Tag Archives: Top 250 Films

A View to a Kill-1985

A View to a Kill-1985

Director John Glen

Starring Roger Moore, Christopher Walken, Grace Jones

Top 250 Films #151

Scott’s Review #484

60002473

Reviewed September 21, 2016

Grade: A

Not exactly deemed a masterpiece, or even a treasured favorite, among the masses of James Bond lovers, A View to a Kill (1985) holds a soft spot for me.

It is one of the first Bond films that I was fortunate enough to see in the movie theater and it has continued to enamor me all these decades later.

Yes, it has flaws (to be mentioned later), but it is a classic, fun, exciting, mid-1980s Bond offering. It contains Roger Moore- in his final Bond appearance, the exotic Grace Jones, a great villain, and on-location treats such as Paris and Iceland- who could ask for anything more?

We are re-introduced to MI-6 agent James Bond on the snowy slopes of Siberia as he discovers the body of 003, along with a Soviet microchip believed to belong to the wealthy Max Zorin (Christopher Walken).

Bond attends a horse sale hosted by Zorin and discovers he is drugging the horses to make them perform better.

It is also revealed that he intends to destroy Silicon Valley to rule the microchip industry. In Zorin’s camp is a mysterious woman named May Day and an odd Nazi scientist named Dr. Carl Mortner.

Events conclude in San Francisco as the action-packed finale takes place in a mine and overlooking (via blimp) the historic Golden Gate Bridge.

I completely get the criticisms hurled at this film- both Roger Moore and, as a secondary character, Lois Maxwell as Miss Moneypenny, had gotten quite long in the tooth by this point in the franchise (1985), which is a shame because both are favorites of mine.

Most glaring in the “bad” department is Tanya Roberts as the main Bond girl, Stacy Sutten- almost rivaling Halle Berry (Die Another Day) as screamingly awful.

Not appearing as a major character until quite late in the film, Stacey is a wealthy heir, to who Zorin is attempting to pay five million dollars to relinquish her shares in Silicon Valley (she refuses).

Robert’s acting is quite poor- she has no chemistry with Moore, and comes across as a dimwit, despite being written as a doctor or scientist of some sort. Regardless, she does not work as a Bond girl.

Yes, the cartoon-like chase around San Francisco with the brooding police chief is unintentionally funny- another negative to the film.

But here are some strengths- Fantastic is Walken as the main villain role of Zorin. Psychotic, loony tunes, and such a pleasure to watch. With his bleached blonde hair and grimacing sneer, a particularly controversial, and favorite scene of mine is when Zorin, machine gun in hand, sprays bullets from left to right, undoubtedly killing dozens, as he gleefully laughs.

This was unprecedented in Bond films up to this point as most villains contained a safer personality- Zorin is positively monstrous and to be feared.

Also worth mentioning is Jones as May Day, simply mesmerizing in the role- although sadly her character is weakened toward the end did she believe Zorin was capable of love??

Countering the anemic chemistry between Bond and Roberts, the chemistry between Jones and Moore sizzles.

This is not the first time Bond has explored an interracial (white and black) romance- far from it. Live and Let Die- circa 1973 takes this honor. I would have enjoyed much more exploration on an emotional level between Bond and May Day instead of the animalistic physical attraction.

One may wonder with all the recognizable flaws with the film, why the A-rating? Because simply put this film is fun and contains all the elements a Bond film ought to. The action is plentiful- who can forget the nail-biting Eifel Tower chase or the Paris car chase- sans car roof?

Not high art, but a grand favorite of mine, A View to a Kill (1985) is entertainment personified. The pop title-theme song, performed by Duran Duran, which became a #1 hit in the summer of 1985, is a wonderful aspect of the film and immediately takes me back to a different time.

I suppose the film does as well and that is a great part of my fondness for it.

Terms of Endearment-1983

Terms of Endearment-1983

Director James L. Brooks

Starring Shirley MacLane, Debra Winger, Jack Nicholson

Top 250 Films #152

Scott’s Review #368

60004508

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Terms of Endearment (1983) is a sentimental favorite of mine, and while I am slightly embarrassed to include this chick-flick to end all chick-flicks on my favorites list, it is also a damned good sentimental film and makes me a bit weepy each time I see it.

It is pure Hollywood mainstream formula, but somehow Terms of Endearment works (romantic films are not usually at the forefront) and even won the coveted Best Picture Oscar in 1983. That must say something.

So if it is so sappy what makes it so great? For starters, it has some exceptional acting all around, especially by leads Shirley MacLaine, Jack Nicholson, and Debra Winger.

How can you go wrong with a talent of that caliber?

MacLaine and Winger play Aurora and Emma Greenway, a mother and daughter, (the father is deceased) who share a lifelong love/hate relationship, living in the mid-west in present times.

Nicholson plays Garrett, a retired astronaut (and womanizer) and the object of Aurora’s affection.

The chemistry among all three is apparent- I sinfully find it delicious that Winger and MacLaine despised each other throughout filming, adding a layer of curiosity and intrigue to the film, and during their scenes.

Director James L. Brooks wisely balances the heavy drama with comedy so the film does not become too overwrought. For example, Garrett and Aurora have a humorous courtship, constantly bickering or misunderstanding each other- he is a womanizing playboy type and Aurora a domineering, insecure woman- they end up needing each other, nonetheless.

Unforgettable is the hilarious drive along with the beach scene that the two share.  Even though the duo is tenuous and difficult, I love them all the same.

The tear-jerker scenes are emotional, especially the deathbed scene at the end of the film. There is so much raw emotion going on at once and, a rarity in film, the child actors involved are real, believable, and flawless.

The film feels like watching a true, real-life, drama play out. The heartache feels real and the film as a whole feels very genuine.

Also interesting is Emma’s failing marriage to Flap (Jeff Daniels) and her subsequent affair with kind-hearted Sam (John Lithgow) as well as her departure from her mother’s hometown, the constant phone calls, and being in one another’s life, just like a real mother and daughter relationship is oftentimes like.

Terms of Endearment (1983) incorporates all of the elements that make a good, old-fashioned, dramatic tear-jerker, and I find myself a sucker for it each time that I watch it.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-James L. Brooks (won), Best Actress-Shirley MacLaine (won), Debra Winger, Best Supporting Actor-Jack Nicholson (won), John Lithgow, Best Screenplay Based on Material Based on Another Medium (won), Best Original Score, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Best Film Editing

The Color Purple-1985

The Color Purple-1985

Director Steven Spielberg

Starring Whoopi Goldberg, Oprah Winfrey

Top 250 Films #153

Scott’s Review #358

60026621

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Steven Spielberg, admittedly a director who focuses more on sentimentality, mixes heartbreak with the courage to blend a recipe that makes for a perfect, mainstream film from 1985.

It is a different direction for him- far extreme from the summer blockbusters he was known for until this time.

Exceptional acting and cinematography lend themselves to The Color Purple, a film based on the much darker novel by Alice Walker. Certainly, one of the best films of the 1980s.

A relative unknown when the film was made, Whoopi Goldberg gives an astounding performance in the lead role.

The film spans approximately forty years in the early twentieth century and is set in rural Georgia.

Celie Harris (Goldberg) is an oppressed black woman, her sister and best friend Nettie is sent away, leaving Celie a virtual prisoner with a man, Albert Johnson (Danny Glover), whom she is forced to marry and care for in addition to his children.

Raped and beaten, Celie is left with little self-worth until two women, rotund, feisty, Sophia (Oprah Winfrey), and Shug (Margaret Avery) inspire her to be something better.

The Color Purple is a very sentimental film filled with inspiration for anyone beaten down or otherwise abused by people or by society.

The depiction of southern life for blacks, especially black women is depicted well, though softened I have no doubt. Liberties must be taken for the sake of film as black men, in particular, are not portrayed well- surely there must have been some decent black men in this time?

But, despite Spielberg being a male, The Color Purple is told from a definite female perspective.

Her role of Celie is Goldberg’s finest and hers is a case of the Academy getting it all wrong; she should have won an Oscar for this performance instead of a conciliation win a few years later for her secondary (and unremarkable) role in Ghost.

Goldberg never achieved any roles as great as Celie.

Her expressions and mannerisms spoke volumes and her occasional wide, beaming smile would melt the coldest heart.

Winfrey, equally brilliant as Sophia (and also robbed at Oscar’s time), is a completely different character. Angry, abrasive, and outspoken, she fills Sophia with life and energy, which makes her big scene heartbreaking to watch.

Defying a white man she is beaten and arrested and reduced to living out her days as a limping maid to a white woman- who she swore she would never serve.

The cinematography and direction of The Color Purple are grand.

Spielberg does a believable job of depicting time accurately. The costumes worn by the cast and the lighting, in general, are bright and colorful, and I think this gives the film a flavor that is nice to watch.

Again, Walker’s novel and the real-life experience were undoubtedly much darker, but for the film’s sake, this adaptation (numerous stage versions preceded and followed) makes for a wonderful film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actress-Whoopi Goldberg, Best Supporting Actress-Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Original Score, Best Original Song-“Miss Celie’s Blues (Sister)”, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Makeup, Best Costume Design

Mommie Dearest-1981

Mommie Dearest-1981

Director Frank Perry

Starring Faye Dunaway

Top 250 Films #154

Scott’s Review #195

60020629

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.

All About Eve-1950

All About Eve-1950

Director Joe Mankiewicz

Starring Bette Davis, Anne Baxter

Top 250 Films #155

Scott’s Review #73

242142

Reviewed June 27, 2014

Grade: A

All About Eve is a cynical masterpiece from 1950 set in the competitive world of the New York theater.

Insecure Margo Channing, played to perfection by Bette Davis, is an aging actress whose career is declining. She meets naïve Eve Harrington, played by Anne Baxter, who insinuates herself into Margo’s life and career.

One interesting aspect of this film is the opening scene of Eve’s acceptance speech. The look of anger and disdain on the front table indicates what is to come.

The film backtracks from the first time the two women meet, and the story begins.

It is undoubtedly a dark film, and jealousy and back-stabbing are common themes throughout, as had never been done before, set in the world of theater.

One by one, each of Margo’s friends catches on to Eve’s plot, but at what cost?

This is Bette Davis’s comeback performance as a talented Broadway star, and she makes the most of the opportunity as she deliciously utters her famous revenge-minded line, “Fasten your seat belts. It’s going to be a bumpy night”.

Marilyn Monroe has a cameo role as a debutante in her first film role.

The film deservedly won the 1950 Best Picture Oscar.

Oscar Nominations: 7 wins-Best Motion Picture (won), Best Director-Joseph L. Mankiewicz (won), Best Actress-Anne Baxter, Bette Davis, Best Supporting Actor-George Sanders (won), Best Supporting Actress-Celeste Holm, Thelma Ritter, Best Screenplay (won), Best Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Sound Recording (won), Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Black-and-White (won), Best Cinematography, Black-and-White, Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing

From Here to Eternity-1953

From Here to Eternity-1953

Director Fred Zinnemann

Starring Burt Lancaster, Deborah Kerr, Montgomery Clift

Top 250 Films #156

Scott’s Review #875

Reviewed March 7, 2019

Grade: A

Based on a popular novel of the same name, written by James Jones in 1952, From Here to Eternity (1953) tells a powerful story of romance and drama set against the gorgeous backdrop of Hawaii.

The film is poignant and sentimental for its build-up to the World War II Pearl Harbor attacks, further enhancing the storytelling.

With great acting and a compelling story, the film is a bombastic Hollywood creation that has endured and remains timeless.

A trio of United States Army personnel is stationed on the sunny island of Oahu. The primary principals are First Sergeant Milton Warden (Burt Lancaster), Private Robert E. Lee Prewitt (Montgomery Clift), and Private Angelo Maggio (Frank Sinatra). Their lives in the Schofield Army Barracks are chronicled.

Respective love interests join them, Alma Lorene (Donna Reed) and Karen Holmes (Deborah Kerr), and the triumphs and sorrows of each are explored dramatically before the devastating incident set to take place.

The film’s perspective is centered around the male characters, which risks the film being classified as a “guy’s movie.” Enough melodrama and romance exist to offset the testosterone and masculinity, and as the characters weave in and out of each other’s lives, a broader canvas is painted.

This point is to the film’s credit as each character is rich with development, sympathy, or sometimes pure anger.

Many films have been told, and continue to be informed throughout the decades, of the terrors and after-effects of World War II, but From Here to Eternity remains at the top of the heap. While not going full throttle with too much violence or grit, the film tells of the trials and tribulations of people affected and soon to be affected by the war.

The characters co-exist peacefully in their little slice of the world. Though there is the occasional bullying or insubordination among the ranks, the romance soon takes center stage, followed by the dire attacks.

The smoldering beach scene featuring Burt Lancaster and Deborah Kerr on the ravaging shores of Halona Cove is as iconic as any cinematic moment. Rumors of the star’s torrid love affair and the need to run off to make love after shooting the scene could be myths, but they have never been disproven.

The camera crew reportedly shot the scene quickly, leaving the duo to their desires. Regardless, the scene may cause the iciest of hearts to turn into a torrent of heart-pounding flutters.

The film suddenly turns dark, as if realizing it is about a devastating war. A central character dies, and another character hunts for revenge. Despite these deaths not being at the hands of an enemy or a battle, they are powerful and dim.

Finally, the attack on Pearl Harbor is upon us, just as the audience will no doubt sense it coming. The film ends sadly with a simple dialogue between the two main female characters.

Thanks to fine direction by novice director Fred Zinnemann, From Here to Eternity (1953) elicits a pure breadth of emotions and subject matters.

At its core, it is a cynical film, but the picture is also rich with courage, integrity, and love of one’s country without suffering from phony false patriotism.

With a dash of romance and sexuality, the film is utterly memorable and deserving of the hefty Academy Awards it achieved.

Oscar Nominations: 8 wins– Best Motion Picture (won), Best Director-Fred Zinnemann (won), Best Actor-Montgomery Clift, Burt Lancaster, Best Actress-Deborah Kerr, Best Supporting Actor-Frank Sinatra (won), Best Supporting Actress-Donna Reed (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Musical Score of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Sound Recording (won), Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (won), Best Costume Design, Black-and-White, Best Film Editing (won)

Parasite-2019

Parasite-2019

Director Joon-ho Bong

Starring Song Kang-ho, Jang Hye-jin

Top 250 Films #157

Scott’s Review #963

Reviewed November 28, 2019

Grade: A

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Allegiances to characters will shift along the way.

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

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

The pacing and tension during this scene are outstanding.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Do the Parks deserve their fates?

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

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

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

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

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

Get Out-2017

Get Out-2017

Director Jordan Peele

Starring Daniel Kaluuya, Allison Williams

Top 250 Films #158

Top 40 Horror Films #24

Scott’s Review #629

Reviewed March 28, 2017

Grade: A

Get Out (2017) is a unique modern-day horror film that combines classic horror elements (notably, great camera angles to elicit jumps) with a touch of slapstick humor, a rare blend in the horror genre.

In the case of Get Out, all of these tidbits come together in a marvelous experience. The subject matter is rather risqué (see below), a plus for me as I like films that push the envelope a bit.

Indeed, as with most horror films, liberties must be taken regarding plot points and continuity issues, but this film is impressive work.

Given that it is director Jordan Peele’s directorial debut, kudos.

Chris Washington (Daniel Kaluuya) is a young photographer who is handsome, educated, and enjoying life. He is black, and his girlfriend, Rose, is a pretty white girl from an affluent upbringing—it is implied that they are opposites on the social scale.

One weekend, they travel out of the city (presumably New York City) to visit Rose’s parents in the country. Her parents, Dean and Missy, own a sprawling estate with acres of land. Nervous to meet Rose’s parents and make a good first impression, Chris notices that Dean and Missy’s servants are all black and act peculiarly.

Soon, it is revealed that Chris’s mother died when he was a little boy, and when Missy hypnotizes Chris, things begin to go from strange to downright scary.

I adore how the film immediately feels ominous—there is simply something not “right” with the situation. Even before Chris and Rose arrive at her parents’ estate, something seems off.

They hit and kill a deer with their car, the policeman who aids them seems racist, and despite Rose seeming fresh-faced, she also seems not to be trusted.

There are so many ominous warnings not to approach her parents’ house that when they finally do arrive, the audience is compelled to watch for more, perhaps while biting fingernails nervously.

Jordan Peele’s decision to keep everything cheery and bright for most of the film only makes the audience wonder what secrets lurk in the grand estate—the setting where most of the action takes place.

When the pair finally arrives at her parents’ house, everything is out of whack. The film undoubtedly borrows from The Stepford Wives (1975) in some of the characters’ pleasant, almost robotic cheerfulness.

The big reveal and the objectification of all of the black characters —specifically black males —can indeed be cause for debate. The racial motives of the characters are also only skimmed over and never discussed or rationalized in detail.

The physical strength and resilience of black men are mentioned a few times, and Rose’s parents, a psychologist and a neurosurgeon, are significant points in the story. Still, the intentions are somewhat wishy-washy and hardly plausible.

Peele mixes a hilarious scene amid the doom and gloom in a wise move.

