Vacation Movie Roundup: High Culture and Low Brow

Posted: June 28, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

I’ve been taking some time off this week, and as always that means I’ve been exposing myself to the good, the bad, and the ugly of the entertainment world so that you, my loyal readers, won’t have to. I’ve got a trio of movies for you this time, ranging from family friendly fare to art house Shakespeare, and theaters-only to cable-exclusives.

First up is the Joss Whedon re-imagining of the Shakespeare classic Much Ado About Nothing. I’ve got a huge man-crush on Whedon, but I also have an undying love for Shakespeare that is as intense as My Not So Humble Wife’s passionate hatred for him (which she can even express in iambic pentameter). Considering my strong and mixed feelings about Kenneth Branagh’s 1993 Much Ado (I loved most of it, but there were some serious casting problems, especially Keanu Reeves as Don John), I approached this film with some joy and much trepidation. The fact that it was shot in twelve days during what amounted to a vacation in the middle of making The Avengers added a certain amount of uncertainty as well.

Fortunately there was nothing to be concerned about and everything to cheer for (even the wife liked it). The entire movie played smoothly, with a cool hipster-jazz influenced feel. Alexis Denisof as Benedick and Amy Acker as Beatrice revive the on screen chemistry that long-time Whedon fans will remember from later seasons of Angel. The dialogue is fast, sharp, and well played, and the staging is perfect. Fran Kranz turns in a solid performance as Claudio, bringing a believable yet charismatic youth and impetuousness to the character without being emo, and Jillian Morgese is charming and reserved as Hero.

My personal favorite surprise was Nathan Fillion as Dogberry. I have never really understood nor appreciated the humor of this character before, particularly since every time I have seen the show Dogberry is overplayed and chewing the scenery (Michael Keaton, I’m looking squarely at you). Fillion brings a surprisingly subdued turn to the role, and by underplaying it actually makes it much funnier, as well as giving his fellow ensemble members a chance to shine.

5/5 stars

While I’m on the subject of ensembles, I may as well talk about Pitch Perfect. Yes, I watched this film, mostly because My Not So Humble Sister said it was funny. I hate admitting she’s right about anything (see the part about her being my sister), but I have to admit it was pretty good. It’s about what you would expect, but there are some ways that it manages to rise above itself. In addition to having some really stellar a cappella performances, the film makes a few inside jokes subverting the very form of film it is (my favorite being when Beca (Anna Kendrick) mocks movies that have the exact plotline of the movie she’s in). Another great bit of comedic subversion in the film is Fat Amy, played by Rebel Wilson. Rather than being the typical shy fat girl who needs to develop self-confidence, “discover herself” and open up, Amy is played as a strong, confident woman from the start. She also has plenty of well-sculpted young men keeping her company in her palatial estate over Spring Break, another nice change from expected norms.

The film does unfortunately have some downsides. They play to the lesbian stereotype more than a little, and there is more than a little bit of gross-out humor (some of which is so far over the top I couldn’t even watch). The plot is also so derivative that, as previously mentioned, they felt the need to mock it in the movie. That only gets you so far.

All that having been said, if you’re looking for something relatively light, relatively fun, and not in any way taxing, Pitch Perfect definitely hits the mark.

3.5/5 stars

I also finally got to see Puss in Boots. I’ve been looking forward to this one for a while, because Puss has become about the only character from Shrek that I can watch for more than five minutes without feeling the need to punch something. It’s not that I don’t like the Shrek franchise, it’s just that I get tired of the same joke after hearing it enough times, and apparently that number of times is two (hence why I can’t stand Shrek the Third, and the less said about the abysmal Shrek the Halls the better). Lucky for me, ditching Mike Myers and Eddie Murphy seems to be exactly what this franchise needed.

Puss in Boots is a sweet, fun, lighthearted romp. It’s family-friendly, but I wouldn’t hold that against it. It’s got a lot of laughs for pretty much everybody, and they cut back the cast to something a bit more manageable to they can really enjoy and play with the idea of the characters again rather than every character just being a one trick pony (or a one note donkey, as the case may be). If the plot was a little predictable, that’s only because (a) they actually laid everything out in such a way that nobody can cry foul later in the film, and (b) the target market for this film probably doesn’t have two digits in their age. If you can accept that, you’ll have a lot of laughs, maybe even enjoy a heartwarming moment (it’s DreamWorks, how can you not?), and then go to bed like good little boys and girls.

4/5 stars

Son of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Posted: May 1, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , , , | 4 Comments

About a week ago I was going through my Dad’s old movie collection, packaging it up and selling what I could, disposing of the rest. It made me realize something: my Dad and I had very different tastes in movies. Not that he had bad taste, mind you, just very different. James Bond, for instance. I like Bond films well enough, and I’ve seen all of them since Octopussy, but Dad had seen and loved all of them, and he had them all on DVD (and more than a few on VHS). As for John Wayne, he had more than a few collections, and he had most every John Wayne film ever made on DVD… all 169 of them. I never really understood his appreciation for John Wayne, but then I’m not sure he ever understood my appreciation for Tim Curry, so fair’s fair.

I had planned to talk about all the obscure movies that I found in Dad’s collection that I loved, but the truth is most of the ones we had in common were either well known (like Rocky II)  or I’ve already mentioned (like Excalibur). So I’ll take this opportunity to cover a couple I did find as well as a couple I think Dad would have liked.

