- that is if they even give it a chance, which, unfortunately, many people will refuse to.

But beyond the filth, perversion, and hatefulness that are themes of Salo, lies a film that is a work of art and must be experienced by the most open-minded of cinema lovers.

The film is a dreamlike experience that centers on four wealthy Fascist Italian men of great importance and power, circa 1944, who decide to kidnap eighteen teenage boys and girls- the youngsters must be the cream of the crop and flawless in appearance, only the most attractive will do- one girl missing a tooth is immediately cast aside as a reject.

Whether the girl flaunted her marred appearance is open to interpretation.

The youths are then taken to an enormous palace where they are stripped of all clothing and forced to endure four months of torture, sexual perversions, and humiliations at the whim of and for the entertainment of their captors.

Finally, at the end of their terms, most are tortured to death by way of scalping, removal of tongues, or having their sexual organs burned off.

Also living in the palace are four aging prostitutes who enthrall the men, along with the reluctant prisoners, with tales of kinky and perverted sexual encounters from their younger days mostly involving anal sex.

The film is divided into four sections based on Dante’s Divine comedy: the Anteinferno, the Circle of Manias, the Circle of Shit, and the Circle of Blood.

In one sadistically disturbing scene, one of the young girls is forced to eat human excrement by one of her wealthy captors.

In another, during the Circle of Shit, everyone dines on a meal consisting of human excrement where lewd sex occurs.

One of the female prisoners is tricked into eating food laced with nails- a contest to determine who has the best buttocks results in the winner being brutally murdered.

Everyone in the film is bisexual and there are repeated scenes of extreme, almost pornographic, violent sex scenes.

On a side note, most of the youngsters (non-actors) reported having a ball while filming Salo and knew not what the film was really about, so the feeling on the set was light-hearted, nothing like the finished product.

While deeply disturbing, Salo is a film that some, or many, will simply not get or look beyond the obvious for a deeper message. It is a masterpiece in its ugliness, rawness, and political statements and is quite artistic once one gets past the brutality and rawness of the film.

Salo contains much political symbolism- the excrement serves as the filth of Nazi Germany and authoritarian figures throughout Europe such as Hitler and Mussolini, the abuse of power that was rampant during the time of the film (World War II era), and the entire film is about the abuse that powerful people (the wealthy fascists equate to powerful Germans) inflicted on the weak (the innocent boys and girls mirror the Jews and the weak).

Is Salo a disturbing, grotesque film? It is. Is it mindless torture for the sake of torture like movies as extreme as Saw and Hostel? It is not. It is an art film, not a horror film.

Banned in many countries for decades due to the extreme content of rape, murder, and torture of individuals thought to be under the age of eighteen, it remains widely banned to this day in several countries.

Many filmmakers, actors, and historians struggle to maintain the artistic merit of the film.

To fully get Salo, one must delve into the mind of the filmmakers and recognize that it is a statement film, filled with symbolism that challenges and questions the politics of its time.

Director, Pier Paolo Pasolini, was brutally murdered by a male prostitute shortly before the film’s release.

Salo (1975) is one of the most disturbing films I have ever viewed.

1999 Films, Best Film of the Year, Bruce Willis, Donnie Wahlberg, Haley Joel Osment, Horror, M. Night Shyamalan, Scott's Top 100 Films, Scott's Top 20 Horror Films, Thriller, Toni Collette

The Sixth Sense-1999

October 8, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Sixth Sense-1999

Director M. Night Shyamalan

Starring Bruce Willis, Haley Joel Osment

Top 100 Films #56 Top 20 Horror Films #15

Scott’s Review #182

Reviewed October 8, 2014

Grade: A

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

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

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

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

He’s worried, over-worked mother, Lynn, is played by Toni Collette. Meanwhile, Malcolm and Anna appear to be going through marital problems and lack any meaningful communication with each other.

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

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

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

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

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

Superlative filmmaking.

A scene involving Cole’s teacher is riveting- being able to sense aspects of people’s pasts Cole realizes his teacher had a stuttering problem as a child. When his teacher is condescending towards Cole, the young boy explodes with rage and begins a chant of “Stuttering Stanley” which reduces the teacher to childhood traumas.

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

This is a scene where Toni Collette shines brightly.

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

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

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

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

More praise should have been reaped on Willis.

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

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

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

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

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

2014 Films, Thriller

Gone Girl-2014

October 6, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Gone Girl-2014

Director-David Fincher

Starring-Ben Affleck, Rosamund Pike

Scott’s Review #181

Reviewed October 6, 2014

Grade: A-

Gone Girl, directed by dark yet mainstream filmmaker David Fincher, offers a simple premise- an affluent woman disappears without warning and a loved one is suspected of the crime.

This type of story has been done many times before in film- think Prisoners from 2013 to cite a very recent example, but what makes Gone Girl unique is its storytelling, pacing, and twists and turns aplenty.

The film is based on the best-selling novel, written by popular novelist Gillian Flynn, who also wrote the screenplay of the film.

Ben Affleck plays Nick Dunne, a man in his 30’s, whose wife Amy, magnificently played by Rosamund Pike, mysteriously disappears, causing a media frenzy to ensue.

After clues are revealed, Nick is thought to be a sociopath and responsible for Amy’s disappearance. Nick and Amy have the perfect marriage….or so it appears. Until fairly recently Nick and Amy have lived an idyllic, well-to-do lifestyle in New York City. Amy’s family is wealthy and writes as successful children’s authors.

Following the recession of 2010 causing both Nick and Amy to lose their jobs and all of their money, combined with Nick’s parent’s health problems, they wind up in a state of peril, and their marriage is severely tested. They are forced to move to a small town in Missouri where Nick grew up. Their lifestyle completely changes.

These facts are naturally revealed as the film progresses, via flashbacks, mostly told from Amy’s perspective, as she chronicles events by writing in her diary.

The story is so smart and layered that the audience continually asks questions throughout the film- Is Amy dead? Did she fake her death? Is Nick involved or innocent? Could Amy’s parents be involved in her disappearance? Can we trust Nick’s sister Margo? What involvement does Amy’s wealthy college sweetheart Desi Collings (Neil Patrick Harris) have?

As more of the plot is revealed new questions are asked.

Intelligently written, with twists and turns galore, after a slow start, the film is a thrill ride. The slow start is necessary to lay the groundwork of the film and it wisely keeps the audience guessing throughout.

The film seems to be a puzzle (literally and figuratively) as each layer is unraveled leading to further questions and new theories.

The film’s score is composed by Trent Reznor (Nine Inch Nails), which adds a dark, techno-gloomy feel, which increases the mood wonderfully.

The acting in Gone Girl is very good- Affleck is capable in the lead male role, though I did not find the part as meaty as one might think. Affleck is handsome and charismatic, though unlikeable too, and I think that is all the part requires.

The standout and breakout performance belongs to Rosamund Pike. After years of struggling along in support film roles as someone’s wife or friend, Pike finally has a complex role that allows her to sink her teeth in. Pike displays almost every emotion- kindness, anger, rage, deception, humor.

The character of Amy is nuanced and certainly resourceful and more than one movie-goers mouth dropped open at her actions in a couple of scenes- think wine bottle and hammer for reference. Neil Patrick Harris is dynamic in the role of Desi- he brings a healthy dose of creepiness mixed with child-like sweetness.

Gone Girl features one of the most shocking scenes in recent history involving a bedroom, a box-cutter, and lots of blood. Fincher’s setting of North Carthage, Missouri is interesting- hardly the intelligentsia of Manhattan that Nick and Amy are accustomed to, the perfect mix of homespun kindness turned to lynch mob of the townspeople is effectively portrayed- the sweet neighbors, happily offering casseroles and hugs to Nick one minute, suddenly turn into sharks when detail is revealed.

The media is, almost ironically, portrayed as menacing and ready to pounce- mainly female reporters played by Sela Ward and deliciously and comically played by Missi Pyle. More than a handful of female characters are written as borderline man-hating and eager to either castrate, figuratively speaking or bed (or both!), Nick Dunne.

Gone Girl contains a few plot holes- how could there be no recorded tapes of the goings-on at Desi’s lake house? The entire plot is so far-fetched when one decides to ponder it.

Gone Girl is mainstream yet dark Hollywood thrill-ride with a theme of dishonesty, and a film exceptionally well-written and layered.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Rosamund Pike

1964 Films, Alfred Hitchcock, Diane Baker, Kimberly Beck, Sean Connery, Thriller, Tippi Hedren

Marnie-1964

October 4, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Marnie-1964

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Sean Connery, Tippi Hedren

Scott’s Review #180

Reviewed October 4, 2014

Grade: A

When evaluating a myriad of Alfred Hitchcock films, Marnie (1964) certainly stands as one of the more complicated of his films, and in recent years has earned higher praise than at the time of release- a la Vertigo (1958).

It contains one of the most complex and psychological Hitchcock characters of all time and is as much a character study as a psychological thriller.

Tippi Hedren stars as Marnie Edgar, a troubled young woman who travels from one financial company to another using a false identity and her good looks to insinuate her way into a clerical job, without references- she then, over time, steals thousands from the companies when her trust is gained.

Eventually, she is caught by Mark Rutland, a handsome, wealthy widower and a client of one of the firms, played by Sean Connery. Infatuated with Marnie, he strikes a deal with her- marry him and he will not turn her over to the police.

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

Why Bernice is crippled, avoids affection with Marnie, and why Marnie despises most men and is terrified of the color red make up the film’s mysterious nature. Diane Baker is compelling as Lil, the snoop, sister-in-law to Mark, and somewhat nemesis of Marnie.

The film features three scenes I am enamored with each time I watch- in one scene, Marnie hides and waits in the bathroom until all the employees have gone home for the night; she carefully steals money from her employer’s safe and prepares to leave- suddenly she notices an unaware cleaning woman with her back to Marnie yet blocking the exit.

How will Marnie escape unnoticed? The surprise in this scene is wonderful. Hitchcock plays the scene with no music, which adds to the level of tension- brilliant.

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

It is a heart-wrenching scene.

The third scene takes place at a racetrack as Marnie and Mark are enjoying one of their first dates together before Mark learns the truth about Marnie- the date is ruined when a former victimized employer of Marnie’s recognizes and makes accusations towards her.

Marnie turns from sweet girl to ice queen seamlessly.

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

This scene had to have been filmed carefully to not make Mark hated. Perhaps saving Marnie the next morning lessens what he did the night before in the eyes of the audience? This is open to debate.

Hedren is fantastic at showing the complexities of the character of Marnie throughout the entire film and does a wonderful job in a difficult role.

As excellent as Hedren is (and she is amazing), I have difficulty buying her as a poor, icy criminal and this comes up each time I view the film. Could this be a result of having identified Hedren as the sophisticated, glamorous, socialite in The Birds made a year earlier so many times? This is quite possibly so.

During the filming of Marnie, the set was reportedly fraught with tension, mainly between Hedren and Hitchcock, who refused to speak with each other throughout filming. This may have added to the overall tension the film has and Hedren appears anxious throughout.

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

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

Still, Marnie (1964) is a complex, psychological classic Hitchcock film from his heyday.

2014 Films, Comedy, Dark Comedy, Independent, Independent Comedy

The Skeleton Twins-2014

October 2, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Skeleton Twins-2014

Director-Craig Johnson

Starring-Bill Hader, Kristen Wiig

Scott’s Review #179

Reviewed October 2, 2014

Grade: A-

The Skeleton Twins is a tremendous, character-driven, family drama that focuses on character development rather than standard plot devices.

The film stars Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig from Saturday Night Live, but do not be fooled based on the actors involved that The Skeleton Twins is a light comedy- it is not. Certainly, there are laugh-out-loud scenes throughout, but this is a serious story about depression, suicide, and anger, and at times, is very dark.

Wiig plays Maggie, a woman in her thirties who seemingly has it all. Lance, her handsome, loyal husband, played by Luke Wilson, adores her. She has a stable job as a dental hygienist and lives a quiet, quaint life in upstate New York- seemingly enjoying a happy middle-class existence.

Hader plays Milo, Maggie’s estranged twin brother, who lives in Los Angeles and is a struggling actor with no agent, reduced to waiting tables in a lousy restaurant. Presumably, just out of a relationship, Milo attempts suicide by slitting his wrists. Maggie flies to Los Angeles to visit Milo in the hospital and invites him to recuperate with Maggie and Lance in New York.

Having grown up as best friends, they reconnect once Milo moves in.

The Skeleton Twins is so jammed packed with interesting stories, both current and back story, that it becomes effortless to fall in love with Maggie and Milo. When the twins were aged 14, their father committed suicide by jumping off a bridge, a father they were very connected to.

Their mother, played by Joanna Gleason, was a horrible mother growing up and, in present times, is a hippie involved in an interracial marriage. She awkwardly visits Maggie and Milo and attempts to heal them through meditation.

Other character history is revealed- Milo, who is gay, was molested by his teacher when he was 15 years old, a teacher he is still in love with, and is wonderfully played against type by Ty Burrell. Maggie has carried on affairs with various men throughout her marriage to Lance and is secretly using birth control pills to avoid becoming pregnant- Lance happily thinks they are trying to conceive.

The characters of Milo and Maggie are incredibly layered and well written- they are both damaged from a difficult childhood, suffer from depression, and now only have each other- rich material.

Scenes in The Skeleton Twins range from hysterical- a scene in a dentists office involving laughing gas is rolling on the floor funny and a lip-synching scene to the 1980’s schmaltzy hit “Nothing’s Gonna Stop Us Now”, are both wonderful, to shocking- scenes where Milo and Maggie go at each other with gusto, dredging up childhood wounds, is brilliantly acted by Wiig and Hader.

The chemistry between Wiig and Hader is incredible and both actors are very successful at playing hysterical comedy versus dark drama, which impressed me.

Luke Wilson is great in support as the straight-laced, nice guy married to Maggie.

A slight criticism- the character of Milo is written as stereotypically gay- man-hungry and hardly a man’s man-He has trouble clearing brush because presumably, he is too girly to handle the task- I wish more films would steer away from these stereotypes.

Ty Burrell’s character of Rich is so complex that I wish he would have been explored a bit more- being gay how can things work with his girlfriend while harboring many secrets? Is he still in love with Milo despite repeatedly pushing him away? I would have loved more depth to this complex character.

After the film, we are left with relief that the filmmakers did not go as dark as they could have, and audiences will know what I mean following the final scene. There is no fairy tale ending ether.

Milo and Maggie are damaged goods who only have each other and that makes for a dynamic character-rich film.

1973 Films, Brian De Palma, Horror, Margot Kidder

Sisters-1973

September 29, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Sisters-1973

Director Brian De Palma

Starring Margot Kidder, Jennifer Salt

Scott’s Review #178

Reviewed September 29, 2014

Grade: B+

Directed by stylistic film genius Brian De Palma, Sisters (1973) is an early entry in the famed director’s repertoire and a direct homage to the classic films of Alfred Hitchcock.

The film stars Margot Kidder as a French-Canadian model named Danielle Breton, who shares a Staten Island, NY apartment with her demented twin sister Dominique. For many years Danielle and Dominique were conjoined twins and only recently surgically separated.

After a romantic date with a new acquaintance, Danielle begins to feel ill and Dominique murders the new boyfriend after he surprises, who he thinks is Danielle, with a birthday cake.

But is it Dominique or is it Danielle?

Meanwhile, a neighbor, Grace Collier played by Jennifer Salt, witnesses the murder from across the alley, and in a highly dramatic scene, involving the victim attempting to scrawl “help” on the window, Grace gets the police involved.

The authorities are skeptical and unsympathetic to Grace’s claims since she works as a newspaper reporter and is constantly challenging the police department in her articles.

Finally, when the police do search Danielle’s apartment, no dead body is found. This sets off the plot for the remainder of the film as Grace looks for the missing body on her own (in Nancy Drew’s style) with the help of a detective she hires, Joseph Larch, comically played by Charles Durning.

One point to mention about Sisters is that the film is a blueprint for De Palma films to come, but that does not mean it is not engaging on its own merits- it pales in comparison to other De Palma gems that followed, such as Carrie and Dressed to Kill.

It feels raw and slightly underdeveloped compared to those aforementioned films.

Danielle’s ex-husband and doctor, Eli, while creepy and sinister, is not fully explored, and his relation to events taking place is a bit vague throughout much of the film.

Techniques such as the split-screen showing simultaneous action oftentimes relating to each other are introduced in this film and are a marvel to watch as so much of the plot is revealed in these sequences- activity in Grace’s apartment contrasts with and interchanges perfectly with action in Danielle’s apartment- highly effective and suspenseful.

DePalma uses many Hitchcock influences, but in no way steals them- the idea of a set of conjoined twins with mental illness was taken from a real-life story of Soviet twins.

Viewers familiar with Psycho will smile during the murder scene as influences are apparent- Rear Window is certainly referenced as countless scenes of the camera looking into Danielle’s or Grace’s apartment or the camera looking out onto a street scene or someone with binoculars spying out of their apartment and into someone else’s apartment across the street- very visually oriented.

The Hitchcock similarities continue with the musical score- it is composed by Bernard Hermann, a frequent collaborator of Hitchcock films- think Vertigo.

After all of the psychological build-up throughout the first hour of the film, the final thirty minutes or so, taking place within the confines of a mental asylum, is confusing and unrealistic, as various flashbacks and dream sequences are used, even using one character taking the place of another in a dream- edgy and unique, but tough to follow and organize properly.

Grace is assumed to be a newly admitted mental patient seemed far-fetched. What exactly transpired between Danielle and Dominique present and/or in the past?

Even though events are explained, I found myself scratching my head a bit after the film.

For fans of Brian De Palma films, Sisters (1973) is a perfect movie experience to show the influence to come and not a bad film on its own either.

2013 Films, Crime Drama, Drama, Edward James Olmos, Harold Perrineau, Hector Elizondo, Independent, Independent Drama, John Sayles, LisaGay Hamilton, Mahershala Ali, Yolonda Ross

Go for Sisters-2013

September 27, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Go for Sisters-2013

Director John Sayles

Starring Edward James Olmos

Scott’s Review #177

Reviewed September 27, 2014

Grade: B-

Go for Sisters is a 2013 independent feature film about a female parole officer (Lisa Gay Hamilton) with a troubled, missing son named Rodney, feared to be mixed up with the murder of a drug dealer.

The film takes place in California and Mexico.

Hamilton plays Bernice, a middle-aged black woman, who has always done the right thing. Widowed and recently dumped by a new boyfriend, she runs into ex-convict Fontayne, played by Yolonda Ross, at her parole office.

Initially wanting nothing to do with her former high school friend, Bernice decides to use Fontayne’s criminal connections to locate Rodney.

From this point, they hire retired Mexican police officer Freddy Suarez, played by Edward James Olmos, and the trio embarks on an adventure across the border of Mexico.

I love the story involving the two female leads (Hamilton and Ross) who share a Thelma and Louise-type bond.

The characters reconnect with each other and develop independently. Straight-laced Bernice toughens up and breaks a few rules while Fontayne, determined to go straight, struggles to keep her head above water, resisting drugs and attempting to hold down a job.

The two forge a bond based on trust, respect, and loyalty, and their friendship grows throughout the film.

One gripe about Fontayne’s character- she admits to being a lesbian but then mentions she is not sure if she is or if she is not. This sexual identity crisis seems strange- why couldn’t the film make her a lesbian? Why the hedging?

The remaining aspects of the film are mediocre to weak.

Adding the character of Freddy to the mix is unnecessary. He adds little to the plot except helping the women get into Mexico and being male comic relief.

Either way, I didn’t find the character very interesting or care about him and the film would have been better off without Freddy.

What was the reasoning behind making him have poor eyesight? What was the point of Freddy taking a young woman and her daughter to breakfast and realizing they were crossing the border to find her estranged husband? Who cares?

It had nothing to do with the plot.

All the audience knows about Freddy is that he is retired due to a misunderstanding, accepts money to help Bernice and Fontayne, and tags along with them for the rest of the film.

The stereotypes should have been eliminated. The Chinese dragon lady and the corrupt Mexican police officers have been played to death in films and are rather insulting to smart and serious movie-goers.

I found the plot a bit tough to follow and I still don’t understand how or why Rodney was involved with the Chinese mob in the first place other than to help Chinese immigrants cross the border.

Was he involved in the money or wanted to help the immigrants cross to the United States?

The film mentions countless times how Rodney is a decent person so what’s his motivation? The film never wholly explains why he is kidnapped and a suspect in a murder case.

Also, countless characters are introduced to help the women on their journey with some connection to the kidnap victim but are written haphazardly with no character development.

The ending of Go for Sisters (2013) is too predictable and leaves the audience not caring about the outcome.

Despite numerous negatives, the heart of the film belongs to the talents of Hamilton and Ross and their characters’ interesting and warm friendship that develops throughout the film.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Female-Yolonda Ross

1956 Films, Alfred Hitchcock, Best Film of the Year, Doris Day, James Stewart, Scott's Top 100 Films, Thriller

The Man Who Knew Too Much-1956

September 26, 2014 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Man Who Knew Too Much-1956

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring James Stewart, Doris Day

Top 100 Films #38

Scott’s Review #176

Reviewed September 26, 2014

Grade: A

The Man Who Knew Too Much is a classic Alfred Hitchcock film from 1956 starring James Stewart and Doris Day, who share tremendous chemistry.

They play a successful married couple- Ben and Jo McKenna, he a Doctor, she a well-known singer, who travels on a lovely trip to Morocco, with their young son Hank in tow.

They are a traditional American family on vacation abroad that the viewer trusts and believes in from the onset of the film.

Suddenly, they are approached by a Frenchman named Louis Bernard, who seems a bit too curious about Ben and his work. Jo is immediately suspicious of the mysterious man and thus begins a series of events involving mistaken identity, an assassination attempt on England’s Prime Minister, and the couple traversing to London in an attempt to locate Hank, who has been kidnapped by criminals.

As with other Hitchcock films- think North by Northwest, the motivations of the assassins are unclear and one might argue, unnecessary. Why are they attempting to assassinate a political figure? Is there money to gain? Is there power to be obtained?

These questions are never answered- the film is not about that, but rather about Ben and Jo’s predicaments. The villains- primarily an innocent-seeming English couple and a sneering, rat-like assassin, are one-dimensional characters as their motivations are not revealed.

A remake of a 1934 version with the same title, but far superior, the film is a suspense/ political thriller.

Some interesting comparisons to other Hitchcock films released around the same time that I continue to notice with each passing viewing-

North by Northwest– the ordinary man falling into international intrigue and Vertigo– Jo is dressed in almost identical fashion to Madeleine/Judy- a classic, sophisticated grey suit with a pulled-up bun hairstyle; the musical scores are extremely similar- almost identical in instances; Vertigo’s bell tower is reminiscent of Ambrose Chappel in The Man Who Knew Too Much. Stewart’s Ben climbs up the bell tower in The Man Who Knew Too Much whereas in Vertigo is terrified of heights, let alone climbing.

These are fascinating tidbits to note for any Hitchcock fan.

Impressive to me is Doris Day’s performance, which is her greatest. Known for the lightweight, romantic comedy, and fluff roles, she turns in a wonderfully emotional and dramatic role and is quite effective in her own right.

The six-minute climactic final sequence, set at a musical concert at the Royal Albert Hall, is among the best in film history and uses no dialogue. This technique is jaw-dropping as one realizes just how much transpires within the six minutes, solely on physical activity and facial expressions alone- the entire plot of the film reaches a searing crescendo- quite literally.

Day is particularly strong in this sequence.

James Stewart, in his fourth turn in a Hitchcock film, is charismatic as always playing the everyman tangled in a web of deceit and espionage. He takes charge, but is identifying to the audience- he can be your friend or neighbor and we trust his character- he is a successful doctor after all.

The now-legendary song from the film “Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)” is an important part of the finale and remains with the audience in a happy yet terrifying way long after the curtain closes on the film.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) is exciting, suspenseful, interesting, and fun- just what a Hitchcock film should be.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Song-” Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)” (won)

Welcome to my blog! 1,425 + reviews posted so far! My name is Scott Segrell and I reside in Stamford, CT. My blog is a diverse site featuring tons of film reviews I have written since I launched my site in 2014. I hope you enjoy perusing the site for latest or greatest films or to search for your own favorites to see how we compare. Please take a look at my featured sections at the top of the page which change often! Utilize the tags and category links.