The comic relief of the film, Rod, Chris’s best friend and proud TSA agent, calls the police and describes in detail his fears of a sex slave operation, which results in the police having a good guffaw- at Rod’s expense. Rod serving as an instrumental part of the film’s conclusion is a fantastic decision, mixing dark humor with more grotesque horror moments.

This succeeds in setting Get Out well above the traditional genre.

The acting by all parties is believable and deserving of acclaim, but newcomer (to me) Kaluuya carries the film very well, even offering more than one heartfelt dramatic scene, mostly when remembering his mother.

Allison Williams (a dead ringer for a young Jennifer Connelly) is also a marvel, as the character changes direction mid-stream and essentially becomes a different character.

Fantastic are the throwback elements of The Stepford Wives, complete with a similar setting. The film does not reveal whether “in the country” is Connecticut or upstate New York.

The Stepford Wives was Connecticut.

Get Out (2017) is a fresh, novel approach to the standard elements of horror. It mixes comedy and aspects of race into a story brimming with suspense, good frights, and fascinating camera angles.

This film, a great success at the box office, doesn’t seem like the typical sequel, but I am intrigued by what more it could offer.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win- Best Picture, Best Director- Jordan Peele, Best Actor- Daniel Kaluuya, Best Original Screenplay (won)

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins- Best Feature (won), Best Director- Jordan Peele (won), Best Male Lead- Daniel Kaluuya, Best Screenplay, Best Editing

Dreamgirls-2006

Dreamgirls-2006

Director Bill Condon

Starring Beyonce, Jennifer Hudson, Eddie Murphy

Top 250 Films #159

Scott’s Film Review #792

Reviewed July 20, 2018

Grade: A

Dreamgirls (2006) is a glossy show business-style drama with plenty of glitz and glamour. Adapted from the Broadway production of the same name, the story is loosely based on the trials and tribulations of The Supremes, a popular all-girl group from the 1960s.

Despite the film being heavily focused on the drama and tension between the characters, it boasts a wonderful soundtrack and fantastic acting- most notably newcomer Jennifer Hudson, who garnered a surprising Best Supporting Actress Oscar win for her role.

The film tells the story of the evolution of American R&B music during the 1960s and the 1970s- the action mainly taking place in Detroit, Michigan, where the genre began.

Taking center stage is the incarnation of a girl group called The Dreams, who are controlled by their manipulative record label executive.

A womanizer and creep, Curtis Taylor (Jamie Foxx), guides the girls to stardom, but beds both the beautiful Deena (Beyonce) and the talented yet overweight Effie White (Jennifer Hudson). This leads to conflict as Curtis decides that less talented Deena is more marketable and thus should be the central figure of the band.

With a stellar cast in tow, Dreamgirls contains a plethora of talent and a good history lesson to boot. The main draw in the acting department is the revelation of the talented Jennifer Hudson.

Winner of the talent show American Idol, many pooh pooed her film direction, apparently assuming she was a flash in the pan and a “reality television” star. The challenging role of Effie is perfectly suited for Hudson- brazen, pipes for days, and plenty of attitude.

Her acting aside, Hudson scorches through an unforgettable rendition of “And I Am Telling You I’m Not Going”, which is assuredly what won her the Oscar.

Otherwise, the supporting cast is worthwhile and impressive is Beyonce in a pivotal role. Surely, the singer/actress faced her share of detractors, along with Hudson, but their chemistry is amazing and she nails all of her songs.

Eddie Murphy is a gem in the role mirrored after James Brown, James “Thunder” Early.  The role is perfect for Murphy- a far cry from his standard comedic roles that have grown stale over the years.

This role rejuvenates the actor’s credibility.

Dreamgirls does at times falter a bit with the drama, almost soap opera-like situations. A triangle develops between Effie, Curtis, and Deena, which leads to tension, bad blood, cattiness, and melodrama.

If the film were a standard drama this would undoubtedly make the film suffer from a tired script or generic writing.

But the musical numbers are so riveting that these flaws can be overlooked completely. The ritzy glamour and sparkles that erupt during “Dreamgirls” and “One Night Only” are wonderful fun and the songs are memorable leaving audiences humming along as they dance in the aisles.

The story has been told many times before. A dream of rising to musical stardom and the many trials and tribulations that go along with these hopes and desires.

Comparisons can be made to Chicago (2002), Valley of the Dolls (1967), or even Gypsy (1962), but the mostly black cast and the 1960s Motown theme is interesting, particularly as the Civil Rights movement of the time was upon us.

The film does not invest much time in politics, sticking mainly with drama and music, which may be a wise move to avoid too much of a message theme.

As the film concludes in 1975, Effie is reaffirmed as a meaningful member of The Dreams after her career has tanked and she has wound up on welfare.

A paternity twist is also thrown in for good measure, but the film has a clear “happily after ever” vibe to it which softens the film and keeps it more on the PG-13 level instead of going for darker themes.

Dreamgirls (2006) is a musical that is highly memorable for me because it made Jennifer Hudson a household name and confirms the talent and glory that she is rightfully due.

In subsequent years the star lost weight, softened her image a bit, and became, well, more generic. But thankfully we have a gorgeous performance to always appreciate her for.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Supporting Actor-Eddie Murphy, Best Supporting Actress-Jennifer Hudson (won), Best Original Song-“Listen”, “Love You I Do”, “Patience”, Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design

Titanic-1997

Titanic-1997

Director James Cameron

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet

Top 250 Films #160

Scott’s Review #327

1181461

Reviewed January 6, 2016

Grade: A

1997’s Titanic is a sweeping, gorgeous epic, directed by James Cameron, that is perfection at every level. This film has it all: romance, disaster, gorgeous art direction, and flawless attention to detail.

The film will make you laugh, cry, and fall in love with the characters, despite knowing the inevitable outcome. The film is based on the real-life sinking of the RMS Titanic in 1912 after the ship tragically collided with an iceberg.

I have witnessed this film be derided for being a “chick flick” or too “sappy”, but I vehemently disagree and feel it is a classic for the ages.

Titanic successfully re-invented the Hollywood epic.

Jack Dawkins (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a penniless artist who meets high-class socialite Rose DeWitt (Kate Winslet) aboard the luxurious Titanic, headed from the coast of England to the United States on its maiden voyage.

Rose is engaged to cagey Cal Hockley (Billy Zane).

Depressed, Rose contemplates diving overboard to her death, but Jack saves her and convinces her otherwise. They spend time together and he draws her portrait. As their romance blossoms, Cal catches on and plots revenge.

In the mix is Rose’s snobbish mother, Ruth, played by Frances Fisher.

The main theme of the film is social class and the difference that separates the haves from the have-nots.

James Cameron desired perfection from this film and he sure got what he wanted. Every detail of Titanic is flawless and historically accurate, from the dining room silverware to the costumes to the set pieces barely visible in the background.

Cameron even had a replica of the original Titanic built for filming purposes- with limitations, but what a vast undertaking this must have been. That, along with the smoldering romance between Jack and Rose, is what makes Titanic one of my favorite films.

Two fantastic scenes are when Jack is taken under the wing of Molly Brown, played by Kathy Bates. Molly is not the snob that many of the other upper class is, and lends Jack a tuxedo so that he will look dapper for Rose. She also tenderly teaches him the appropriate way to use silverware.

Tragically, the other scene is more melancholy- a gorgeous classical piece plays in the background as the vast ship is engulfed in water and slowly sinks, causing many deaths.

At well over three hours in length, the conclusion of the film is quite sprawling- and one has the feeling of being aboard the ship. By this time I was invested in the characters, both lead and supporting and the tragedy that ensues is both a marvel and heart-wrenching.

Titanic (1997) is a film that simply must be viewed on the big screen for full effect, and is a timeless masterpiece that has aged perfectly.

Oscar Nominations: 10 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-James Cameron (won), Best Actress-Kate Winslet, Best Supporting Actress-Gloria Stuart, Best Original Dramatic Score (won), Best Original Song-“My Heart Will Go On”, Best Sound Effects Editing (won), Best Sound (won), Best Art Direction (won), Best Cinematography (won), Best Makeup, Best Costume Design (won), Best Film Editing (won), Best Visual Effects (won)

Scream-1996

Scream-1996

Director Wes Craven

Starring Drew Barrymore, Neve Campbell, David Arquette

Top 250 Films #161

Top 40 Horror Films #25

Scott’s Review #710

Reviewed January 5, 2018

Grade: A-

Wes Craven’s 1996 film Scream is a piece that greatly assisted in bringing the horror genre back into relevance after a long drought throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s when horror films suffered from both over-saturation and cliche-riddled messes.

Thanks to Scream, creativity and plot twists and turns returned to the forefront of good horror films, and a clever film was birthed.

Fast-forward to 2018, the film does suffer a bit from a dated 1990s look but is still great fun to watch and a treat for all classic horror buffs as the references to classic greats are endless.

The film is sectioned off nicely and gets underway quickly  (in the best sequence of the film) as Casey Becker (Drew Barrymore)  receives a flirtatious phone call while making popcorn, from a man asking her to name her favorite horror film.

The friendly game quickly turns vicious as the caller threatens to kill her boyfriend should she answer a question incorrectly.

In a clever twist (think 1960s Psycho!) Casey and her boyfriend meet deadly fates and the opening credits begin to roll.

Given the huge star, Barrymore was in 1996, this twist was all the more shocking and attention-grabbing.

The remainder of the film centers around Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell), a popular California high school student, as she is pursued by an attacker known only as “Ghostface”, who dons a creepy costume and terrorizes victims via phone calls.

The small town, led by police officer Dewey Riley (David Arquette) and bitchy newswoman Gale Weathers (Courtney Cox), is determined to unmask the killer and figure out his or her motivations.

Sidney’s boyfriend, Billy (Skeet Ulrich), and other friends are along for the ride as a possible connected sub-plot involving Sidney’s deceased mother is introduced.

A romance between Dewey and Gale is also broached.

Scream is an enormous treat for fans of the horror genre as numerous references (and film clips!) of classics such as 1978’s Halloween abound throughout the film.

Other references to Friday the 13th, Prom Night, and A Nightmare On Elm Street appear during the film.

Writer, Kevin Williamson, a horror enthusiast, must have had a ball writing the screenplay that would become Scream.

In 1996, the mega-success of the film successfully not only jump-started the entire genre but also introduced younger fans of Scream to classics that were perhaps their parent’s generation and got them interested in the films.

Classic horror films are not only referenced during the film but also explained, mostly by the supporting character of Jamie, the nerdy kid who works at the video store and adores horror films.

A sequence in which he explains several “rules” of the horror genre is superlative, creative, and just great fun. He tells the teenagers at a party that anyone who drinks, has sex, or says “I will be right back”, is doomed to suffer a violent fate.

This clever writing makes Scream enormous fun to watch.

The climax of Scream is quite surprising in itself and the “great reveal” of the murderer (s) is also intelligent writing and quite the surprise. Several red herrings are produced along the way, casting suspicion on other characters who may or may not be the killers.

A small gripe of the writing is the motivations of the murderers- when the explanation is given for their killing spree, the reasoning is a bit convoluted and hard to fathom, but this is horror, and suspension of disbelief is always a necessity.

Scream is best remembered for giving the horror genre a good, hard kick in the seat of the pants and shaking all of the elements up a bit while preserving the core ideals of a good slasher film (suspense, a whodunit, and good solid kills).

Scream (1996) was followed by several sequels, some achieving better successes than others. In 2018 the film may not be quite as fresh as it once was, but is still a solid watch and memorable for relaunching a genre.

Beaches-1988

Beaches-1988

Director Garry Marshall

Starring Bette Midler, Barbara Hershey

Top 250 Films #162

Scott’s Review #352

60011617

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Beaches (1988) is a film that can easily be described as sentimental, sappy, and a chick flick- all in a derogatory fashion- but that regardless, is a treasure to me. I fall for this tearjerker every single time that I watch it.

It is not necessarily a great film, not high art, nor particularly edgy, but a good, old-fashioned, conventional film about friendship.

Bette Midler and Barbara Hershey give the film believability whereas other similar films would appear contrived.

C.C. Bloom (Midler) and Hillary Whitney (Hershey) are lifelong friends from opposite backgrounds. Besides, they could not have more opposite personalities. C.C. is blue-collar, outrageous, and brash, Hillary, is demure, rich, and sophisticated.

We meet our friends as young girls on the boardwalk of Atlantic City, C.C. hiding from her overbearing stage Mom, and Hillary lost and wandering the boardwalk.

The two become fast friends despite their vastly different upbringings and stay connected through ups and downs and life’s trials and tribulations, for over thirty years.

The chemistry between Midler and Hershey is great. I completely buy them as best friends through the years, despite having little in common.

Throughout their tender, emotional scenes, and the knock-down-drag-out fight they have at the mall (a fantastic scene!), there is never doubt about what they have.

They compete over a man, which ordinarily is a lame plot device, but in Beaches, it works because the two stars make it work.

Each actress puts her mark on the individual role. Midler’s C.C. is arrogant, feisty, and interesting as she begins a “have not” and becomes a “have”.

She becomes spoiled and pampered- all of the things she envies about Hillary. She does not handle wealth as well as Hillary because she lacks education. Hillary, an attorney, is classy and graceful.

These characteristics are why it is believable that the women would be at odds.

The last act is a weepy one as one of the women dies, leaving the other to pick up the pieces and move on- alone. This is a sad moment in the film, but the women’s devotion and loyalty are admirable.

Beaches (1988) may not be high art, but boy will it get you reaching for the tissues.

Oscar Nominations: Best Art Direction

Topaz-1969

Topaz-1969

Director Alfred Hitchcock

Starring Frederick Stafford, Karin Dor

Top 250 Films #163

Scott’s Review #108

60020562

Reviewed July 12, 2014

Grade: A-

Topaz is an intriguing, suspenseful 1969 latter-day Alfred Hitchcock film.

In the political thriller vein, the film typically suffers from being both overlooked and under-appreciated, yet receives admiration from film buffs. It is certainly not one of his better-known films, and that is quite a shame.

As with many great films, it is complex and layered, requiring close attention and even multiple viewings.

The issue with Topaz is that the film suffers from a lack of recognizable stars- a trademark of Hitchcock films in his heyday. Frederick Stafford (Andre) and Karin Dor (Juanita) are the featured romantic couple.

Despite his being married to another woman, Andre and Juanita are the couple the audience is intended to root for.

The story involves competing spies from France, the United States, and Cuba, all vying for government secrets concerning the Cuban Missile Crisis in the 1960s.

Each spy does their best to obtain the secrets, some in a sinister fashion.

The French accents, especially, can be tough to understand, but it is a thrilling film that traverses New York City, Cuba, and France. The main protagonist is Andre, and Stafford has a high level of charisma and a suave manner.

The character is quite similar to James Bond. The film itself plays out like a Bond film, with exotic locales, beautiful women, and political intrigue.

As with most Hitchcock films, the set pieces and art direction are beautiful and perfect. One highlight is a particular character’s death scene in Cuba. Throughout the film, the love story is involved, and the death is tragic yet heartfelt and shocking.

Topaz, sadly, was unsuccessful at the box office due to the lack of Hollywood names attached and limited promotion, although it made several top-ten critics’ lists in 1969.

Topaz is undoubtedly one of the more obscure of Hitchcock’s films, but an excellent one to discover and revere.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes-1953

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes-1953

Director Howard Hawks

Starring Jane Russell, Marilyn Monroe

Top 250 Films #164

Scott’s Review #384

60004540

Reviewed March 13, 2016

Grade: B+

One of the iconic and legendary stars, Marilyn Monroe’s better-known offerings from her brief career are Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953), a fun musical romantic comedy.

To create this wonderful gem, she stars alongside Jane Russell, another popular Hollywood star from a golden era.

Together, they have great chemistry and an easy yin-yang relationship, which makes the film light and cheerful but not meaningless or too fluffy.

It is just a genre that it is.

As mentioned, Roma has evolved in modern cinema, and Gentlemen embodies the innocence that has since been lost. The 1950s were a perfect time for this genre of film.

Lorelei Lee (Monroe) and Dorothy Shaw (Russell) are American showgirls and best friends who perform a stage show together. Lorelei loves diamonds and rich men- she is dating Gus Esmond, an awkward yet lovable young man who is wealthy but controlled by his father.

Dorothy is less interested in being showered with wealth but prefers handsome, adventure-filled adventures. These begin when the girls board a cruise ship to Paris. A private investigator (Malone) hired by Gus’s father observes and follows Lorelei while the Olympic swim team pursues Dorothy.

The film is entertaining and a must-see for all Monroe fans, as it was at the time when she was at her best- Gentlemen Prefer Blondes and Some Like it Hot are my personal favorites, and she was in the prime of her tragically short film career- sure, she plays the “dumb blonde” character with gusto. Still, there is something innocent and fun about her portrayal of Lorelei, and we immediately fall in love with her.

Dorothy is the leader—the smart one—and complements Lorelei’s naivety. More worldly and sophisticated, she watches out for her counterpart.

The chemistry between Monroe and Russell makes the film work so well. The audience buys them as best friends, and the two actresses (who reportedly got along famously).

Monroe shines during the legendary number, Girls’ Nights Are the Best Friend,” a performance that famously inspired the 1984 Madonna video, ” Girls Night Out,” which will forever live on in music history.

My favorite scene is on the ship when Lorelei gets into trouble. She sneaks into the private investigator’s cabin to obtain incriminating evidence and gets stuck in the tight cabin window.

The shot of Monroe sticking halfway out the window is funny. She then hilariously enlists a young child to help her avoid recognition and a subpar man with subpar vision.

Vision also comes into play when Dorothy disguises herself as Lorelei in a silly fashion (looking more like a drag queen) in a courtroom scene over hi-jinks involving a stolen tiara.

Interesting is the scene in wsurroundedrothy is surrounded by dancing, which is as provocative for 1953 as it is today.

Undoubtedly unable to show any form of nudity whatsoever, the dancers are clad in nude-colored shorts, which indeed suggests elements of sexuality, an illusion of nudity, and fits the scene perfectly as Dorothy is in testosterone heaven.  It is like a big, giant fantasy for her.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953) is a triumphant offering from another cinematic era—a sorely missed time. Cute but not trivial, the film is a witty portrayal of the iconic Marilyn Monroe.

Pink Flamingos-1972

Pink Flamingos-1972

Director John Waters

Starring Divine, Edith Massey

Top 250 Films #165

Scott’s Review #359

70032618

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

One of the true, and best, late-night gross-out films of all time, Pink Flamingos (1972) breaks down barriers I never thought possible to do in film and contains one of the most vomit-inducing scenes to ever grace the movies.

The film is certainly one of a kind and will only be appreciated by a certain type of film-goer. Pink Flamingos is raw, entertaining, and must be seen to be believed.

Outrageous in every way and shot documentary style, the film has weird close-ups and amateurish camera angles, only adding to the fun.

I love the film.

In what director John Waters famously dubbed the “Trash Trilogy”, along with similar films Desperate Living and Female Trouble, Pink Flamingos has the dubious honor of being the best of the three.

Waters stalwart, Divine, plays Babs Johnson, an underground criminal who lives a meager existence in a trailer along with her mentally challenged son Crackers, and her bizarre, egg-obsessed mother, Edie (Massey). They are joined by Babs’s companion, Cotton.

In an attempt to win the “Filthiest Person Alive” contest and usurp Babs from achieving this distinction. the Marbles (Mink Stole and David Lochary) set out to destroy her career.

Pink Flamingos is complete and utter over-the-top fare, but I have fallen in love with the film over the years.

Let’s just say it is a type of film that is an acquired taste, and one will eventually revel in the madness or be disgusted with its bad taste.

Waters, a truly creative,  breaks new ground in filthy behavior. On a budget of no more than $10,000, it is more than impressive how he pulled this off successfully.

The antics that Babs and the Marbles engage in are downright crude, but the extreme nature of the fun is exactly what is to love about the film. Hysterical is the character of Babs’s mother Edie.

Confined to a crib and constantly inquiring about the Egg Man, she is obsessed with eggs and wants to eat nothing else. She eventually marries the Egg Man. The character is entertaining beyond belief.

The Marbles run a clinic in which they sell stolen babies to lesbian couples for cash.  When they send Babs a box of human excrement and a card that says “fatso”, the war between the two sides is on.

The highlight of the film is the main sequence in which Babs holds a birthday party. A male contortionist flexes his anus in rhythm to the song “Surfin’ Bird”, which may be the only film featuring an anus.

How Waters got away with some of this stuff is mind-blowing.

The most disturbing scene occurs at the very end when Babs watches a dog do “its business” on the street and proceeds to pick up the excrement and eat it, revealing to the audience a toothy (and brown) smile.

Reportedly Divine did this act. As the film ends, Babs truly is “The Filthiest Person Alive”.

Thanks to the genius of John Waters and Divine and the superlative supporting cast, Pink Flamingos (1972) is a reminder that creativity and unique humor do not have to conform to a specific style or follow a road map.

Waters takes any film criteria and throws it right out the window, instead of creating a masterpiece in warped fun and disgust.

Joker-2019

Joker-2019

Director Todd Phillips

Starring Joaquin Phoenix, Robert De Niro

Top 250 Films #166

Scott’s Review #953

Reviewed November 1, 2019

Grade: A

Joker (2019) is a film that has divided audiences. Some love it, others loathe it. The experience is not your standard fun, superhero fare, with a hero’s rescue and the good triumphing over evil.

Despite the parlay into Batman territory, the film smacks the viewer across the face with its brutality, violence, and social and psychological injustices.

Joaquin Phoenix pummels the audience with an angry and bitter portrayal of the title character, easily one of the best performances of the year.

In one of the first scenes, before we even know the character, we experience a long, close-up of Phoenix laughing hysterically. We wonder what is so funny, before the revelation that he, Arthur Fleck, suffers from a nervous condition that causes inappropriate outbursts.

The year is 1981, and the fictional Gotham City, clearly a mirror image of New York City, serves as the setting. Times are tough, and crime is rampant.

Arthur lives in a dumpy apartment with his sickly mother, Penny (Frances Conroy), and visits a social worker regularly to receive his prescription medicine.

Arthur finds meager work as a party clown and aspires to be a stand-up comedian. After a gang attacks him in an alley, Arthur’s co-worker, Randall, encourages him to take a gun. Arthur invites his neighbor, single mother Sophie, to his stand-up comedy show, and they happily begin dating.

Finally, another person understands him. Segments of the population are disenfranchised and impoverished as Thomas Wayne, a billionaire philanthropist, runs for mayor of Gotham. A strange connection develops between Arthur, Penny, and Thomas, becoming central to the plot.

Can we discuss Phoenix’s bravura performance for a moment?

Suppose anyone thinks that Heath Ledger was phenomenal when he portrayed the same character in 2008’s The Dark Knight. In that case, they will be elated by Phoenix, who elevates the character to an entirely new level.

What Phoenix adds is strong sympathy for Arthur/the Joker and a care for the character. We feel sorry for him, but should we? He is a villain after all. One could easily debate whether his character can be considered the bad guy or the hero.

Regardless of the assessment, the performance is unforgettable.

A turn-off to some, which I found tremendously powerful, is the role reversal in the portrayal of the Wayne family, Bruce, and Batman characters.

Always deemed the “good guys”, in Joker, Thomas Wayne is self-centered, pompous, and embodies a sense of entitlement and snobbery.

Bruce is a young boy, but the implication is that the family is unkind, and what might the child grow up to believe?  Why is Batman/Bruce Wayne heralded as good and the Joker evil? It turns the tradition upside down into a twisted mind warp, and this is wonderfully creative and thought-provoking.

The best scene in the film, which triggers much of the subsequent violence and chaos, occurs when Arthur is invited to appear on a late-night talk show hosted by Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro). A week earlier, Franklin had played a humiliating clip of Arthur poorly performing stand-up.

Arthur decides to appear in full “Joker” attire, and the eventual discussion and words lead to tragic events. The scene is tense, intelligently written, and combative as the men spar over politics and class distinction.

Lastly, the musical score is dark, haunting, and mesmerizing without overtaking the film. Many key scenes of Arthur dancing and posturing are masterful, with the inclusion of the bombastic music.

He is a celebratory character, in his mind at least, and the music fuses into the scene with gusto and power. The combination of clowns and an incredible score adds significantly to the production.

Joker (2019) showcases a marvelous acting performance on the part of Phoenix, which combines a haunting musical score in its depth.

Providing a social commentary for people experiencing poverty and disenfranchisement, this film will divide viewers, probably based on preconceived expectations of a traditional Marvel-type superhero event.

The film offers much more than safer films like Wonder Woman (2017) or Black Panther (2018) ever could- a dark and violent character study.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Todd Phillips, Best Actor-Joaquin Phoenix (won), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score (won), Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing

Moonlight-2016

Moonlight-2016

Director Barry Jenkins

Starring Trevante Rhodes, Andre Holland

Top 250 Films #167

Scott’s Review #512

80121348

Reviewed November 6, 2016

Grade: A

Moonlight (2016) is an excellent film rich in character and grit. It tells the story of one man’s life, from childhood to teenage years to adulthood, sharing the bonds he forms and the demons he wrestles with.

The acting is fantastic, and the story is poignant and truthful.

The film is not preachy but instead tells a story, leaving the audience to sit and observe, quietly formulating their opinions.

Moonlight is a mixture of beauty and heartbreak and is told very well.

The film is divided into three chronological chapters that describe the central character’s life.

Chiron is a shy, docile young boy of six or seven living in the drug-filled world of Miami, Florida, in the 1980s. He is bullied for being “different,” though he does not know why he is shunned. Chiron is introverted and distrustful.

A kind-hearted drug dealer named Juan (Mahersala Ali) takes a shine to Chiron, whose own mother becomes more and more absent and emotionally abusive to her son.

Naomie Harris plays Paula, mother to Chiron and herself a drug addict. Juan and his girlfriend Theresa (Janelle Monae) become surrogate parents to Chiron and share their home with him as needed.

Chapter two focuses on Chiron as a teenager, still bullied and coming to terms with his sexuality and feelings of insecurity. By this time, his mother has spiraled out of control, and his life is a sad one.

He is filled with emotions such as rage, despair, and confusion. An experience with his best friend, Kevin, changes the direction of his life. Kevin is his saving grace and a decent person amidst his troubled life.

In chapter three, we are re-introduced to Chiron as an adult, having wholly reinvented himself and become a changed man, but is he changed for better or worse? People from his past resurface at this time, and Chiron must face various demons and emotions and come to terms with himself and the others surrounding him.

Does his story have a sad or a happy ending? This is the question we are left wondering.

The aspect that impressed me the most is the storytelling and the ground broken with this film.

From an LGBTQ+ perspective, by this time (2016), we have experienced numerous offerings on the subject. Still, the fact that Moonlight is not only a character study but a love story between two black men has not yet been done to this degree in cinema, or arguably at all, especially in mainstream fare.

Happily, Moonlight is receiving critical praise. The fact that Chiron lives in a macho, male-driven society makes his self-acceptance all the more challenging for him.

The direction in Moonlight is impressive, and director Barry Jenkins deserves much praise.

Quiet scenes of Chiron as a boy asking Juan and Theresa why the bullies call him a specific name are heartbreaking. Another scene muted and in slow motion, reveals an abusive Paula calling Chiron a degrading name, leaving him confused and hurt.

The tender scenes between Chiron and Kevin are sweet and passionate and are told on a humanistic level.

Moonlight delves into such territory as loneliness and self-identity. It is an interesting film for anyone who has struggled with these issues or is empathetic to those who have.

Moonlight (2016) breaks stereotypes and molds a subtle and low-key film that speaks volumes.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Barry Jenkins, Best Supporting Actor-Mahershala Ali (won), Best Supporting Actress-Naomie Harris, Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Original Score, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 6 wins-Best Feature (won), Best Director-Barry Jenkins (won), Best Screenplay (won), Best Cinematography (won), Best Editing (won), Robert Altman Award (won)

Female Trouble-1974

Female Trouble-1974

Director John Waters

Starring Divine

Top 250 Films #168

Scott’s Review #146

70032612

Reviewed August 4, 2014

Grade: A

Female Trouble (1974) is a deliciously naughty treat by famous Independent film legend, John Waters.

Not exactly family-friendly, it is a gem for those desiring more left-of-center fare with depravity and gross-out fun mixed in for good measure.

Water’s theme of the film is “crime is beauty” and the film is dedicated to Manson family member, Charles “Tex” Watson.

Meant for adult, late-night viewing, the film tells the story of female delinquent Dawn Davenport, who angrily leaves home one Christmas morning after not receiving her desired cha-cha heels as a Christmas present.

Her parents, religious freaks, disown her and she is left to fend for herself on the streets of Baltimore.

The film then tells of her life story of giving birth and subsequently falling into a life of crime in the 1960s.  Her friends Chicklet and Concetta are in tow as they work various jobs and embark on a career of theft.

Female Trouble stars Waters regulars Divine, Mink Stole, Edith Massey, Cookie Mueller, and others.

Interestingly, Divine plays a dual role- Dawn Davenport (in drag, of course) and also the father of her bratty child- Earl Peterson. Dawn and Earl have a less-than-romantic interlude on a dirty mattress on the side of the road when he picks her up hitchhiking, which results in the birth of Taffy.

Also featured is the hilarious feud between Dawn and her love interest’s (Gator) Aunt Ida, as the women engage in tactics such as acid throwing and chopping off of limbs as they constantly exact revenge on each other.

Favorite scenes include Dawn’s maniacal nightclub act in which she does her rendition of acrobatics and then begins firing a gun into the crowd. Another is of Dawn’s dinner party with Donald and Donna Dasher- serving a meal consisting of spaghetti and chips, Taffy’s tirade hilariously ruins the evening.

This film is not for the prudish, squeamish, or uptight crowd, but a ball for all open-minded, dirty fun-seekers. The film contains one over-the-top, hilarious scene after another.

The line “just cuz you got them big udders don’t make you somethin’ special” is a Waters classic.

Female Trouble is one of a series of outrageous, cult-classics featuring the legendary camp star, Divine.

Not meant to be overanalyzed or some might say, analyzed at all, Female Trouble (1974) is unabashedly trashy and makes no apologies for its outrageousness.

The Hours-2002

The Hours-2002

Director Stephen Daldry

Starring Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore, Meryl Streep

Top 250 Films #169

Scott’s Review #803

Reviewed August 17, 2018

Grade: A

The Hours (2002) is a film containing the ultimate in acting riches. With names like Nicole Kidman, Meryl Streep, and Julianne Moore associated with the film this is not surprising.

Not solely belonging to the ladies, however, Ed Harris, in particular, is dynamic in his role as are all the other males who appear in the film.

Told in three different sections in chronological order, but going back and forth, the stories all share connections via the novel Mrs. Dalloway, written by Virginia Woolf.

One of the best films of the decade!

Each segment of the film takes place within a single day, but decades apart. Wisely, director Stephen Daldry switches between the stories frequently leaving sort of a cliffhanger, making the drama more compelling and spicy.

In 1923, a depressed Virginia Woolf is portrayed by an unrecognizable Nicole Kidman in a role that won her the Best Actress Oscar.

Woolf resides outside of London and struggles to complete her novel amid nervous breakdowns and the watchful eye of her husband, who is aware of her mental pain.

In 1951, Laura Brown (Julianne Moore) seemingly has it all, living the “American Dream”. Residing in a nice neighborhood with a loving husband, she is pregnant with her second child, spending the days at home raising her young son, Richie, whom she is very close to yet does not understand.

After a fleeting lesbian dalliance with a neighbor, Laura goes off to a hotel with bottles of pills, intending to kill herself. She changes her mind after reading Woolf’s novel and dozing off, deciding instead to make a different decision.

Finally, in 2001, Clarissa (Meryl Streep), is bisexual and in a same-sex relationship. She lives with Richard (Harris), whom she dated in college, now the best of friends. He is gay, stricken with the AIDS virus, and close to committing suicide as he plans to jump out of a window.

This story (present times) is crucial to the film because it involves two characters from the 1951 story. These characters intersect with others in a touching and heart-wrenching way.

The greatest parts of The Hours are the brilliant acting and the richly written storytelling. Arguably, Kidman, Streep, and Moore all could have won Oscars for their performances, and I must mention that as brilliant as Kidman is (she is the sole Oscar recipient), and Streep is just universally good, I would have given the Oscar to Moore- the standout in my opinion.

Glamorous and intelligent, warm to her son, she makes a monumental and controversial decision. The character should not be sympathetic- yet she is. This is a testament to Moore’s infusing the character with confidence, reasonable thoughts, and even some empathy. We finally understand why she does what she does.

May I boast for a moment about Harris’s performance? Richard, once known as Richie as a kid (this will give something away), has lived a difficult life.

Abandoned, wounded, and suffering much loss, he is a tragic figure, pained beyond belief. His suffering is so monumental that we almost welcome his demise, and Harris offers so much of himself in this difficult role. He is both physically and emotionally hurt and Harris portrays this in spades.

Uniquely, all three stories work independently of each other. Yes, characters from one appear in another, but they are like well-crafted vignettes. Similarly, they each begin with breakfast, then involve the planning of a party or celebration of some sort, and culminate in sadness.

Yet, the film does not feel like a downer or preachy in any way, but rather, good, solid, humanistic story-telling, which I adore.

Sure, the film is considered a drama, but it also contains multiple gay or bisexual characters and therefore must be included in the chambers of LGBT filmmaking.

With an A-list cast, the film helps lead the charge (successfully so) to bring more rich LGBT films to center stage and garner mainstream audiences.

The great aspect of The Hours is that it is a mainstream film- a good solid drama.

Based on a Pulitzer Prize-winning novel by Michael Cunningham, The Hours (2002) does not try to draw parallels with each story or necessarily connect them in an obvious fashion.

Rather, the film version provokes thought both with LGBT and feminist approaches. Each female central character lives in a world run by men, as Woolf argues in her novel.

The film brilliantly adapts the novel and brings it to large audiences in a fantastic, riveting fashion.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Stephen Daldry, Best Actress-Nicole Kidman (won), Best Supporting Actor-Ed Harris, Best Supporting Actress-Julianne Moore, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing

Hairspray-1988

Hairspray-1988

Director John Waters

Starring Ricki Lake, Divine

Top 250 Films #170

Scott’s Review #130

60025089

Reviewed July 23, 2014

Grade: B+

Hairspray (1988) is one of director John Water’s later and much more mainstream comedies.

Influencing the Broadway musical of the same name that was created years later and inspiring a successful remake in 2007, the film is a wonderful watch one late at night accompanied by spirits.

It is fun, fun, fun.

The film tells the story of a cute, yet insecure, overweight teenager named Tracy Turnblad, wonderfully portrayed by Rikki Lake. Tracy lives in Baltimore in the racially conflicted 1960s, and she battles to appear on a local talent show.

With Waters directing, one might expect comedic raunchiness, but Hairspray is quite tame. It is the only Waters film to be rated PG, the others are rated X.

Not to be outdone, however, Hairspray does contain its share of light naughtiness.

The film itself, while campy and over the top, is important since it does its best to break down racial barriers, including interracial relationships, and sends an important message.

Tracy and her best friend Penny Pingleton judge people for who they are, not on race, income, or anything else.

Those characters in Hairspray who are written as racist or less than welcoming to interracial cohabitation (again the film is set in the early 1960s) look like buffoons and not with the progressive social times.

The supporting cast is high caliber- Divine and Jerry Stiller are perfectly cast as Tracy’s open-minded yet cautious and concerned parents.

Famous musicians appear in cameos- most notable are Debbie Harry, Ric Ocasek, and Sonny Bono in small but zesty roles.

The musical dance numbers are plentiful and perfectly fit the time of the film.

Hairspray (1988) is entertaining, relevant, and free with a powerful message mixed in with the entertainment.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Director-John Waters, Best Female Lead-Ricki Lake, Best Supporting Male-Divine, Best Supporting Female-Debbie Harry, Best Screenplay

Philadelphia-1993

Philadelphia-1993

Director Jonathan Demme

Starring Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington

Top 250 Films #171

Scott’s Review #782

Reviewed July 3, 2018

Grade: A

Having the powerful distinction of being one of the first Hollywood LGBT films to deal with heavy issues such as HIV/AIDS and homophobia, Philadelphia (1993) is a film to champion.

The film does contain some less-than-positive stereotypes across the board, but was a tremendous box office success and more importantly introduced a large audience to a still (at that time) taboo subject.

Hopefully, this had a tremendous effect on creating an understanding of a vicious disease and its ramifications.

Tom Hanks deservedly won the Best Actor Oscar for his lead performance of an AIDS and discrimination victim as did the heartbreaking theme song “Streets of Philadelphia”, penned by Bruce Springsteen, win for Best Original Song.

Director Jonathan Demme creates a world quite realistic in portrayal at the corporate level. Hotshot attorney Andrew Beckett (Hanks) has a promising future at one of the country’s largest law firms in Philadelphia.

Assigned a high-profile case, it is noticed that Andrew has developed lesions across his body and is subsequently fired from the firm. After deciding to sue the firm and having no luck finding an attorney to represent him, he finally meets struggling black attorney, Joe Miller (Denzel Washington), who begrudgingly takes the case to gain exposure.

Philadelphia is a film that is a courtroom drama with a cause and is firmly ensconced in the “message movie” genre.  A lesser version, and perhaps one made even a decade or so after 1993, might be reduced to the Hallmark television movie category.

Fortunately, the timing is perfect and Philadelphia can be remembered as a film championing LGBT rights.

Hanks’s performance is just dynamic- his character is meant to be empathetic, a victimized man unjustly suffering not only discrimination but a death sentence. The audience knows what is to come and as Andrew loses more weight and appears more sullen and haggard, the tale increases in sadness.

The final act of Andrew’s court victory is to be celebrated, but also is heartbreaking as a feeble and dying Andrew now lies close to death.

Hanks brilliantly infuses Andrew with courage, heart, and values, so much so that he becomes a hero to the audience even if their sexuality is different than his.

As much as the undying love for Hanks is deserved, the powerful supporting cast is a treasure. Washington is not as sympathetic a character as Andrew is, but learns a lesson and eventually leaves his machismo on the sidelines.

The heart-wrenching death scene culminating in the hospital room involves lover Miguel (Antonio Banderas), surrounded by Andrew’s family, all-embracing as one. There is beauty mixed with tragedy in this one scene alone.

Even Mary Steenburgen as the tough defense lawyer shows some heart. And who can say more about the dynamic Joanne Woodward as Andrew’s mother?

Unfortunately, there are a few stereotypes to endure, and sadly many early LGBT films (and some still do!) include these for emphasis- or perhaps ignorance? Nonetheless, these make the film seem slightly dated given the LGBT progress made in the decades since the film was released.

Joe Miller is portrayed as a macho guy afraid to be viewed as gay- he even jokes around about being a “man” with his wife. Joe also grimaces when he shakes hands with Andrew and suddenly realizes Andrew has AIDS.

Nearly all of Andrew and Miguel’s gay friends are effeminate- this hardly seems possible.

Such is a monumental achievement when a film breaks barriers by telling a story of critical importance. Philadelphia (1993) does just that by patiently asking its audience for tolerance, understanding, and heart.

In return, the film educates, floods with emotion, and breaks hearts. Other LGBT films would come along that were arguably even better, but Philadelphia is a groundbreaking experience sure to be remembered as the first of its kind.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Actor-Tom Hanks (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Song-“Streets of Philadelphia” (won), “Philadelphia”, Best Makeup

The Hateful Eight-2015

The Hateful Eight-2015

Director Quentin Tarantino

Starring Kurt Russell, Samuel L. Jackson, Jennifer Jason Leigh

Top 250 Films #172

Scott’s Review #319

80064515

Reviewed January 3, 2016

Grade: A

Quentin Tarantino does it again!

The modern equivalent of Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick, David Lynch, or any of the great directors, his films are an experience to be reveled in.

The viewer is taken to another world and experiences a great fantasy. This time he dives into western territory with The Hateful Eight (2015), a brutal tale of eight strangers holed up in a shelter during a Wyoming blizzard shortly after the Civil War.

The film delivers blood, unique characters, and brilliant writing.

We are introduced to Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson) and John “The Hangman” (Kurt Russell) early on, as Marquis hitches a ride on John’s stagecoach.

They are bounty hunters heading to Red Rock to deliver their prisoners and collect a large loot. Marquis has three dead bodies, but John has captured brutal female criminal Daisy Domergue, played wonderfully by Jennifer Jason Leigh, alive and well.

The group then picks up the new Red Rock sheriff, Chris Mannix, who is headed there to accept his new position.

Everyone is in a panic to reach safety before a vicious blizzard hits and the group comes to a shelter where they meet the other film principals, Joe Gage (Michael Madsen), Oswaldo (Tim Roth), Marco the Mexican (Demian Bichir), and General Sandy Smithers (Bruce Dern).

These eight make up “The Hateful Eight” in the title.

The setting could not be better. The cold, wintry blizzard and the grand mountains of the West are authentic. However, most of the film is set inside Minnie’s Haberdashery, an inn where the eight (and some others) spend most of the film.

I found the setting tremendously effective as the howling wind,  the driving snow through the windows, mixed with the glowing warmth of the lighting and the hot, steaming, soothing stew that they ate, and the hot coffee, which is ingeniously featured throughout the film.

These hot and cold elements contrast so well.

Shot in 70 mm film to ensure a widescreen, epic look, the film succeeds in the snowy, outdoor scenes, though I am not sure I would notice this camera style without it being touted with the release.

The characters bristle with authenticity and engagement and each one is interested in his or her own right- even the secondary characters.

My favorites are John “The Hangman”, Daisy, Marquis, and Sandy Smithers. John is probably the most likable character of the bunch and Kurt Russell (almost unrecognizable under the thick beard), gives the character charm and wit.

As the story unfolds, each character is mysterious, and their motives unclear, which makes the film fun. Are some in secret cahoots with others? When someone poisons the coffee, a whodunit erupts.

This is the beauty- the character motivations slowly come into play and a slow reveal occurs.

The gore/violence is fantastic. Without revealing too much, there are many deaths and the film is non-linear, with the middle portion of the story occurring before the first section. To keep things organized, Tarantino divides into chapters, and over three hours long, the film is a monster.

I like how Tarantino features an interracial relationship (black inn owner Minnie and her white husband).

Favorite scenes include the vomiting blood sequence and the brutal scene of the severing of the arm of a character.  There is also the scene of Marquis dragging a victimized, naked soldier through the snow that is intense and shocking, involving brutal sodomy.

As with all of Tarantino’s films, the characters are cartoonish and not to be taken completely seriously and the violence will undoubtedly offend some, but that is the beauty of his films.

This is a masterful work by a masterful modern director.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Supporting Actress-Jennifer Jason Leigh, Best Original Score (won), Best Cinematography

La La Land-2016

La La Land-2016

Director Damien Chazelle

Starring Emma Stone, Ryan Gosling

Top 250 Films #173

Scott’s Review #538

80095365

Reviewed December 6, 2016

Grade: A

La La Land (2016) breathes new life into the classic musical genre of the 1950s and offers a fresh glimpse into Hollywood.

The film explores the glitz and glamour, triumphs and heartbreaks, and dreams both broken and fulfilled in a town laden with broken hearts.

The bright, colorful film stars two of today’s top young, talented actors: Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling. The chemistry between the leads and the dynamic musical numbers is incredible.

It’s a masterful nod to old Hollywood.

Mia (Stone) is an aspiring young actress struggling to survive the Hollywood scene. She serves lattes in a coffee shop on a studio lot and auditions endlessly for film and television parts without much luck.

Her passion is acting, but she also writes a one-woman play she plans to star in.

On the other hand, Sebastian (Gosling) is a dedicated jazz musician, struggling to make ends meet by playing demoralizing gigs that ruin the essence of jazz, meeting many people who tell him that jazz is a dying genre.

Sebastian’s dream is to open his nightclub one day.

Through circumstances, Mia and Sebastian meet and continue to run into each other, forging a wonderful friendship that eventually leads to romance.

The film is a gorgeous experience with bright sets, creative sequences, and numerous song and dance numbers to keep you humming. Mia and Sebastian even tap-dance one beautiful night following a Hollywood party under the moonlight with the Los Angeles skyline in view as they bond.

It is one of the best scenes in the film.

La La Land is seasonal and begins in the winter, though this is strictly an attempt to separate the chapters. Los Angeles is always warm, but the timing is Christmas, which is engaging in a warm climate.

In the first scene, we are immediately treated to a musical number. Stuck in stifling freeway traffic, the car drivers get out in unison, sing and dance, and then return to their cars to continue their mundane day.

Director Damien Chazelle cleverly balances the cheerful tone with the everyday redundant tasks and the struggles of artists hoping for a dream.

La La Land excels during the scenes of Sebastian and Mia as the chemistry is palpable. Gosling and Stone have something.

Supporting players like J.K. Simmons and Rosemarie Dewitt add pizzazz to their small but meaningful parts.

I adore the odes to classic Hollywood films that director Chazelle incorporates into his movie.

Classics such as Alfred Hitchcock’s Notorious (1946) and the legendary film Casablanca (1940) are mentioned twice.

During a sweet moment, Sebastian takes Mia to see Rebel Without a Cause (1956) at an old-style theater; he is shocked that she has never seen the film and eagerly excited to introduce her to it.

This continues as he shares his love for jazz music with her.

Later, the theater closes, and the film takes a more dour tone as the struggles of both characters overwhelm them.

The film’s finale is terrific.

Suddenly, five years later, many events have happened. In a brilliant sequence, the characters’ lives are explained through a song as we see the period play out until we reach the point of the film where the song began, a treasure of an ode to the truth of the characters.

The sequence is emotional, heartbreaking, and choreographed without missing a beat,

Gosling and Stone sing all their songs, not live as in Les Miserables (2012), but wisely on a sound stage. They are neither novices nor Grammy winners, but they are honest, truthful, and with heart.

It is refreshing to see classic Hollywood told in such a riveting fashion, as seen through the young’s eyes.

Films and styles of decades past are renewed through this excellent piece of cinema.

I noted similarities to An American in Paris (1951) and countless other gems from years ago and stood proudly, knowing that a nostalgic piece of cinema is precisely what we need.

Oscar Nominations: 6 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Damien Chazelle (won), Best Actor-Ryan Gosling, Best Actress-Emma Stone (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score (won), Best Original Song-“City of Stars” (won), “Audition (The Fools Who Dream),” Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design (won), Best Cinematography (won), Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing

Monster-2003

Monster-2003

Director Patty Jenkins

Starring Charlize Theron, Christina Ricci

Top 250 Films #174

Scott’s Review #347

60032559

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Monster (2003) may feature one of the best acting performances of all time-Charlize Theron simply embodies the role of the notorious female serial killer, Aileen Wuornos, in a simply astounding triumph.

The mannerisms, the anger, and the charisma that Theron portrays are nothing short of brilliance.

This brazen acting is simply the best aspect of Monster and the main reason to witness the film.

Besides this, the film itself is also great.

The film immediately focuses on Theron- we meet the down-on-her-luck prostitute sitting in tatters underneath an overpass.

Suicidal and with five dollars to her name, she goes to a dive bar for one last beer- having blown someone for the five dollars she reasons that the money will go to waste if she does not spend it.

Her older confidante is Thomas, a grizzled man assumed to be an occasional client of hers, who is played by Bruce Dern. She goes to a gay bar and meets Selby Wall (Christina Ricci), a lesbian.

Aileen insists she is not gay but winds up spending the night with her in Selby’s family home. The two form a connection and bond immediately, spending more time together and becoming immersed in each other’s lives.

When Aileen is brutally raped and beaten by a client, she begins down a dark and murderous path, killing men she meets after she steals their money.

Selby eventually catches on to this and is conflicted over whether to turn her friend in or serve as an accomplice to her crimes as the police close in on the pair.

Enough cannot be said of Theron’s performance. She simply becomes Wournos- from her walk to her infamous manic mannerisms, and her hair flip.

Theron, a gorgeous woman, gained weight, used false teeth, and became simply unrecognizable in the role of a brutal, angry, and trashy-looking woman.

Ricci also deserves praise, but plays her role as a bit clueless or dimwitted, counterbalancing Theron’s manic, in-your-face role. It works well. Both characters are longing for love and companionship and both are misfits.

In a sweet scene, the pair go roller skating together, hand in hand, to the famous rock song, “Don’t Stop Believin”.

This is a great scene.

One can argue the fact that director, Patty Jenkins, softens the way that Wournos is written. Known as a hardened, mean woman, Jenkins writes her as much more sympathetic.

This can also be attributed to the fact that Theron emits some vulnerability to the character- the woman never knew love until she met and bonded with Selby.

Needless to say, Monster (2003) is a dynamic, energetic film, thanks in large part to the powerful performance of Charlize Theron- a role that awarded her the Best Actress Academy Award.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actress-Charlize Theron (won)

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 2 wins-Best First Feature (won), Best Female Lead-Charlize Theron (won), Best First Screenplay

Reform School Girls-1986

Reform School Girls-1986

Director Tom DeSimone

Starring Linda Carol, Wendy O. Williams, Pat Ast

Top 250 Films #175

Scott’s Review #348

60037139

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Let’s be honest here- Reform School Girls (1986) is neither a work of cinema art nor a particularly well-acted film.

From a critic’s perspective, it is riddled with stereotypes and objectifies women.

Still, it’s one of my favorite guilty pleasures and has an offbeat charm that makes me want to watch the film over and over again. I never tire of it. I also don’t think it should be reviled, but rather, revered.

There is a perverse magnificence to the film and some similarities to another cult gem- Russ Myers’s Faster Pussycat, Kill!… Kill! (1965)

Critics be damned- not every film needs to be high art!

One of my absolute favorite cult actresses, Pat Ast, famous for another cult gem, 1972’s Heat, stars in Reform School Girls as a vicious prison guard.

Alongside punk rocker turned actress, Wendy O. Williams, they make the film a guilty masterpiece as both women bring their share of odd energy and humor to the flick.

Sybil Danning co-stars as the corrupt Warden Sutter.

The plot of the film is pretty straightforward and it screams late-night fun.

A virginal teenage girl named Jenny is sent to a reform school run by the sinister warden and her sadistic and abusive henchwoman, Edna (Ast). While there, Jenny is intimidated by Charlie (Williams), who rules the roost via bullying and threats. Jenny is accompanied by several other terrified girls, who are stripped and degraded by Edna.

This leads to an attempted escape and protest scene by the girls and others as they try to remove themselves from their tormentors.

Reform School Girls is simply great fun.

The poor acting is actually a strength of the film as one scantily clad female after another prance around the reform school.

Wendy O. Williams regularly wears skimpy panties, bra, and heels, and is laughable playing a teenager since the actress was pushing forty years old.

The culmination of the film is fantastic as a chase ends up by an enormous tower on the grounds of the prison, resulting in the deaths of Charlie and Edna in a dramatic fashion.

Edna’s charred remains are met by an uproar of cheers by the inmates- I half expected them to burst into a chorus of “Ding Dong the Witch Is Dead”.

Reform School Girls (1986) is a perfect cult classic to enjoy on a late Saturday night.