The Name of the Rose (1986) – Based on the book of the same name by Umberto Eco, this film stars two of my favorite actors, Sean Connery and a young Christian Slater (somehow I only seem to like a young Christian Slater). It’s the story of a Franciscan monk and his apprentice who investigate a series of strange deaths at a monastery.  Call it a period mystery, if you will. I can’t really go into much more description without giving away lots of the plot, but the best part of this movie for me is the depth of characterization and world building. Apparently a lot of that derives from the source novel (which My Not So Humble Wife loves, although I’ve never personally read it), but the acting is top notch as well. While Connery drives the majority of the action, I want to give special attention to Ron Perlman as Salvatore; it’s a difficult role to play with empathy and he does it exceptionally well.

The Legend of the Lone Ranger (1981) – This was probably the first (and for a long time the only) western I ever really liked, let alone loved. I think this film gets a lot of grief for both deserved and undeserved reasons. There’s a certain amount of unrealistic expectations, in the same way that any iconic pop culture figure will have that any departure from established traditions will only exacerbate. That having been said, there’s also a certain amount of heavy-handedness: in the attempts to make the bad guys truly evil, to make Tonto more than a stereotype (and in the process making every other Native American in the film a bigger stereotype), and in the attempts to make John Reid into a larger-than-life hero. With all that having been said, I still believe this movie largely succeeds at being greater than its flaws, and if approached with an open mind and in the spirit of a western dime novel or “gritty remake” of an old radio show, it can be very appealing.

The Searchers (1956) – I had to watch this movie for a film class I took a few years ago, and I’m glad I did. After I finished, I immediately called my Dad and said, “Hey Dad, I take back everything I ever said about John Wayne. You were right.” He asked me what movie I watched, and when I told him, he wasn’t in the least surprised. “You started with the best.” The conversation went on from there, and we must have talked for an hour just about this movie and how amazing it is, and why. I could lay it all out for you here, but you should really just watch it for yourself. Not only does John Wayne give one of the most fantastic, nuanced performances I have ever seen, but the entire film is full of great performances, amazing visuals, and a stirring and poignant plot. If you only watch one western in your life, this should be it.

Cat Ballou (1965) – Now, if you’re going to watch two westerns in your life, may I make another suggestion? I remember watching this movie as a kid with my Dad and My Not So Humble Sister and it made no sense to me whatsoever. Why were people singing? In a western? (Bear in mind this film preceded Paint Your Wagon by about five years.) Isn’t that Nat King Cole? And I’m pretty sure that’s Jane Fonda. Wait, why is that gunslinger drunk? What in the world is going on here? That was basically my reaction to this movie the first five times I watched it. It took me a long time to realize (a) this was a comedy and (b) there was a plot, I just wasn’t following it. Once I got it all straight, I learned to stop worrying and just go with it, and it actually turned out to be a pretty funny little film. Not the greatest comedy or western ever but enjoyable, and Lee Marvin puts in an Oscar-winning performance, so it has that going for it. And hey, Nat King Cole.

Yes, It’s More of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)!

Posted: April 12, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , , , | 3 Comments

I’m starting to think I have a habit. I blame it on my Dad. From the time I was a little kid, we always had the latest in television technology. Cable? You bet. VCR? Beta AND VHS, at the same time, usually more than one of each. Laserdisc? Okay, let’s not go crazy here. We weren’t rich, the man just liked his TV. But he did get on the DVD bandwagon early, and he got a Blu-Ray player pretty fast too. He even had digital cable AND a satellite dish at the same time at one point.

What I’m trying to say is I had a lot of exposure at an impressionable age to a lot of movies. I don’t know why I never picked up Dad’s fascination with John Wayne films, but I do seem to have picked up his love of cinema somewhere along the line, and I’m going to keep sharing it with you. At least the obscure bits.

Flash Gordon (1980) – I can’t even begin to describe how amazing this film is. It’s astounding, it’s mind-boggling, it’s a tour-de-force of awful. This is one of the worst sci-fi films I have ever seen, and that’s saying a lot. The plot is so far beyond insipid, it actually transcends its origins in the funny pages by making Flash Gordon the quarterback for the New York Jets (I am not making this up). He and reporter Dale Arden are kidnapped by a mad scientist in his homemade rocket during an apocalypse being caused by Ming the Merciless (still not making this up) in an attempt to save Earth. The plot actually manages to go downhill from there, and to top it all off the entire movie has a soundtrack done by Queen (and what is it with me and movies with soundtracks by Queen?). Despite all of this, or maybe because of it, I simply have to watch this movie every chance I get. It’s the kind of thing that is so unintentionally hilarious I just can’t get enough.

Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1978) – What do you get when you take the music of the Beatles as sung by the Bee Gees and Peter Frampton, add in an all-star cast (for the time) including George Burns, Steve Martin, and Alice Cooper, and add a special cameo appearance of Aerosmith doing possibly the most well-known cover of all time? That’s right, you get the movie that made my wife seriously consider leaving me (no I am not kidding, she has yet to forgive me for this, and it’s been several years since she watched half of it). This is the kind of movie that you will either love or hate, and unless you like your movies served with a very large slice of cheese, chances are you will hate it (particularly if you’re a Beatles fan). I’ve been watching it since I was old enough to operate the VCR, so for me it has nostalgia value going for it if nothing else, and I happen to like the music (and cheesy movies). If you’ve got a strong stomach and are willing to take a risk, you might just find a new favorite too. Or maybe you’ll leave me, but I’m willing to take that chance.

Clue (1985) – Long before the recent trend in creating movies out of board games became the hot thing, this movie set the bar, and it set the bar high. Rather than bothering with anything like a real mystery plot, it’s a screwball comedy of murder and mayhem, with bodies dropping left and right and great, quotable one-liners going off just as fast. Martin Mull puts in a solid performance as Colonel Mustard, Lesley Ann Warren is fantastic as Miss Scarlet, and Madeline Kahn is at the top of her game as Mrs. White. In addition to everything else it has going for it, this movie has the greatest performance ever by Tim Curry. Yes, I’ve seen The Rocky Horror Picture Show. I’ve seen it in the theater… over 1,000 times. I stand by my statement. The multiple endings are handled perfectly, and add just the right feel to the movie for the game tie-in.

Yellowbeard (1983) – A piratical satire starring… well, just about everybody who was in comedy in the early Eighties, Yellowbeard is basically what you might expect. The British Navy gets the vilest pirate in the world to escape from prison in order to follow him to his treasure and hilarity ensues. I won’t bother explaining the rest of the plot because really there’s not much point. The whole thing is basically a vehicle for jokes and gags, which suits me just fine. The cast includes Monty Python alumni Graham Chapman, Eric Idle, and John Cleese, as well as Cheech Marin, Tommy Chong, and Madeline Kahn. Once again Madeline Kahn is fantastic in this film, and I’m always a fan of all the Pythons. I’m not always as big a fan of Cheech and Chong, but they do a fantastic job of sending up Spanish Conquistadors. It’s very slapstick, very screwball, and a lot of fun.

 
For more movie suggestions, why not check out these posts:

More of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Even More of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Still More of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Still More of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Posted: March 27, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , | 6 Comments

I don’t know why I keep coming back to this. Maybe it’s because I just spent so much time watching TV as a kid. I hated going outside. Outside is where my sister was. And sunshine. And fresh air. And exercise.

But I digress.

I loved TV, and TV loved me. I especially loved watching really off-beat comedies, movies that made no sense whatsoever, and the weirder they were the more I loved them. I suppose that explains why so few people seem to know some of these films, although it has been gently suggested to me that it may also be because I’m getting old and all of these movies predate DVDs. I would like to point out that Star Wars predates the mass-market success of the VCR, but I still have no tolerance for anyone who hasn’t seen it (you know who you are).

But I digress again.

Here’s some of my favorite off-beat comedies from back when I was a kid. They’re best taken with a grain of salt (or better yet several grains, lime, and tequila), with tongue planted firmly in cheek.

Little Shop of Horrors (1986) – Believe it or not, this is a movie version of an off-Broadway musical based on a 1960 comedy with Jack Nicholson (I can’t comment on that version, since I’ve never seen it). What I can say is, this thing is a laugh riot. It’s creepy enough to try to do a comedy about a carnivorous sentient plant from outer space (yes, you read that correctly), but making it into a musical takes it to a whole new level. The brilliant caricatures of the mousy shop attendant Seymour Krelbourne (played by Rick Moranis), his overbearing boss Mr. Mushnik (Vincent Gardenia), and the ditzy blonde love interest Audrey (Ellen Greene). Of course, any fan of the movie will tell you the absolute scene stealer is the inestimable Steve Martin as Orin Scrivello, DDS, the sadistic dentist and Audrey’s “boyfriend”, who’s rousing rendition of “Dentist!” will leave you squirming with laughter. The numerous cameos from other famous comedians (including John Candy and one of the most disturbingly funny performances ever from Bill Murray) round out a fantastic cast in this terrific musical.

Big Trouble in Little China (1985) – I have no idea how to even begin classifying this movie. I’ll go with the Amazon.com description because it seems to cover all the bases: “mystical action-adventure-comedy-kung-fu-monster-ghost-story”. Everybody get that? I’m pretty sure it’s supposed to be (very loosely) based on Chinese mythology, but please don’t quote me on that, because I don’t want to offend anybody (the film takes care of that for me, I’m sure). Kurt Russell plays a truck driver named Jack Burton (get used to that name, you’ll hear it a lot), owner of The Pork Chop Express (I’m not making this up), who gets caught up in an attempt by a near-immortal Chinese businessman to kidnap a girl (still not making this up), and he has to help his friend and an interfering busybody played by a young Kim Cattrall, assisted by some Chinese gangsters (how could I possibly make this up?) to rescue her from the aforementioned kidnapper and his three powerful sorcerer sons before he becomes immortal (why would I make this up?). If you like Army of Darkness you’ll probably like this movie; in fact, if you just like wierd, out there stuff you’ll probably like this movie. It’s got some decent FX (especially for its time), and the martial arts action is actually pretty good. The comedy is solid and doesn’t distract from the plot, which is roundabout but gets where it’s going.

Spies Like Us (1985) – My dad once described Chevy Chase as “so funny he can make me laugh standing still.” I have to agree with him. Hell, I even kind of liked Fletch, and that’s saying something. Pair him up with Dan Aykroyd and you have a near-perfect recipe for comedy gold, which is exactly what this movie is: near-perfect. Aykroyd delivers his usual character-driven humor while serving as a perfect straight man for Chase to deliver almost non-stop one-liners. Together they make a terrific comedy team, and the ludicrousness of putting them in a Cold War-driven “spy movie” vehicle is a brilliant recipe for disaster. The only drawbacks are that the middle of the movie drags a little, although that is more a matter of the rest of the film being so spot-on in comedic timing that it becomes nigh-impossible to sustain for almost two hours, and the last few minutes feel a little tacked on. Those are only minor quibbles, however, and overall this is still one of the funniest movies I have ever seen, and I still quote it to this day.

Biloxi Blues (1988) – If you asked me why I love this movie, I couldn’t really give you one good reason. I might have to say “Neil Simon”, because I don’t think I’ve ever read a Neil Simon play I didn’t love. Or maybe it’s Matthew Broderick (this is pre-Godzilla), or even Christopher Walken’s brilliant turn as Sergeant First Class Merwin J. Toomey. Perhaps it’s just because I felt a strong connection, even at an early age, to the character of Eugene, who seemed so horribly out of place in the Army in general and boot camp in particular. The writing is sharp, and the dialogue is top-notch, witty without feeling deliberate. It’s not a simplistic film, taking some serious turns and having more than a few darker moments that spice the humor and remind you that life isn’t always laughter; rather, laughter is there to help us survive the dark times. It’s a surprisingly deep film for a comedy, particularly one that can still be viewed as somewhat of a “coming of age” film (although most of that is covered by the previous film from the Eugene trilogy, Brighton Beach Memoirs, which is also good although I don’t care for it quite as much).

Even More of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Posted: March 18, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , | 6 Comments

Continuing on a recent theme, I’ve come up with yet another batch of movies that just don’t seem to have the recognition I feel they deserve. Rather than focus on just one genre this time, I thought I’d spread it out a bit with some fantasy, some comedy, and some… well, there’s one that I’m not sure what genre to call it. I’ll let you decide.

Excalibur (1981) – Let’s be clear about one thing: I had a professor in college who was an Arthurian scholar. If she had any idea I was recommending this movie to ANYONE, she would slap me with a copy of the Morte d’Arthur. This film has so many historical and literary inaccuracies it wouldn’t know what accuracy was if you hit it in the face with a tuna carved out of the stuff. But I love it anyway. The acting is sharp, the settings are lush, and the music is perfect. They paid so much attention to detail I have to believe they basically decided going in that there was a certain story they wanted to tell, and they weren’t going to let trivial things like “facts” get in the way. You have to admire that kind of chutzpah. Arthur is kind of a putz, but it works because he’s Arthur, and we’ve been led to believe by modern culture that’s what Arthur is supposed to be (see my point about literary accuracy above). Merlin is far and away the best part of this film and well worth watching for all by himself, and the entire affair (quite literally) between Lancelot and Guinevere is handled marvelously, enhancing without overshadowing the plot, as is the quest for the Grail, and Morgan le Fey and Mordred are incorporated in fascinating if (again) historically inaccurate ways. If nothing else they deserve an award for best use of “O Fortuna” from Carl Orff’s “Carmina Burana” in a film.

Highlander (1986) – Anyone who knows me should see this as no surprise, and frankly the idea that there’s more than three people on Earth who haven’t seen this movie both shocks and offends me. Granted, the movie is older than some full grown adults, but that’s no excuse. I’ve seen Citizen Kane (and it wasn’t as good, in MNSHO). Ah, well. This is a fantastic fantasy/sci-fi adventure of immortals born throughout different times on Earth, destined to fight each other until only one remains.

I actually sat here for five minutes trying to come up with a better plot summary to explain why this cult classic has remained popular for so long and launched a hit TV series as well (please, if you love your own eyes, DO NOT WATCH THE SEQUELS), but I can’t. It’s just one of those things that’s better than it sounds. The location work outside of the city is actually quite beautiful, and the sound work on the film is great. The cinematography is top notch, and they do a great job playing with the idea of what immortality really means, both the good and the bad. The special effects are kind of dated, but the acting is still pretty good, and hey, Sean Connery. The entire soundtrack was done by Queen, so it has that as a bonus as well. Just watch it. Trust me on this one. It has a lot going for it.

The Crow (1994) – There was a time in my life where if you hadn’t seen this movie, I didn’t want to know you. Of course, there was also a time in my life where I dressed all in black, smoked clove cigarettes, and listened to The Cure a lot. These times may or may not have overlapped. This should not in any way reflect on the quality of this movie. It’s not exactly an easy one to place; it’s starts with a brutal murder of a man and his fiancée by a vicious gang of criminals. He then comes back as a revenant to seek revenge against the people responsible. I know this sounds like a horror flick, and I’m not trying to soft-sell the violence, because there’s plenty to be had (Brandon Lee actually died in an accident filming this movie). But there’s a lot more going on here, both in terms of the emotional depth of the relationships between the characters and the acting (Michael Wincott in particular gives a stellar performance as Top Dollar). There’s a lot of ugliness and beauty, violence and pain, and in the end, a small amount of peace in this film. It’s a tall order for such a short running time, and not one I would recommend for a “rom com” kind of night, but if you want something different, check it out.

Better Off Dead (1985) – Who says I don’t love a good romantic comedy? Okay, so this isn’t exactly a typical rom com, but it is possibly the best John Cusack movie ever made (with the possible exception of Grosse Pointe Blank). Stocked with a series of over-the-top characters that are more caricatures than fully realized (or even two-dimensional and trying) representations, the this slightly black (more grey, really) comedy manages to combine the essence of teen romance film and screwball comedy into a breezy, fast-paced romp that doesn’t slow down long enough to take itself seriously. There are a few points where the jokes drag (I’ve watched it at least a hundred times and I still don’t get the bit with the animated burger), but overall the gags manage to carry it through. While there are plenty of snappy one-liners, what keeps me coming back every time are the running jokes, like the psychotic newspaper boy, Lane’s mother’s cooking, and of course his botched (and never serious) suicide attempts. If it sounds weird, well, it is. If it sounds sick, yeah, that too. But man, is it funny.

More of My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Posted: March 1, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , | 3 Comments

A couple of weeks ago, I (re-)introduced the world to a few of my favorite movies that seem to have fallen by the wayside in pop culture. After giving it some thought, I realized there are a whole host of movies I’ve loved that aren’t even mentioned anymore, so I thought I’d dip back into the pool of memory and share a couple more gems with all of you. This time I’ll be dredging up some of the best (and worst) comedic fare I’ve ever known, from the most laughable decade I’ve lived through: the 1980s.

Trading Places (1983) – Before he started doing movies that suck like Bowfinger and Daddy Day Care, you could pretty much count on Eddie Murphy to be rock-solid comic gold. Dan Aykroyd already had a pretty solid resume including the amazing The Blues Brothers (the original, not the cash-cow abomination of a “sequel” he insisted on inflicting on us all). Put them both together with Jamie Lee Curtis and some other faces you’d know even if you wouldn’t recognize the names (Denholm Elliott, Ralph Bellamy, Don Ameche), and you have a guaranteed great movie. But that wasn’t enough. They went and put together one of the best “Prince and the Pauper” style stories ever, with hilarious twists and some of the wittiest dialogue I have ever witnessed. Murphy is at the top of his game in this film, Aykroyd plays his character’s entire ride to the hilt, and Bellamy and Ameche are so wickedly delightful I can’t help loving them. The theme of this movie has managed to hold up surprisingly well, and it is instantly relatable, unlike some other more serious films to come out of the Decade of Greed.

The Last Dragon (1985) – Lest you think I come to praise the 80s and all they have wrought, I bring you this delightfully polished turd. To this day I’m not sure what they were attempting with this film. If I had to venture a guess, I would say it was a satire of both cheap kung-fu and blaxsploitation films that were popular in the 1970s. Unfortunately the risk with any kind of parody is that you dance too close to the fire and fall into self-parody, becoming the thing you were attempting to mock. Or maybe I’m wrong, maybe they really thought they had a great script with this one, which just makes it that much funnier. It’s the story of a young man obsessed with Bruce Lee whose name is Bruce Leroy (I’m not making this up), whose brother is obsessed with being “cool” and breakdancing (still not making this up), who has a rival named Sho’ Nuff (how could I make this up?), and is in pursuit of something called “the Glow” (why would I make this up?). This is all in the first fifteen minutes or so. There’s also an evil record producer and a singer-ingénue played by Vanity (don’t remember her? That’s okay, nobody does). The best part is this movie was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Original Song for “Rhythm of the Night” and two Razzies for Worst Original Song for “The Last Dragon” and “7th Heaven”. Like I said, it practically mocks itself.

Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid (1982) – Not all parody fails, and when it succeeds, it succeeds brilliantly. Before he started doing “serious” and “deep” roles, one of the great masters of parody was Steve Martin, and this movie may be his masterpiece. A perfect send-up of the film noir genre, directed by the legendary Carl Reiner, Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid works on several levels. Like any great parody, it actually manages to serve (at least nominally) as a proper noir film, including a beautiful femme fatal and a sinister plot. That having been said, the bad (sometimes tasteless) jokes start early and come rapid-fire, with the unusual convention of weaving mini-scenes from actual film noir movies into the movie for the actors to respond and react to. The result is a study in how to do straight-faced comedy from one of the all-time masters of the art.

Stripes (1981) – What is it about SNL alums from the 80s? They make great comedy, then they get all serious. Bill Murray was great once… Ah, well. Years before anybody ever heard of a Ghostbuster, Bill Murray and Harold Ramis got together and made a scathingly witty send up of military culture and life. Along with a fantastic supporting cast including the legendary (and sadly missed) John Candy and brilliant John Larroquette, this film is somewhat like the Marx Brothers meets Band of Brothers. While the humor tends to be a bit juvenile and raunchy, it’s relatively tame by modern standards, and it’s almost always laugh out loud funny. Murray has already perfected his ability to convey nuance with a glance, but he still manages to bring more passion than many of his later roles. For those who only know Ramis from Ghostbusters, this will be a special treat, as it is a very different and more outgoing character for him. Highly recommended as a “history of comedy” must-see.

My Favorite Movies (That You’ve Never Seen)

Posted: February 4, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , , | 5 Comments

Whether because I’ve seen some obscure movies (not that I’m a movie buff, I just watch weird stuff) or because I’m just a little older than some of my friends, I often find myself making references to movies that apparently nobody other than myself and a handful of others have seen. Mostly because this means my brilliant pop culture references end up falling on the ears of Philistines, but in some small part because it means that some piece of great cinema (loosely defined) has gone unnoticed for far too long, I’ve decided to share with you a few of my favorites.

Last week I covered some classic movies I’d like to see modern takes on. While I would highly recommend every one of those, there are some movies that are perfect just the way they are, or in at least one case, there’s no way you could possibly recapture the inane brilliance and je ne sais quoi that makes it so wonderful. If you haven’t seen these yet, I almost envy you, because you have a chance to be delighted by these hidden gems.

All That Jazz (1979) – A semi-autobiographical work directed and choreographed by legend Bob Fosse. I say “semi-autobiographical” for a couple of reasons, in part because the protagonist is named Joe Giden rather than Bob Fosse, there are certain fantastical elements, and… well, I don’t want to give away too much. Suffice to say that this film is astounding. The music is at times fun and bouncy and at other times downright lascivious, and the dancing… well, it’s Bob Fosse. One scene inspired the (in)famous Paula Abdul video “Cold Hearted”, for those of you old enough to remember that one, and to be honest she couldn’t even begin to do it justice. There’s a lot in this movie, ranging from humor to tragedy, and more than a bit of great storytelling (every time I watch it I discover some new element that I missed before). Here’s my favorite line from the movie, just to give you a taste of the kind of humor you’ll find: “Ladies and gentlemen, let me lay on you a so-so entertainer, not much of a humanitarian, and this cat was never nobody’s friend… you can applaud if you wanna…Mr. Joe Gideon!” And remember, this is Bob Fosse directing a movie – about himself. Powerful stuff.

Hudson Hawk (1991) – This is the movie critics love to hate. It has a score of 17 from Metacritic.com. Let’s put that into perspective: that’s on a scale of 100. By way of comparison, Godzilla starring Matthew Broderick got a 32. Here’s my favorite: “This may be the only would-be blockbuster that’s a sprawling, dissociated mess on purpose. It’s a perverse landmark: the first postmodern Hollywood disaster.” That’s according to Owen Glieberman of Entertainment Weekly. So why would I possibly tell you to watch this movie? Let’s take a look at what Empire has to say: “What director Lehmann has made is essentially a multi-million dollar cult movie with great effects, a witty script and some good performances, but although some of the eccentric (and occasionally slapstick) humour may not appeal to a mass audience, it is certainly one of the more original blockbusters coming out this summer.” And that’s the heart and soul of it. Bruce Willis and Danny Aiello give great comedic performances in this film, with a bit of over-the-top maudlin emotion to balance(?) things out. Andie MacDowell is passable, and Sandra Benhardt is… well, Sandra Bernhardt (either you love her or hate her). The movie is eminently quotable, like all great cult films are, and any heist film that involves an evil corporation, the CIA, the Vatican and Leonardo Da Vinci… you know what? I have no idea how to finish that sentence. Just watch the movie. Trust me.

Strange Days (1995) – Swinging back again from awful to awesome, we have the cyberpunk tech thriller Strange Days. This lush, brilliant movie manages to capture the true esthetic of cyberpunk without getting bogged down in the tech, as such movies so often do. The plot is brilliantly convoluted (deliberately so) with a delicious and satisfying ending that will make you want to watch it again. The best part for me personally is how the central tech (a form of virtual-reality life recorder) is a McGuffin; it’s a strong plot device, central but not crucial to the pot and character development. It could theoretically be accomplished even with modern equivalents, but that’s the point of cyberpunk: close enough to touch, far enough to be eerie. The music is phenomenal (for my taste), again being right in line with the esthetic, and the settings are fully realized, with great costuming and make-up all around. Everything is about style over substance, and there are clear, sharp  divides between the haves and the have-nots at all levels of society. Ralph Fiennes turns in a powerful, emotional performance, Angela Bassett is both emotionally moving and powerful (physically as well as emotively), and Tom Sizemore delivers one of the most surprising and understatedly brilliant supporting roles I have ever seen. Rounding out a fabulous cast are Juliette Lewis and a small but important role from a young Vincent D’Onofrio. Well worth your time.

If I can think of more, I’ll be sure to add them in the future. If you have any “must see” obscure gems, tell me all about them in the comments below!

Remakes I’d Love to See

Posted: January 28, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , , , | 1 Comment

So I’ve noticed a trend in Hollywierd lately of remaking all the things from my childhood, usually making it worse rather than better (Dukes of Hazard, I’m looking at you), although the occasional Michael Bay Giant Robot SmashFest Round IV manages to put a small smile on my face.

I was originally planning to bring to the attention of you, my loyal readers, some of the best movies you’ve probably never seen, when it occurred to me I could do so much more: I’ll let all the world know how these movies could be revived, remade, and (hopefully) not allowed to suck too much in the process.

Flash Gordon (1980) – Let me start by saying the following: this movie was made in 1980, it’s based off a 1930s era sci-fi comic strip and it has a soundtrack by Queen. I’m not really sure if there is any way it could be made better. Then again, in the movie Flash is the quarterback for the New York Jets, so I don’t know that it could be worse. There’s a certain way of looking at it that says “you just can’t do this without being campy”, but apparently as of a few years ago they were looking at doing just that (way down at the bottom of the interview).

For myself, I’d like to see some of the same camp, but with a little more balance toward hard sci fi. Something like what Cabin in the Woods did with horror; it had a bit of humor and campiness to it, but only as much as it needed. Considering there are plenty of real world companies pushing to get into space, there’s lots of room there for “Flash” Gordon to be a pilot with a private company pushing the boundaries, and Dale Arden can go from being a helpless maiden (in whatever guise to a lesser or greater degree) to a bit more useful partner, perhaps even as a copilot. Besides, wouldn’t it make it that much for fun for Ming the Merciless to try to enslave her (the guy is a psychopath, after all). With a soundtrack by The Killers, Fun., The Airborne Toxic Event, or possibly all of the above and more, it would be everything the 1980 movie was and better.

Pump Up the Volume (1990) – If you haven’t seen this one, I highly recommend it. It sits somewhere between comedy and drama as most teen movies from the 80s into the early 90s do, but this one went a slightly darker route (which is not surprising considering just a couple years earlier Christian Slater had been doing the dark comedy Heathers). It covers teenage angst and rebellion through the lens of pirate radio and public school, and considering the political climate of youth rebellion and schools today this one seems a perfect fit for a modern take. The existence of internet radio, satellite radio, and all the other easy to access entertainment options today almost makes pirate radio seem more interesting, sort of a “guerrilla entertainment” that would be very appealing to those looking to rebel against the corporate masters. Change it up a little bit to make it a podcast or some other form of hacking and suddenly SOPA and PIPA become an issue. BAM! Instant social relevance.

In addition to being a great vehicle for small, unknown bands, it would also be a perfect opportunity to bring back some classics. I’d love to see the Pixie’s “Wave of Mutilation” show up on the soundtrack again, and it just wouldn’t be Pump Up the Volume without Leonard Cohen’s “Everybody Knows”. For a delightful Easter egg I’d love to see Christian Slater and Samantha Mathis as the parents of our new troubled teen, and if they wanted to make it a direct sequel we could even see them reprising their original roles (and can you imagine the scene where our protagonist finds out her parents are the legendary Happy Harry Hard-on and The Eat Me Beat Me Lady? Do as I say, not as I did!) For an extra twist, don’t make it a public school, make it a charter or private school the kid is rebelling against. Can they actually do what they are doing? It may be wrong, but is it legal?

Finally I’d like to suggest Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins (1985). For those of you who think this movie is nothing but a cheap action/adventure/comedy from the mid-80s, you are so very, very wrong. Not only was it nominated for an Oscar (Best Makeup, Carl Fullerton), but the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films nominated it for a Saturn Award for both Best Fantasy Film and Best Supporting Actor (Joel Grey). Before you sneer at that one, let me note that Mr. Grey also got another nomination for Best Supporting Actor that year – a Golden Globe nomination (and he deserved it).

The fact is, this movie had a lot more style, story, and general “cool” factor going for it than the special effects of the time (makeup notwithstanding)  could keep up with. It was also clearly the first in what was meant to be a series (note the subtitle), and there was a lot of room to grow. Either a complete remake or “many years later” sequel would be awesome (I would pay large sums of money either way to see Joel Grey reprise his role as Chiun). This seems like just the sort of vehicle that would work well for some of the current martial arts action stars, such as Jet Li or Jackie Chan, or perhaps another as-yet unknown to American audiences star, to serve as a serious villain (rather than the slightly silly and pathetic one we had in the original). Jason Statham could fill in as a suitable Remo Williams.

Hollywood, please, take these ideas. Make them. The only thing I ask in return is to be there for the big premiere. That’s not so much, is it? (Oh, and if you can get Christian Slater to sign my copy of Pump Up the Volume that would be awesome.)

Do You Hear the People Sing?

Posted: January 4, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , , , , | 8 Comments

I’m going to say this up front: when I saw Les Miserables, I cried like a baby through the whole thing. I’m man enough to admit it. You’d pretty much have to have a heart of stone not to. I’ve been in love with the music of Les Mis for about twenty years, but I’ve never had a chance to see it in person (and the half staged, half not production they run perennially on PBS every time they need to shake loose a few more nickels doesn’t count either). I’m trying to convey the extremely high expectations and hopes I had going into this film before you read any further.

That having been said, if you haven’t seen this movie yet, I suggest you stop reading, buy a ticket to the next showing, and go out to see it. It’s really that good. The first word to come to mind after it was over was “epic”. If there was a chance in hell of a musical being nominated for a Best Picture Oscar, this would be the one. Certainly there are more than a few deserved nominations to go around.

First, the cinematography is stunning. Rather than simply transporting the stage show to film, cinematographer Danny Cohen uses the film medium to create a complete and compelling world full of vivid and rich imagery and (here’s that word again) epic scale. The staging of every scene is perfect, vast and overwhelming in the prison yard, majestic and beautiful when looking out over the rooftops of Paris, and time and confining when having a sword-fight in a hospital.

One of the great strengths of film over stage is the ability to do close-ups, to bring intimacy with the performers that simply isn’t available even in a black box performance (and who ever heard of Les Mis being done in a black box, anyway?), and director Tom Hooper does an excellent job of utilizing the various levels of intimacy available to draw more out of the characters than would otherwise be possible. The sets are also much more flexible, and the use of space is often fun and agile without feeling “dancy” or overblown. Most of all was the unique decision to film with live singing rather than a playback, which gives even more of a sense of intimacy and believability to the moments in the film; there is none of the traditional sense of “let’s all suddenly break into song!” associated with movie musicals, but rather a natural transition in and out of music that lends itself to a perfect suspension of disbelief.

There were also some key decisions made in terms of what material to include and what to cut, but they were done with a careful eye toward shaping a coherent narrative, and unless one of your favorite songs is missing I doubt you will even notice (unless like me you absolutely despise one of the songs that got trimmed back, in which case you might even cheer a bit.)

The bulk of my praise however (and this might just be my own personal tastes coming out) is going to go to the actors.

First and foremost I can’t say enough about Anne Hathaway as Fantine. I’ve never been all that fond of Fantine as a character (again, I’ve only ever really known the music), as I found her to be at best a plot device and not especially sympathetic. Well voiced? Certainly. Someone to care about? Not really. Hathaway changed that completely. She brought a tragic dignity to the role it always lacked for me before, and my heart ached for her every moment. Her decent from factory worker to her final moments is brought to painful life by a performance that by itself deserves an Oscar. Add onto that her amazing performance of “I Dreamed a Dream”, and if she doesn’t at least get nominated for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar, there will be a riot in Hollywood. In this performance she showed that it is possible to both sing beautifully and emote, while most actors struggle to do either one.

Standing in contrast to Hathaway’s performance, but still just as moving and powerful in its own way, is Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean. Whether because he is playing to a camera rather than an entire theater or simply as a matter of character choice, Jackman dials down Valjean from the more grandiose figure he is traditionally presented as. This fits the narrative of the story better, as well as allowing his co-stars to bring their own performances down to a more empathetic level. While I myself have always loved (and sympathized with) Valjean, it takes a great deal of skill to show that level of restraint with the character, especially when he brings forth his characteristic passion in occasional moments of brilliance.

The rest of the cast vary from good to great, but I want to give some special words of praise to a few who either made me care about their characters more than I expected to, or who managed to rise above my expectations of their abilities.

Sacha Baron Cohen as Thenardier and Helena Bonham Carter as Madame Thenardier – I love these characters and I most assuredly do not love these performers, so I was shocked when I saw their names in the credits. While I wasn’t thrilled with all the choices made around their roles, I loved everything they did with their roles. Don’t know that it’s worth an Oscar, but certainly worth a Golden Globe nomination.

Samantha Barks as Eponine – Until I saw this movie Eponine was at best a throw away plot device, at worst an annoying roadblock of a plot device. Ms. Barks changed all of that. She made Eponine charming, warm, relatable, and in the end another wonderfully tragic figure. Again, I don’t know that she rose to the level of Oscar nomination, but she definitely deserves a Golden Globe.

Daniel Huttlestone as Gavroche – I have always vacillated back and forth between being irritated by Gavroche because I don’t know what to do with him and simply despising him for being a waste of time and space. Young Master Huttlestone has completely changed my mind, bringing courage, dignity and charm to an otherwise forgettable character. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him getting a Golden Globe nomination for Best Supporting Actor, and even a dark horse candidate for an Oscar nomination.

Now, if you still haven’t seen the movie, what are you waiting for? Will you join in our crusade? Who will be strong and stand with me? Beyond the barricade there’s a movie you’ve just got to see.

The Joys of Uncomplicated

Posted: December 21, 2012 | Author: | Filed under: Culture | Tags: , , , , | 1 Comment

A peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Kraft Mac and Cheese (in the blue box!). Mashed potatoes and gravy. There’s a reason these are some of my favorite foods, and it’s not just because they have enough carbs between them to make Robert Atkins come back from the grave and die all over again. No, it’s because they are uncomplicated. There isn’t anything complex or subtle about them; you know exactly what you are going to get, and that is as wonderful as it is comforting.

The movie equivalent of this would be The Expendables 2. In many ways it is a tour-de-force. On the surface it may seem like nothing but pure action movie schlock, and there’s a reason for that: it’s nothing but pure action movie schlock. But stop for a moment and think about what that really means. When was the last time you saw a pure action movie?

Action movies aren’t supposed to be complicated. They should have a clear good guy (or good guys), maybe a little rough around the edges but very easy to connect with. The bad guy should be so rotten he practically oozes filth. If there is any angst it should last just long enough to give motivation to go out and get the bad guy. And there should be lots of fights: fistfights, knife fights, gunfights, explosions fights, the works. The dialogue should be breezy enough to keep the action moving without getting you bogged down, and juts interesting enough to keep you amused.

And that’s exactly what The Expendables was. The brilliance of the original was that David Callaham and Sylvester Stallone managed to deconstruct the action film and determine exactly what its minimal components should be. They then built the perfect film with a great ensemble cast, putting together some of (if not most) of the greatest action stars of all time. It was fantastic, and of course they were going to do a sequel. So what does a deconstructed sequel to an action film look like?

Basically, it looks like The Expendables 2. You use the same formula as the first, add 20% more explosions, “this time it’s personal”, a couple of fun cameos to round out the whole thing, and bam! You got a sequel. If it feels like the entire movie is one running cliché, it’s mostly because that’s what happens when you break down the formula for (arguably) the most formulaic film genre ever made and strip out all the useless detritus that has been accumulating over the years as people try to disguise the fact that they are making an action film.

But here’s the thing: none of that matters, for two reasons. First, formula or not, the film works. It’s a great action flick, mostly because it doesn’t try to be anything else. If they had tried to add even a dollop of something else (even a hint of romance, or meaning, or whatever) it would have fallen flat on its face. It succeeds because it is pure and uncomplicated, delivering exactly what it promises.

The second reason is that the cast is a lot better than most people give them credit for. Some of them (Sly Stallone, Bruce Willis) are actually astoundingly good actors, and others (I’m not cruel enough to call them out by name) excel within their milieu, which is still pretty damn hard to do. Selling the scene is always difficult; doing it when it could be sitting in a bar one day and the middle of a jungle firefight the next is monumentally tougher. And staying in character while explosions are going off just a few yards away? Not as easy as you think. If you don’t believe me, try it some time. The cast sells this movie, even more than the movie sells itself.

If you’re looking for a great movie that will make you think, will bring tears to your eyes, and in the end will make you believe that people can triumph over any adversity, I highly recommend that you watch The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. Great film. But if you just want to have a good time, get a few laughs, and not have to work too hard for it, I highly recommend The Expendables 2.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →