Hiatus, excuses and more

At this point I'm truly well behind in reviews and their quality has been much less than I prefer. I've been on a road trip for a few weeks and have been rushing things trying to keep up. I also have company showing up in several hours for the weekend. It's not looking productive.

So I've decided to call a short break.

I'll pick back up starting September 18th. But I made a commitment to have a review for every day of the year, so I'll be doubling up for a while to keep current as well as backfill the missing reviews. Keep an eye out for the past ones as well as the new ones.

And I also promise to update the Alphabetic list as well.

Until then, thanks for you support.

07-09-10 Pathfinder (2007)

Seen: September 7th, 2007
Format: Broadcast (Direct TV rental)
Rating: 6

I have no idea where to begin with this. It's probably due to guilt.

Basically, I feel guilty for enjoying this film. I watched it while staying with my brother, and we had a good hoot and holler time with it. It was fun guy-bonding time, and we both had a good time.

That said, it's probably the best way to watch this, with a good friend and a beer.

Not that there's fundamentally anything wrong with this film. It's a pretty standard tale of discovering who you really are and what's most important to you. It's about growth and battling the demons of your past, only here they're not a metaphor. It's about love and respect and learning they're worth fighting for. It's about the ultimate fatality of ego.

And it's about big scary Vikings bashing the crap out of everything.

It all goes down in interesting, but relatively predictable fashion. The characters border on caricature through most of the film, but never really fall too far into cliche. The acting is passable, but not of a very wide scope. The plot is predictable, but at the same time, fairly well written and rendered.

The one thing that really stands out here is the look of the film. It's highly stylized. It's much larger than life in many ways and adds a distinct feel of the fantastic to the film. I'm reminded in some ways of Boorman's Excalibur. Much of the film is very dark, shot with high contrasts and rich blacks and blues. It's more ominous than beautiful, but striking none the less.

See this one with a crew, probably best to avoid on a spousal date night unless your spouse is an archaeologist who enjoys criticizing the authenticity of depictions of historical cultures.

The Good: Dark, in so many ways
The Bad: Predictable
The Ugly: Relatives dropping in unannounced

07-09-08 The Mountain Men (1980)

Seen: September 6th, 2007
Format: DVD
Rating: 6

Maybe you're a glass-half-full type of person. If so, you might enjoy this film.

You might like Brian Keith's performance, which is over the top and one of the most genuine and amusing I've seen in a long time. He's not only the comic relief for this film, but in many ways its very heart. Frapp's affection for the serious Tyler helps us accept and even grow to like him.

You might appreciate the locations, which are stunning. They embody the ultimate romantic premise of the film, men who are men, out in the wild, wresting their livelihood from it while constantly fighting for survival. It's a powerful and fundamental American archetype and fully exploited here.

You might also enjoy the amazing lack of political correctness. Whites and Indians fight each other incessantly and steal from each other as a matter of course. The often respect each other and sometimes there's love, or slavery; the lines are often wide and gray. The film treats this all baldly, not shrinking for it's reality, but not pandering it either.

If, on the other hand, you see your glass half empty, there's plenty to dislike.

The number of horse falls is a bit stunning, I find it hard to believe none were injured. Animals in general seem to take it hard in this film, though the credits assure us otherwise. Women aren't treated particularly well either.

Heston's acting can be a touch grating. He's never been a favorite, been his over-emoting here is particularly tiresome at times. I can't imagine him playing happy-go-lucky, he'd probably seem afflicted with rictus.

The plot isn't particularly think either. It's all about the wilderness and fighting with your neighbor. It's about trapping beaver, getting drunk and laid. It's hardly art-house fare.

Full or empty, it's your choice of course. But all in all it's not a bad way to pass a few hours with a friend.

The Good: Brian Keith
The Bad: Monomania
The Ugly: Parley

07-09-07 Bullitt (1968)

Seen: September 4th, 2007
Format: DVD
Rating: 7

Watching films from the 60s and 70s can be a lot of fun. If nothing else, the argot and fashions of the time are worth a good snicker. The writing and acting are often cliche and cheesy, as if melodrama could actually pass for drama.

Bullitt has none of these problems.

I don't know how I missed this when I started watching 70s driving movies. It's got a great chase scene, one one the earliest I'm aware of shot on the streets of San Francisco. The jumps alone have been echoed through dozens of films and TV shows.

The plot itself is pretty interesting as well. The political nature of the conflicts inside the justice system are interesting and fresh. This isn't simply a case of corruption. It's a commentary on ego and ambition and how it ultimately affects due process,and by association, public safety.

The characters here are generally strong. McQueen is understated and outstanding. It amazes me how much he does with his character. There's a quiet strength and attention to detail that's very impressive. And he conveys all this with a minimum of dialogue, showing us who Bullitt is instead of tryingto have him tell us.

Robert Vaughn is excellent as well, and evidently had to be convinced to take the part. His a solid foil for Bullitt, not because he's bad, but simply because his mores are so stilted by comparison. The rest of the cast is generally solid as well, though the supporting characters tend to be used primarily to construct the framework for the plot, and are generally much less fleshed out. The exception to this may be the assassins, whom I found rather frightening.

The plot is engaging. It's not the simple gangland confessional it appears on the surface. I found myself drawn in as the film progressed for that reason. Unexpected things happen here. It's almost a bait and switch maneuver, one that's actually appreciated. It's not too convoluted to follow casually, but it does make you wonder where it's going.

There's some interesting camera work in the film. There are shots both long and short that divert your attention to focus that action somewhere else. The action and chase scenes are well shot also, with interesting cuts and angles the highlight the action itself. It's become a common technique, but seems original in a film of this vintage.

The score should be noted as well. Schifrin does a stellar job here. The music drives and accentuate the film without ever becoming too obvious or melodramatic. The absence of music is often as telling as it's presence, with many scenes left unadorned.

While a bit date, Bullitt is an excellent specimen of the genre and deserves a look.

The Good: Chic crime caper
The Bad: A bit dated
The Ugly: Garrotes

07-09-06 A Breed Apart (1984)

Seen: September 2, 2007
Format: Broadcast (Encore)
Rating: 2

I watched this one out a of a bit of desperation. I've been on a trip and don't have access to my normal flow of decent cinema. This was on late and looked atrocious.

It was.

The director has both a directing and writing credit for a film called Pterodactyl Woman from Beverly Hills. I recognize nothing the screen writer's ever done. Despite the fact that there's some actual talent in the cast, these are the real signposts to what you're in for.

Basically this film is a mass of tired cliches. We've got a damaged Vietnam vet, cut off from society. We've got a working class single mom, looking for a role model for her young son. There's the evil corporate bastard with the strange collection, who's willing to pay to complete it, regardless of the environmental and moral implications. And the headstrong outdoor adventurist, whoring for cash for his next expedition. And to round it off, the drunken rednecks who kill wildlife which crosses their path, all of it.

Mix this in with an undiscovered and virtually extinct species of eagle, and a reporter who's willing to trade her person for a story and you've got, well pretty much nothing. Basically it about throwing this characters together with a thin, concocted premise and seeing what happens.

The good news is that we've got Rutger Hauer, Kathleen Turner, Powers Boothe, Brion James and Donald Pleasence doing the acting. The bad news is you can't make shortcake out of manure. While they all do their best to bring these characters to life, and even do a passable job in some cases, what's happening here just isn't that interesting, not to mention plausible.

Hauer's Jim is the strangest and perhaps most interesting of the bunch, and he comes off almost post-apocalyptic. He acts as if humanity is foreign to him and slips off into strange reveries, complete with background chopper sound effects. Yeah, we get it.

Technically, there's nothing remotely interesting going on. It's not terrible, but there's nothing really redeeming.

There is some gratuitous nudity, which is actually a bit comical. But overall it's a bit pointless and even preachy, and has somehow ended up where it belongs, playing on a second-rate cable movie channel in a spot even the infomercials aren't interested in.

The Good: Some decent actors.

The Bad: The premise and script

The Ugly: Pretty much the whole thing...

07-09-05 Shaun of the Dead (2004)

Seen: August 31st, 2007 (and previous)
Format: DVD (and theater)
Rating: 7

It should be noted that Shaun of the Dead really has no plot. There's no real point to what happens. There's no real arc. Nobody really changes much or learns anything. It's basically a very large, running joke composed of references and reentrant gags.

But it's a very good joke.

I saw this film in the theater, and more recently on DVD. I saw Hot Fuzz in the meantime, which made it much more evident that Shaun of the Dead is not so much a parody as it is an homage. It's a bit rougher, a bit less honed and polished, but it exhibits a similar reverence for the zombie genre that HF does for the cop/buddy cop conceit.

This film's humor is a bit broader. The jokes and commentary are a bit more blatant. Offsetting this are the many subtle references to films including the multiple shot and musical ones which I only learned about from reading the trivia on IMDB*.

There's some excellent social commentary here. The direct comparisons between the lives of everyday people in their natural and zombified states are priceless.The exploitation of zombies, while a bit hyperbolic are no less cutting and poignant. The reactions of survivors to the zombified are telling too. How often do they stop to really think about someone that the encountered in everyday life?

Writing and acting here are top notch, showing the familiarity of the writers and actors via their time together on other projects. The film moves along nicely and the timing of the scenes both internally and sequentially is rather remarkable.

The one thing really lacking is a sense of purpose and direction to the film. There's not much, if any, arc here. This could be considered just another part of the commentary/homage to the genre, as most zombie films are concerned primarily with survival and little else. The act of keeping the body count as low as possible until the credits roll is the primary function of whichever group of protagonists the film happens to follow. The same is true here. But somehow I want a bit more. I suppose that I expected some sort of answer, some sort of final comment or revelation about the genre to come through the characters after their journey.

And we do get one of sorts. Perhaps it's the nature of that message that seems unfulfilling. Perhaps it's that commentary, which seems to say that it doesn't really matter whether we we're one of the infected or not, which is the most disturbing aspect of the film.

See this one if you've ever seen a zombie film and liked it ... or not.

*I love the good zombie film (and recently got to defend the position that zombie is actually a genre), but I can't claim a comprehensive background.

The Good: Zombies all around us

The Bad: A little light on plot

The Ugly: Child locks

07-09-04 The Cave (2005)

Seen: September 31st, 2007 (and previous)
Format: Broadcast (Encore)
Rating: 5

I'm on a road trip and trying to get my quota in and stumbled across this late at night. I'd seen it before and didn't remember hating it, and gave it another look. It was pretty much the same as the first time around.

Basically this is a things that go bump in the night, er dark, flick. It cam e out around the same time as The Descent, and contains similar elements, but has a very different tone. This one's thriller instead of horror, and tries a bit harder to actually rationalize things.

There's some beautiful visuals in this film, and not just the classic underwater cave shots (the location is famous and escapes me at the moment). In particular, the shots of Charlie climbing in the dark are quite stunning.

The Dark can almost be considered a character in this film, and the way it's treated visually is critical. The film makers do an excellent job here, using it well, lighting in many ways to created different effects and atmospheres as the journey progresses.

Casting and performances are decent. This is the film that made me actually start to pay attention to Piper Perabo. Her role is different than you've seen before. Lena Headey is solid, but unremarkable, as is Cole Hauser. The rest are caricatures to some degree.

The rest of the film doesn't fare quite so well.

The backstory is a bit thin. While you have to give credit for trying to supply a scientific explanation for what's going on in the cave, it all seems a bit thin and superficial. While the concepts are interesting, in the long run, it really didn't matter that much to me.

There's also an attempt at creating tension within the party. This works to a small degree, but serves more to partition the party into those you think will survive, vs. those you think won't. It all comes off as more posturing than anything else, and tends to undermine the authority and respect Jack has been shown earlier in the film.

But it's still all good fun. It keeps the details from us long enough to keep us interested. The monsters are scary, but not invincible. There's some surprises along the way. Settle in with someone to grab onto and pay attention.

The Good: Visually compelling noise in the dark fest

The Bad: Sketchy backstory

The Ugly: Changing for the better

07-09-03 For Your Consideration (2006)

Seen: February (24?), 2007
Format: DVD
Rating: 4

There's a lot of talented people here. There an abundance of experience, imagination and creativity.

And I'm done with Guest's satiric films.

I kept watching Guest's films because the casts were great, the characters largely improvised. There were generally good running gags, all delivered in dead-pan fashion that made you wince.

This is Spinal Tap is brilliant. With each successive incarnation, the cast got larger. More talent was added. New perspectives surfaced. And it got more and more tired.

Finally, they've taken on Hollywood. You'd think that this, of all the films, would be the easiest, because the writers and cast actually live in this world. Perhaps it's this very proximity, a forest-for-the-trees perspective issue which makes this film fail. Perhaps the ensemble knows and sees things that I can't, and rely on a context which I just don't comprehend to create a subtle satire that I just can't appreciate. And if that is truly the case, is that my problem, or theirs?

This is not to say that there aren't good gags. They're there. So are some outlandish and amusing performances. There are new compatriots who shine, perhaps because they're new. There moments both funny and filled with the obligatory schadenfreude. But in the end, its still the same schtick in new clothes.

My final opinion is that they've finally become so comfortable with this process, so glib and polished at their delivery, that they've begun to phone it all in.

Perhaps the answers to all my misgiving lie in the commentary on the DVD. Perhaps Chris could explain it all to me and in a blinding epiphany I'd appreciate all its brilliance.

But there's no way I'm sitting through it again.

The Good: More of the same sly satire.

The Bad: More of the same old schtick.

The Ugly: Marilyn Hack's makeover

07-09-02 Butterfield 8 (1960)

Seen: April (20?), 2001
Format: DVD
Rating: 2

Here's one from the Recycler. I've written reviews on Netflix a few times, and I'm going to cheat here by revamping one of those.

It seems that this "genre" of film is something of a mystery to me, as is Elizabeth Taylor's "acting". She does the simpering, spoiled, dysfunctional brat (and in later films, the bitter, dysfunctional harpy) to a T, but seems to have little range beyond this. (I've since seen some of her work I actually like).

While the script definitely has the potential, the acting and directing sure didn't do it any justice.

Laurence Harvey is one of the most wooden actors I've seen, with little to no emotional range (the Keanu Reeves of his generation perhaps?) and was the only bad thing in an otherwise magnificent "The Manchurian Candidate". One must assume that he and Taylor were paired for their star quality at the time as they have no chemistry onscreen. Her chemistry w/ Fisher is much more believable, but they were evidently married at the time, go figure.

The directing is a bit of a nightmare as well, with enough continuity errors, boring editing, POV cuts w/ mismatched lighting, and unimaginative angles that it's a bit painful to watch. Again, it seems that the producers figured the subject matter and stars would carry the film.

Unless you like thin, wooden, overblown melodrama, I'd avoid this one.

The Good: Eddie Fisher does a decent, (relatively understated) turn.

The Bad: Shock value subject matter still doesn't save this mess.

The Ugly: Laurence Harvey can't emote to save his life.

07-09-01 Fracture (2007)

Seen: August 27th, 2007
Format: DVD
Rating: 7

I like Embeth Davitz, it's a shame she's only here to be shot in the head. But we've got Hopkins and Gosling to carry to the load, which is a good thing.

Fracture (and I have no idea how the title relates to the film) is a fun, tight little caper. A murder mystery with unexpected developments, and a bad guy that seems eerily in control of the whole scenario. While it's improbably in spots, it's very consistent, playing by it's own rules.

There are twists and turns and a few surprises. There are moments or compassion and charm. There is a budding romance and a dying one. It's like a little microcosm of human emotion in frailty all laid out for our observation. If anything, it may be a bit too complete in this arena. There's very very few people in this film who aren't' undergoing a transformation of one type or another.

The writing is solid, and the film moves at a good pace. Every time it seems to slow down, along comes a new piece of information which boot on down the line. It may stop and start a bit, but it continually holds your interest. It slows down but never bogs down.

Visually, the film is interesting, but not spectacular. There's very good use of light and color, but it all serves the film and nothing really stands out. It's subdued to a large extent. There's lots of darkness in the film, watch for light be introduced to a scene and the difference between the scenes that are brightly lit, as opposed to those which are dark.

The cast is spot on, not a complaint in the bunch. Rosamund Pike is always welcome, and play solidly here. The leads are excellent, though their characters a bit contrived. The supporting cast is a mixed bag, though generally solid.

See this one if you like twisty capers, with smart criminals.

Nothing about this film is going to really stay with you, but in it's time, it's fully engaging.

The Good: Clever caper with decent characters

The Bad: Those dang mores getting in the way

The Ugly: Pulling the plug