Reviews

120 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Grindhouse (2007)
comic relief and bloody retro
12 February 2008
After seeing the most of Tarantino's and Rodriguez's work, this double feature was again amazing and a welcome retro shock. The trademarks are incorporated in a whole new concept and fingerlicking (provided you are a carnivore) action. I couldn't help but recall parts of some greasy Troma VHS-tapes i rented in another life, something to do with Cult Videotheek Amsterdam. T&R used many technical achievements of the old masters of cinema, absolutely fantastic framing combined with vacuous conversations (Are you OK? No I'm just Cherry) and graphically mind-boggling gadgets (italian vogue ?!) Also some was reminiscent of Mad Max and Reservoir Dogs, admitted i never did see Vanishing Point, White Line Fever and Big Wednesday.

Be sure to see Death Proof first and Planet Terror afterwards. As far as i'm concerned, this work proves that double features are a great phenomenon and i hope there will be more.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
complete and uplifting little movie
21 April 2004
This short was screened at AFFF between 'the making of' Bad Taste (1987) and Forgotten Silver (1995), although it was not directed by Peter Jackson.

There's not much speech and that is the universal power of it. It's a complete movie about two neighbours who have a funny conflict. Or a funny way of resolving their conflict, i should say. Their unorthodox ways must be on anybody's mind from time to time: especially children's.

I appreciated that this short didn't want to be a full movie but is good fun at just the length it has. The sound and cinematography techniques tell most of the story.

WingNut rules! 7/10.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
devil-worshipping international conglomerates: eat your heart out!
14 April 2003
Tonight LLoyd Kaufman got his lifetime achievement award. Afterwards there was a presentation of 'Apocalypse Soon' which I expected to be very raunchy (like the extras on Troma's War DVD), but turned out to be incredibly educational and entertaining as well. 135 minutes of perseverence by Kaufman, cut from a gruesome production in which eleven people got sacked and the cameraman hired back again (then trashed), an M16 didn't work, a stuntman had to be paid for jumping from a stunning 3 feet high onto two-feet-high cushion, actresses suddenly don't want to take their shirts off (you can't do that to a Troma movie) and lots of other mind-boggling problems. If this is a fake story about a troubled production merely to make the featured movie sell, then i don't know what's real anymore.

If you don't consider the quality of the featured movie, then I'd have to say 'Apocalypse Soon' is better than 'Hearts of Darkness' in which case i have to rate it 10/10 and i will. Just a pity they don't show how Kaufman fires all those crew. I still hope the Hollywood companies (read: the devil-worshipping international conglomerates) see this and realize they've been beaten once and for all by Troma. The editing is ingenious, as is the camera-work. Even Michael Herz's (Joe Fleishaker?) corpulence surpasses Marlon Brando's! It's hard to admit, but I don't think a 135 min docu about The Lord Of The Rings would be THIS interesting.

These 135 minutes are simply worth it and confirmed that Kaufman (also see Terror Firmer) indeed has achieved a lot. BTW, the lifetime achievement award formerly went to Paul Verhoeven (Soldaat van Oranje, Starship Troopers, Basic Instinct) and Brian Yuzna (Bride of Re-Animator, Society, Beyond Re-Animator) and Dario Argento (Phenomena, Suspiria, Profondo Rosso).
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Naqoyqatsi (2002)
The exploration of the human kind continues scientifically, not intellectually.
17 March 2003
'Between innocence and politics' would be a Donnie Darkesque mistake to describe the experience of this movie. There's more than one dimension in the world of Reggio and Glass. Especially Jon Kane adds a dimension in my opinion. At times I was a bit disappointed that the creators couldn't resist the temptation of getting rather political and explicit. That wasn't necessary to entertain the audience more. Some may put it like certain sequences are on the verge of being political, but the engagement annoyed me. The Beastie Boys video 'Something's got to give' did it better.

Animation/CGI has been completely aesthetically accepted as means of returning to the level of part one with bits of Tron, bytes of the Matrix, snippets of 2001 and views of Avalon (Oshii, 2001). Together with Glass's magnificent tunes and 'skywalker sound' Naqoyqatsi almost reaches the massive level of Koyaanisqatsi.

Reggio and Kane return to computer-mainboards, cultivation of nature, escalation of conflicts, but this powerful and almost scientific exploration of all kinds of human conflicts still has little intellectual value. Not even if it featured a thousand computer generated symbols, Leonardo Da Vincis, Madame Tussauds, American presidents, Hieronymus Boschs, terrorists or babies. The explicit and excessive use of facial icons and expressions diminishes the universal value as well. I was charmed by the portrayal of internal fights that sportsmen and -women experience (but why did they forget rowing sequences?). It still is way better than the picturesque Powaqqatsi, not only because this has less stock shots, apart from some military parades and nuclear mushrooms. I'm glad Soderbergh shoved it forward. 8/10 (Koyaanisqatsi after reconsidering 9/10, Powaqqatsi 6/10)
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
aesthetically grim
18 December 2002
This is a worthy sequel as I enjoyed myself as much as with part 1. I still haven't read any of the books, but I have to say that the story and plot twists develop in a way I could never have imagined. Some of it was even reminiscent of 'Throne of Blood' (Kurosawa, 1957) which was of course a brilliant adaptation of MacBeth. See that film to figure out which parts I mean plz.

The art direction is of course still great as they shot the movie together with part 1 and 3. Here the CGI has become fingerlicking good: Gollum puts Jar Jar Binks AND Yoda to shame!

Let's wait for part 3 to drop some concluding remarks about this trilogy. For now it feels great to experience the premieres of these movies and be a part of the hype as well, I might add. The videogame should be Everquest I guess (never played it though). WingNut rules (and Orlando Bloom can surf!): as far as I'm concerned this gets the same rating as part 1.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
this is the end ... all the children are insane
5 June 2002
'Are my methods unsound?' - 'I don't see a method at all, sir.'

Hearts of darkness: a filmmaker's apocalypse has become the mother of all making-of documentaries. At least that's what Coppola had in mind. I guess every making-of ever made wanted to be something like Hearts has accomplished. Problems in production, actors, story, editing, financing and directing are revealed. However, not much attention is paid to the actual adaptation of the original story and the difference in vision that was obviously there. The trouble surrounding Apocalypse Now as presented in this documentary makes you wonder how on earth Apocalypse Now was actually released at all. On the other hand that might just be exploitation of a supposedly disastrous production, like the trouble with 'The African Queen' (Huston, 1951). In that case, it would mean Coppola created a legend out of some futile problems to emphasize that you HAVE to see the final product.

Nevertheless his film IS spectacular. The helicopter action in Black Hawk Down can't top the impact of the lauded Huey-attack. And Apo features one of the greatest scores and (awardwinning) sound designs in history of cinema. With the emphasis on lunacy and despair in the form of surrealist cacophony. I would have liked to hear some more in this docu about the sound design that was as revolutionary as that of 'the Right Stuff' and 'Star Wars'. I really couldn't say that we were all tricked into pretensions and reputation-building (which IS the case with Vertigo if you ask me) for commercial purposes.

Almost forty years after Orson Welles wanted to make his first film out of Joseph Conrad's book 'Heart of Darkness' (yes, that's 3 years before Citizen Kane), Coppola started to create his own loose adaptation of the book. In this documentary is even an excerpt of Welles' 1938-radio adaptation of Heart of Darkness. I hope it will come with the docu when it is released on dvd (will it ever?).

Apo was supposed to be a sort of journey of a man into the past (hence the newly restored scene on the french plantage), almost maybe like Bergman's Wild Strawberries, but only the form and the surrealism, not the content of course. But if we may believe this docu, the production resembled just as much turmoil as the lunacy in the story itself. The French plantage (with french actress Aurore Clément ('Paris, Texas')) illustrates the fifties: the idea of the French still being in the forest and representing the fifties politics. Coppola elucidates why he initially shot and later cut out the scene. Fortunately it would later be presented to the world in the 'Redux' version. The story of Apo was supposed to take us back in time, to re-live Kurtz' adventure. Maybe even like the extraordinary 'Paris, Texas' (Wenders, 1984) that in content is also a journey into the past of a man.

For most people, this docu will be a delight just to see behind the scenes footage, because they don't see they're being manipulated by the actual SELECTION of footage and mutilation of interviews. It's very entertaining, but ultimately some points do not convince. How can the director of 'the Godfather 1+2' and 'the Conversation' let a production get out of hand like the way it's presented in 'Hearts'? And, the real heart of the concept isn't really touched by any of the interviewees. But, as an admirer of Apo, I say it's a must see, not only for the background stories (Welles), the problems created by actors (Sheen's attack, Brando's corpulence) and the lunacy on the set itself (idiodyssey?), but also to hear Francis Ford Coppola say that the film will not be good and a 20 million dollar disaster, while it was becoming the greatest warmovie ever made (right behind Catch-22 ;-). And for that, mr and mrs Coppola, I salute you. 9/10
28 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Warriors (1979)
The Warriors will not bend. For anybody. Not in 1979 and not now.
3 June 2002
Injustice, female seduction, baddies and gang action portrayed by tour-de-force acting performances in this true cult movie (does it still exist?), masterfully directed and written by Walter Hill, screenwriter of Alien (Scott, 1979). Look past the few improbabilities and you'll see that Hill (the Long Riders, 48 Hrs, Crossroads) can/could surpass Spielberg's storytelling qualities and lives up to Woo/Peckinpah action with excerpts in slow motion. I think the wipes between scenes (like Akira Kurosawa and George Lucas among others used) reveal the admiration of Hill and cinematographer Andrew Laszlo (First Blood, Inner Space) for the mentioned storytelling. This one just isn't for kids, although it might feel like the concept for a computergame from time to time. The Warriors doesn't contain the tearjerking and the sentimental stuff that Spielberg and Lucas can't seem to get rid of.

The Warriors is a quite straight forward non-meandering fugitive-film that gives as strong and lasting an impression of the streets and subway of New York as the French Connection does. In this case mostly at nighttime until the apotheosis. The graffiti and/on subways define the setting and the mood of this urban adventure about eight fugitives. City streets don't have much pity for them. That's the only philosophy in this intellectually devoid movie. And I like it that way.

Is The Warriors an icon and the thing a lot of directors try to accomplish today or is it simply suspense? IMO it is a classic alright. With great and dated music, where 'dated' is a compliment (try this one: 'Nowhere to run' by Martha and the Vandellas). You will want to see it again after a while. And again.

David Patrick Kelly (the Funeral, K-PAX) returns as 'Luther' also in 48 Hours (1982) and should get much more recognition today, because he can create a sardonic sort of craziness in a story but also reliability itself. 9/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Near Dark (1987)
stylized horror with distinctive music
2 June 2002
The great Bill Paxton (Aliens, Frailty, a Simple Plan, Weird Science), Jenette Goldstein (Aliens, T2) and Lance Henriksen (Aliens, Millennium, the Right Stuff, Terminator) teamed up for Near Dark as a coherent outfit that actually consists of outsiders. Directed by Kathryn Bigelow (Wild Palms, Point Break), they are really able to make the viewer afraid of inevitable eternity, although we are clearly invited to sympathize with the 'turned' ones in the middle part of the story. In that way we completely stand and feel with protagonist Caleb during the entire movie.

This is actually the only movie in which I like Tangerine Dream's synthesizer music. Tangerine Dream (Thief, The Keep, Miracle Mile, Legend, Sorcerer) normally is more appropriate for Miami Vice, but their adhesive and slightly mesmerizing (and dated) style works nicely here. It contributes to the distinctive atmosphere and the not very complicated story. Near Dark is not only a stylized teenager horror, but also a road movie that comes across as a continuing nightmare.

Adam Greenberg's empathizing and intense cinematography (also the Big Red One, Terminator 1+2+3) is perhaps the most appealing factors of the movie, without being anything like poetic. But he is able to make sunlight as deadly as bullets and nighttime as soothing as lotion. Without trying to be intelligent, the movie succeeds to deliver, because all factors are tuned exactly right and create a unique thrill inside the genre. I didn't mind the flaws, especially because I stumbled upon it at 2 a.m. on the BBC. Shivers down my spine. 8/10 ... and stop watching Buffy already
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Schizopolis (1996)
a couple of beers short of a sixpack
31 May 2002
Indie director goes nutzoid. I've got serious trouble to see the humour of this. Woody Allen's 'Annie Hall' already presented some of the supposed jokes and humour in this terribly inferior product of a bored and phrenetic state of mind (at the time). Frankly I rented this because of Soderbergh's recent successes in movieland before Oceans Eleven with which he gets even more commercial than with Out Of Sight. The latter actually had some style. But this turns out to be his worst (typically: that means 'weenie' in Dutch) movie. The point of it may be that Soderbergh is tired of urban cacophony, or that he wants to pay an awkward homage to certain movies that inspired him.

More probable is that Soderbergh tries to accomplish something bizarre like a Monty Python-effect but crashes and burns along the way before making a point or even becoming experimental. My sympathy goes out to all the fans, but this was a run of the mill. Much ado about nothing. Buñuel made great movies about merely what he liked to show, without a point. Now Schizopolis is definitely NOT ahead of its time. However also but nevertheless heh uche moreover big dogs barking on my head whatsoever hereby backed up paddywagon mackin' on thy cat's ass or shave my legs and call me grandpa. Now, was that funny? Was it surreal? ... Thought so. Ah well, one born every minute. 3/10
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Soylent Green (1973)
plankton rules ... or does it?
29 May 2002
... and then it turned out that they were just as much concerned with the environment and euthanasia back in 1973 as we are now. Nevertheless this is one of the last convulsions of the era of critical sci-fi movies that came to an abrupt end with the arrival of action-sci-fi Star Wars, Alien and Mad Max etc. Correct me if I'm wrong here as I didn't do any research. Typically for the action era: one of the first video-games (I believe it is Space Invaders) is featured in Soylent Green as a decadent toy.

Thought provoking sci-fi is slowly returning nowadays (Gattaca, Truman Show, A.I.) as I see it. E.g. the same global warming problem as in Soylent Green is a topic in A.I. that also pervasively depicts the consequences of that problem clearly in that same old futuristic NYC. I haven't found any recent movie that features genetically engineered food though (retrodirect to '2001', Dark Star, Silent Running and Willy Wonka :-). I recommend Fahrenheit 451 and Gattaca for the thinking audience.

The bleak messages have difficulties boiling to the surface. The point of the film is less apparent than it's entertaining value: indeed this calls for a remake as someone stated. If only for the awkwardly mischosen music to be corrected. The movie concentrated too much on Heston's mission that isn't very thrilling, and should've done more with the corruptions of future dystopian society incl corporations and authorities. Most of it worked alright though and the intentions of the authors are unmistakenly present. Watching it widescreen next time and reading the novel may help.

Fleischer in a sense wasted the magnificent cast (Heston, Cotten, Robinson), but then again he never was one of my favourite directors. Harrison's novel must be more poignant and cynical. The screenplay is ok, but with this sort of movies the atmosphere is more important to convince, like in The Omega Man and Westworld, and that certainly works here. Credit to cinematographer Richard Kline (Andromeda strain, Terminal man) and what's left of the acting talent. Heston (Omega man, Touch of evil) seems to enjoy his authoritative and violent role in society as a detective. Edward G. Robinson (Little Caesar, Double Indemnity, the Stranger) is most convincing though, as the (unexpectedly) nostalghic and sentimental roommate who ensures the audience that the time of democracy and free nature is long over. Survival of the fittest is now. The government doesn't seem to be withholding in scooping people off the streets and hasn't any ethical problems with euthanasia too. This movie made me feel extremely happy to be able to open a window and simply look at a tree+bird. Same feeling I had with 'THX 1138'. See what it does for you... 8/10
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
very good eighties movie, not yet cinema
28 May 2002
This is the first movie in Rourke's golden years: Year of the dragon (1985), 9 1/2 weeks (1986), Angel Heart (1987), Barfly (1987): every single one underrated IMO. His glory started to erode heavily with Johnny Handsome (1989), really hit an all-time low with Wild Orchid (1990) and confirms that as the Marlboro Man's sidekick Harley Davidson (1991). Nevertheless I'm sorry that his footage was cut out of the Thin Red Line (1998), because I like his style. Michael Cimino (Thunderbolt&Lightfoot, Deerhunter) and cinematographer Alex Thomson (Excalibur, the Keep, Legend) apparently know their way in the eighties as well, although the story plays just before.

Is the recent wave of violence in Chinatown caused by Stanley White, the new (Polish originate) gung-ho sheriff in N.Y. Chinatown, or by the hunger for power by the young chinese gangsters? White, ironically, makes his own job harder because he has serious trouble respecting the Chinese in any way. Stanley hits the crime in chinatown like Popeye Doyle in the tradition of the French Connection, instead of a sheriff with brains. He will have to pay for his callousness and hypocrisy.

'Year of the dragon' depicts some of the the money and gambling problems of the Chinese in an early but profound eighties' style. The score sounds cheap, but fortunately is scarce too. I particularly like the noirish feel of this way-above-average cop-flick. Michael Mann could only wish he made this: it's one of my favourite tv-movies. The few negative points are probably due to interference of producer Dino de Laurentiis. 8/10
24 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
THX 1138 (1971)
observing with (y)our hands tied: the audience as a big brother
27 May 2002
Where the figures in 'Star Wars' find themselves in fantastic worlds of which the audience isn't supposed to question the realism apart from the convincing power but merely needs to be entertained, the protagonist in 'THX-1138' finds himself in a dystopic world of which we ARE supposed to be sceptic, if not, take distance and condemn strongly, without knowing how it has come to this.

At the same time both subtle and impressive music, not much dialogue (an idea Lucas should have returned to when writing Ep1+2) and impeccable storytelling. The cinematography by Albert Kihn and David Myers is stunning and together with Lucas' own editing tells a much more coherent story than what Lucas presented to us the last decade. Recently he probably forgets watching his favourite Kurosawa-movies right before filming, because many beginners' mistakes are shine through in Episode 1 and 2 of his Star Wars enterprise. But in 'THX-1138' the visuals are almost poetic and make you forget the sometimes absent dialogue and may even outperform Robert Duvall (also MASH, Godfather, Apocalypse Now). I wonder why there is a thank-you-note to cinematographer Caleb Deschanel (Apocalypse Now, Being There, Right Stuff) in the end-credits.

The sterile cleanliness, totalitarian authority, cold uniformity and extreme conformism all have the goal to suppress human behaviour and promote the most efficient society. What these people need to do is watch more fantasy movies! =^) A world like the one in 'THX-1138' could never exist, because we're too afraid that it might actually really come to that. Or are 'we' only the moviegoing public i.e. 5% of world population? In that case it might become reality some day including '... cybernetics, genetics, lasers...' etc. But there is a way out of this dystopic world, you only have to approach life from a different perspective and there you have it. Nothing will hold you back. Some of the following cynical stories do not agree with that view: Brazil, Nineteen Eighty-Four, Metropolis, Gattaca and Soylent Green. Nevertheless I would like to recommend them.

Some references to this movie are worth mentioning: (1) cell block #1138 in Star Wars Ep4 (2) the license plate THX138 in American Graffiti (3) IMDb comment #1138 for Star Wars Ep2 ;-) Finally I recommend taking a look at the 'recommendations' and 'movie connections'-tabs here on IMDb. 8/10
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
George Lucas read&watched LordOfTheRings closely and learned
17 May 2002
Ep2 has a more distinguished place in history of cinema than Ep1, 5 and 6, without being groundbreaking. There are numerous cliche-scenes, old-fashioned costumes, and the directing overall was conventional. But of course, that's why we go and see a Star Wars movie. Lucas definitely did not let us down. Anybody who wants 2 C art should look further. All the references to other classic scifi-movies are great. To name a few: Blade Runner (noir feel of the dark side, rain, robots who want to live, air traffic), Metropolis (dehumanised workers, air traffic), Matrix (computercontrolled breeding of human beings), Robocop (Jango Fett), Starship Troopers (massive action scenes), Gladiator (arena fights), LOTR1 (fantasy politics, good vs evil forces) and basically most movies based on stories by Philip K. Dick. Yes, even A.I. (coldness, boy looking for mama). W/o the ethical questions that is, and w/o intelligence.

After the first 45 min I was afraid that Ep2 was turning into some kind of Star Trek, but luckily I was wrong and treated with magnificent action mostly in the latter half of the movie. And the lightsaber-battles have become delightfully more convincing. The star wars are back! A much heard complaint about the unfinished storylines in Ep2 is a very weak one, because nobody complained about unfinished storylines in LOTR 1 did they? Everyone knows the events in Ep3 will be the link between Ep2 (2002) and Ep4 (1977).

Great that the annoying Jar Jar Binks has almost vanished from the story. Let's hope he'll be completely removed from Ep3. Good riddance. Ep2 is more mature than Ep1, but the 'dark side' is still not all over the movie as promised. For the first time it does rain though in Star Wars, a lot happens at night time and the evil Christopher 'Saruman' Lee and Temuera Morrison (Once were warriors) contribute to a new sense of evilness that hopefully will stretch far into Ep3.

Some complaints: firstly, the CGI animals in the 'Gladiator'-scene are pathetic, because there seems 2 B no neither gravity nor mass and none of the protagonists seems 2 B emotionally affected. Not even Boba Fett for christ sake, despite he must have suffered the most. Secondly: are chromatic 30-year-old SR-71's (Blackbird) and 20-year-old B-2's suddenly the airplanes from the future (also in Ep1)? In Ep2 they don't even have jet engines anymore, but returned to the good old days of conventional engines. But the roaring definitely makes them more impressive. Third: the 'airtraffic'-scene in the beginning of the movie was uninvolving and not new too (Fifth Element, Blade Runner). Fourth: 'Ep2 - attack of the clones' is NOT the first completely digitally shot movie as Lucas likes to believe: that was Vidocq (2001).

Ep2 is entertaining enough to be 180 min though. The music has become somewhat more subtle in my opinion and does more justice to the storyline than in Ep1 and Ep6. The CGI and the action scenes almost surpass LOTR1 (never the art direction) and the acting was WAY better than in the callow Ep1. The humor is still a bit childish. Let's say Ep2 is the puberty of Star Wars and let's hope Ep3 will be grown up (not too much though ;-). Don't expect much more than thrilling action, scifi and fantasy in Ep2: 8/10. (Ep4:10; Ep5:9; Ep6:6; Ep1:4)
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Frailty (2001)
pretty scary, not graphical, intentionally humourless
17 April 2002
Godfearing Christians will not appreciate this movie. Fortunately, I'm not one of them. It is a shocking but quite predictable thriller with certainly appealing cinematography and decent directing by actor Paxton (Aliens, Near Dark, Weird Science). It must have been a fairly simple project, adequate for starter Paxton, who succeeded with cinematographer Bill Butler (The Conversation, Demon Seed, Jaws) in making this a pretty eerie thriller. The psychology in the story (that probably really happened here and there, and on a greater scale too) is the scariest besides what's going on off-screen occasionally. The absence of humour and non-linearity of the story makes the movie a bit mature, although there isn't a real point to be discovered. Except that besides cigarettes, religion can kill (you). Don't think about it too much afterwards, lads.

The best roles are played by the two boys. O'Leary and Sumpter are quite stirring throughout the movie and give Paxton's role much more meaning, although McConaughey and Paxton never completely convince. That seems like a hint for shocks to come, but turns out to be just not-so-good acting. I'd like to see Paxton return to less mature roles like the ones in the movies mentioned above.

BTW, it's good to hear someone remember the great film 'The Warriors' (Hill, 1979) in a movie. Also, the scene where Paxton discovers the first instrument for 'God's Hands' reminded me delightfully of 'Near Dark' (Bigelow, 1986) very much with its burning sunlight through that shed in the middle of nowhere. I would like to see this again in contrast with lots of teenage slashers of the past ten years. 7/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
Tous le Soirs: SPECTACLE - CONCERT - BAL
20 February 2002
Three days after standing on Place de Figalle in front of 'le Moulin Rouge' (and bought some of Lautrec's posters as a souvenir), I decided to go and see the movie. Moulin Rouge! turned out 2 B plain and cliche entertainment. I guess that's what it's supposed 2 B and should be treated like that. It was a disappointment in general with some good moments and dynamic cinematography. The point is that it was flat but musical world with round bellies and lots of booze: Burgundian, flamboyant, bohemian, cancan and tragic. Tragic because the actors didn't have the chance to give the love story (which could have been good) sense.

'Smells like teen spirit' (Nirvana), 'Your Song' (Elton John), 'Heroes' (David Bowie), 'One day I'll fly away', 'Roxanne' (Sting) and the inevitable 'The show must go on' (Queen) are examples of the arrangements for the score. The original songs once are great, but the rest of the movie didn't do much for me. I can understand the nostalghic feelings for those songs, but that doesn't really contribute to a great movie: it merely sets a firm tone and provides convenient dialogue from songtexts.

The exclamation mark should have been removed from the title and especially from the movie itself if you take my meaning. Neither being a fan of Kidman and McGregor nor of musicals in general, I still say that Kidman and the cinematography deserve 2 B nominated, but no winners as far as I'm concerned. 6/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pi (1998)
as interesting as a palindrome like 20-02 2002 20:02
20 February 2002
Pi is a slightly enigmatic thriller (like Tetsuo and Cube and Eraserhead) and supposedly mathematical interesting, but ultimately not THAT relevant or challenging. The story and the b/w cinematography gave the film an appealing indie character and is definitely more interesting for people who were disappointed by 'Hackers' or 'Knight Moves', simply because it lives up to its ambition with not much means. It is not filled with culture as someone stated. Good movie though and worth to see again sometime. 7/10 (not including positive discrimination of indies :-)
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Moulin Rouge (1952)
Henri: portrait of a painter
20 February 2002
This movie is not completely comparable with the recent carnavalesque 'version' because it isn't actually a version: it's a completely different story. 'Moulin Rouge' (1952) is less nauseating as 'Moulin Rouge!' (2001) and more convincing characterwise. Where the recent version doesn't really live up to it's award nominations, this one delivers, although some of the dialogue is awkward and forced to give the audience information about Lautrec in a way that could only be read from a paper. Also, I would have liked some more on Lautrec's friendship with Vincent van Gogh (making green with blue, pink, yellow and grey?).

The lush colors and compositions are superior to those of the recent movie. The parades of paintings are well-chosen and show how Lautrec's work evolved. The costumes in the movie are clearly inspired by the sketches and paintings, although I'm sure not everyone looked like that in those days. The American actors with a French accent and the French actors trying to speak English are somewhat laughable (intonation sucks basically), but I was charmed by the sincerity of this movie. Absolutely great casting.

This movie should be titled 'Henri' as the emphazis is almost completely on Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec with the setting profoundly being Paris. Near the complete love-life of Lautrec is worked out here. Not that it was very impressing or elaborate (which is the point), but I guess intriguing is the right word here. So far I think this stands apart from Huston's other movies (Asphalt Jungle, Wise Blood, Kremlin Letter) in several respects. Lautrec's words 'evil exists only in the eye of the beholder' portray his opinion of people who couldn't stand the controversy and sexuality in his paintings, but also characterize the different tone Huston had in mind for this movie after his more rational film-noirs (plotmovies). 7/10
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Are we really curious whether Corey will get his license?
12 February 2002
Some of the reigning stars of the moment (and some moments ago) have started their career with the Troma Studios (Billy Bob Thornton, Kevin Costner). Corey Haim however, started with solid material like 'the Lost boys' (1987) to proceed via liquid and humorless teen comedies like this one and finally vaporizes his career taking part in no less than four flopping crapfests in 1996.

'Death Race 2000' (1975) must be the reason why Corey Haim tried to obtain his driver's license from 'Bullet' (1985) to 'License to drive' (1988). Will he finally graduate? I'm not sure if I really care. After all the notable teen comedies (Ferris Bueller, Weird Science, or even Pretty in pink, and other John Hughes stuff, etc etc), Beeman came forward with this degenerate attempt to make a buck. Avoid it. 2/10
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Carmageddon, or how I learned to stop worrying and love those crazy seventies
12 February 2002
'Mad Max' meets the 'Running Man' and they both drive over miss Daisy. 'Death Race 2000' is a disconcerting smithereen job, but also fun. It is unprobable to say the least: 'Frankenstein' as the embodiment of national virtue? Nice thought over a dose of mescaline maybe. With unbelievable music too. Everything seems 2 B possible: ethical correct splatter comedies? You've got it. The acting in this supposed SF (caricatures of the immoral society of the future) is absolutely horrible (apart from Carradine and Griffeth). Add some black humor and non-existing emotions and you have Death Race 2000: the obscure cult flick in which Sly gets slapped around some as driver Machine-Gun Joe Viterbo. And retrospectively one of his best roles, besides 'First Blood' and 'Rocky'.

Luckily there was room in the rating for some graphical splatter and nudity, which is why this has become a cult movie. And fat chance the uncut version will be banned where I live. It is more than questionable if the story is really about the fear of America becoming that chauvinistic and drenched in bloodlust. I get the impression that most of it is just a glorification of violence. But in a more thoroughly humorous way than e.g. Wild Bunch (1969) et al. Imagine the American president has a summer house in Peking, or driver Mathilda the Hun has a nazi-navigator Herman the German...

DR2k was appropriately filmed by the great cinematographer Tak Fujimoto (Badlands, Silence of the lambs, Sixth Sense, and last but not least Ferris Bueller's day off). Good for Paul Bartel that he made Death Race 2000 before George Miller made Mad Max (1978), because it would have been a completely obsolete cartoon otherwise: something like Evil Knievel vs Dick Dastardly. Nevertheless DR2k is quite enjoyable. This movie may be inspired by 'the Cars that ate Paris' (Weir, 1974) and seemed to have inspired 'Carmageddon' (VG) and Mad Max of course. Guys, it's been real. Jesus Chrysler, I'd almost rate this 6/10.
33 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rashomon (1950)
What did we just see?
10 February 2002
'People forget the unpleasant things. They only remember what they want to remember.'

In Rashomon the editing tells ½ of the story. It may feel experimental or unconventional, but Kurosawa perfects the concept second by second, directing and editing. This film didn't need a big budget to come perfectly to the point. It's a simple tale, but not a superficial tale. Different points of view and selective memories ('It's true! I saw it!') don't only make the woods unsafe, but are one of the most universal topics of humanity. 'We humans are weak creatures. That's why we lie, even to ourselves' says it all actually: it's about what people want to hear and when they start being interested at all, apart from wishful thinking. Selfish excuses vs trust in other people.

Rashomon gets masterful when in one instant there is literally a different point of view: the camera takes another position to shoot the same sequence, thereby forcing the audience to reconsider what they just saw. That is the sort of storytelling that the supposed masters of cinema in our time yet have to equal, or try to copy when they fail. Admitted 'Memento' (2000, Nolan) is a truly great one. Still not THAT universal. 'Pulp Fiction' (1994) didn't come close, 'La Commare Secca' (1962) also didn't. 'Ghost dog: the way of the samurai' (1999) touched another border of the concept, or does it?

The use of (non-original) music in my opinion reveals a certain interest for western influence, not only in Rashomon, but also in Kurosawa's forthcoming films, and is probably why his films were so influential on western filmmakers too.

The cinematography is dynamic and changes scene by scene to emphasize exactly what is going on. The shadows of leaves and branches, captured by cinematographer Kazuo Miyagawa, make you really feel 'in the woods', while the actors (Toshirô Mifune, Takashi Shimura) convince the remaining part of the audience (which adds up to 100% breathless viewers). It may be after days that you first realize you saw an important film. After weeks you realize that you must see it again to comprehend (despite it's only 85 min), and ironically that is just one of the crucial points that Kurosawa made. 10/10
238 out of 287 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
'everything is prerecorded'
3 February 2002
Lynch leans heavily on the performances of the actors and they truly pull it off. Naomi Watts initially comes across like a vacuous nurse from 'flying docters' and rapidly shows she is a very talented actress. Laura Harring did a good job, but Watts is clearly more versatile and subtle. Mulholland Drive starts as a completely credible story and develops into a genuine David Lynch work of art: enigmatic, cryptic, steamy, surreal, baffling, kind of slow with (unfortunately) terrible music. Lynch totally forgets about entire parts of the 'plot' and concentrates on the unexpected. Even some strange (horror) sequences from Eraserhead (1977) are recognizable.

Unmistakenly from the director of Blue Velvet, Twin Peaks and Lost Highway: not exactly intuitively directed, but I say intuitive viewing is required like when viewing Lost Highway. Don't try to explain everything that's going on and let the images and surreal editing/developments create the atmosphere of the movie. Some may say it's arthouse, but IMO it's too accessible for that. I'd say it's off beat and haunting from beginning to end. Peter Deming (Lost Highway, Evil Dead 2 !, From Hell) is quickly becoming one of my favourite cinematographers. Get this guy in 'Visions of light 2' plz.

If you thought David Fincher makes mind candy, see Mulholland Dr and think again. Most people will find this more accessible than Twin Peaks though. Go see it in combination with 'Outer Space' (1999) in the Paradiso theater in Amsterdam. There are some really annoying and pointless sequences, but I still rate it 9/10 which includes positive discrimination of Lynch, not because I supposedly don't want to admit I didn't understand the movie ;-) This one really made me curious about the way Lynch directs a movie on set.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
working class and academic thinking under fine cinematography
28 January 2002
The main storyline is concerned with workers, capitalists and academic thinkers (resp. 'down' and 'stars' ?). And it might become much more relevant again soon. What's the use of a college education in times of recession and strikes? Like Jack Palance said in le Mepris (1963, Godard) 'wise men don't humiliate others with their lesser abilities....'. 'On The Waterfront' was way better on this economic subject, but as far as I'm concerned that was merely because of its director and protagonist. Others might emphasize it is American and has more suspense, which is true.

The dialogues sound kind of flat or monotonous, but the story is absolutely entertaining enough and the cinematography by Mutz Greenbaum (Thunder Rock) is really fine. He especially knows his way with contrast and composition apparently. Carol Reed (Odd Man Out, Fallen Idol, Third Man) gently develops the story and the points he (and writer Alec Coppel, who also wrote Vertigo and Obsession) wants to make. The movie as a whole is a quite moralistic and a bit too sincere, but again the directing and the cinematography more than make up. At last but not least, Michael Redgrave (Thunder Rock, Mr. Arkadin, the Innocents) puts forward a great deal of realism, enforcing A. J. Cronin's points. A point is that different social classes should have more respect for each other because they are complements, not substitutes. Another point is that it is probably a personal story (Cronin's ?). 8/10
21 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Come and See (1985)
unremitting graphical terror and accumulating atrocities
17 January 2002
Elem Klimov and Aleksei Rodionov's handheld cinematography, present the viewer with the mental and physical destruction of a boy who changes in front of your eyes beyond recognition.

Cacophoneous, industrial sounds and sometimes cryptic story-elements (for as far as there is a story) contribute to this ruthlessly escalating history lesson about Nazi's who burned down hundreds of villages in 1943 in Russia. The realism makes you wonder how many people were harmed making the film, while the score represents the mindnumbing experiences of Florya, a tour-de-force performance by Aleksei Kravchenko (16 at the time). All along, somehow Klimov knows very well how to prevent the audience from becoming numb.

ILM's specialFX are smoother, but the FX here in 'Come and see' are so realistic, it's almost unreal: reminiscent of the first 30 min of Saving private Ryan, Thin red line (watch the animals), Apocalypse Now and the painstaking 'Band of brothers'. Indeed forget about the rest of 'SPR', Platoon and even Full Metal Jacket. However, I would like to recommend Deer Hunter (Cimino, 1978) and Hotaru no haka (1988). But I never suspected there was something massive like this. 10/10
86 out of 123 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
not completely satisfying, but hey
12 January 2002
'Kubrick - a life in pictures' doesn't make the Kubrick dvd collection more complete and in that way it is commercial exploitation by warner. But that aside I think it is an comprehensive, elaborate document that concentrates more on Kubrick's pictures than on Kubrick the director, although his intellect went into his pictures of course, without letting the rest of his private life interfere too much with his brainchildren. This document however is the legacy of someone else and as elaborate as it may be, it is a contextual interpretation of Kubrick's cynicism narrated by Tom Cruise (good job BTW) and directed by someone who knew Kubrick but never worked with him. That means there are always essential points lost. Knowing that's the case in most docu's, this one didn't disappoint.

I think it was good choice to let all Kubrick films pass the revue and take a look at what Kubrick's thoughts were during each project and how his collaborators and family coped. Interviewing Woody Allen wasn't a good idea: although he's (like Kubrick) a 'very' New Yorker and he's one of the better directors of our time, his remarks on Kubricks cinema were bogus and should have been left out. Instead, composer Ligeti (2001, Eyes Wide Shut) should have gotten more time.

Especially the remarks about the 'Zeiss-lenses' (?) used for Barry Lyndon are clarifying: it shows some of the experimental (but determined) mind of Kubrick that we also saw with Eisenstein and Kurosawa. A little hesitating I think I can say that Soderbergh fits that illustrious list too from that perspective. But that's another story (not just because he's not dead). About Federico Fellini, Luis Buñuel, Mike Nichols, Orson Welles, and Stanley Kubrick I could say that they're my favourite directors. Visually and especially with regard to content. There really is no way of choosing, because they complemented each other's cinema and in their own brilliant ways show their concern with humanity. Some more rational than others. Kubrick's concerns are what this documentary nearly, but not completely satisfyingly, showed. 8/10
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1900 (1976)
epic, metaphoric, eclectic: politically charged drama
10 January 2002
Bertolucci did it again. Less 'red' than Reds (Beatty, 1981), unfortunately Novecento becomes very 'red' and sentimental in the last hour, but I guess that's to emphasize the emotional response to the ending of a war. The simplistic and propagandistic characterization of fascists in general (Donald Sutherland plays the caricaturally satanic embodiment of fascism and opportunism) didn't do justice to the subtlety of the rest of the story, but after all the story revolves around the friendship between aristocrat Alfredo and farmer Olmo. If you look beyond the few flaws, '1900' makes you wonder why only five Bertolucci films have hit the DVD plastic yet. Possibly that's because of the political engagement these tend to propagate in many (subtle) ways. One of the most obvious ways in '1900' is the quite in-your-face waving of the red flags near the end.

Vittorio Storaro (Apocalypse Now, il Conformista, Reds) did it again. Very subtle compositions versus shocking graphic violence and intimacy from time to time: in general it's more coherent and explicit than 'il Conformista'. Although 1900 is less poetic poetic than 'il Conformista', the great cinematographer found many instances to display his cinematic brilliance in the most appropriate way and let the eclectic cast come to justice. To name a few: Robert DeNiro (Taxi Driver '76!, the Godfather 2, Brazil, Raging Bull), Sterling Hayden (the Godfather 1, Dr. Strangelove, Asphalt Jungle, the Killing), Dominique Sanda (il Conformista), Stefania Sandrelli (il Conformista), Alida Valli (the Third Man, the Spider's Stratagem) and the young soldier Teodoro (Allen Midgette) in Bertolucci's first feature 'la Commare Secca' has a short but good appearance in Novecento for some reason. And last but not least Burt Lancaster (il Gattopardo, the Killers, Criss Cross) who continues his part from 'il Gattopardo' in a way.

Ennio Morricone (Days of heaven, Once upon a time in America) did it again. This time not yet as sentimental as Once upon a time in America: his subtle score carries some of the scenes and completes the film in an appropriate way, where the other film turns out to be overdone. Maybe he was glad to work with Leone again. Or something. Anyway, Morricone sure helps making the 5h10 movie watchable consecutively and in one sigh.

The epic story about lower and upper classes and the (metaphoric) fascination with animals was presumably an inspiration for 'Days of heaven' (Malick, 1978). FYI IMO 'epic' does not necessarily mean that it's a good film, but in this case it's a crucial aspect of the story. If Bertolucci had watched the Godfather (1972) and especially Godfather Part 2 (1974) a little closer, then he could have gotten the flaws out if this film (refers to the 310 min version). Sergio 'dollar trilogy' Leone did that better in 'Once upon a time in America' (again unfortunately also infinitely more sentimental). Concluding: il conformista meets the godfather? Not really, but still 9/10
13 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed