Change Your Image
61876
Reviews
Pont de Varsòvia (1990)
Brilliant but Confusing... But maybe that's the point
I saw this film last night and I am still wondering about it. But that's a good thing. The film sort of follows one man around who I believe is a journalist. Emphasis on the "sort of." He constitutes a very thin thread of a plot and sort of provides a very loose unifying theme for the film.
The film begins with a conversation between a writer and his wife and the next 20 minutes could be a very fragmented conventional film. A lot of characters are introduced, a lot of talking is done, a lot of possible exposition occurs, there is some beautiful photography of Barcelona and an incredible scene of an orchestra playing in the streets. And finally, about 30 minutes into the film, when everything introduced so far comes together in one place and we think we are finally about to understand something the credit sequences roll.
After the credits are done we are treated to a surreal montage of scenes which are both confusing, beautiful and moving. I'm not sure yet if these scenes have some deeper meaning or if they are just there for the visual and emotional impact. Again the journalist provides a very loose thread appearing in conversations in between the meat of the movie which are these absurd yet deeply affecting scenes of seemingly random and absurd things.
The film almost seems like a meta-comment on itself. The scenes with dialog are mostly about the choice of a writer between writing for profit and writing for art and what responsibility he bears and what role he plays in society. Many of the interspersed, seemingly unrelated scenes feature music and people watching music being performed. While I have no interpretation of this film yet I can't help but think it is some sort of comment on art.
Regardless this film is incredible visually and emotionally. Definitely not for the fan of Hollywood films, or even independent films, or actually any film with any type of structured narrative. But if you let the film take you and suspend and expectation the reward is very worthwhile.
Evil Dead II (1987)
Evil Dead II - By far the best of the Evil Dead series
My guess on Evil Dead II is that Sam Raimi, once he had established his viability as a director/producer with commercial potential, went back and remade Evil Dead with a bigger budget and better actors. Bruce Campbell has almost 10 years more experience since the original Evil Dead and it shows, as he now gives a great performance as compared to his early semi-amateur performance in the original film.
The plot of this film is nearly identical to its prequel - but otherwise the film is better in every respect. Better acting, better special effects, better direction, scarier, and above all funnier. While Evil Dead I gives the impression of being funny because it is so badly done - in Evil Dead II the humor is quite obviously intentional, and makes fun not only of itself, but of the viewers, especially those who take it seriously. As with all of Raimi's later films (after Evil Dead) - this film is campy, yet aware of that fact; stupid (and I use this in the most positive sense of the word), yet smart enough to realize that it is stupid - and it uses that self-awareness to great effect.
In my opinion, what makes this movie great is that it is a by-the-books horror film that is aware of what it is, and uses that knowledge to make fun of itself in a way that is not obvious, and is actually quite subtle. Unlike Evil Dead I, which is obviously not meant to be funny; and Evil Dead III, which is obviously meant to be funny; this film walks the thin line in the between the two - funny if you take it to be funny, and a B-horror movie if you take it to be no more than that. That is the genius of Sam Raimi - unlike the 70's wave of directors (Scorsese, Altman, Kubrick, Penn, etc.), who made films with messages, Raimi makes films that can be interpreted differently by every viewer. I just wish he would leave the Producing behind and make some more movies, because no one else can make an over-the-top movie like he can. And Evil Dead II is the best example of his unique approach to film-making.
Mean Streets (1973)
Mean Streets - A Scorsese Masterpiece
I have written a 20 page paper on this film, so I don't know if I can sum it up in this short space. This film is Scorsese's first major film, and some might attribute the sloppy camerawork to that, but the camera-work is deliberate, and gives the film a feeling of reality, an almost documentary quality, which is one of Scorsese's trademarks. The plot is almost non-existent, the film is a collection of random events, which together, show the randomness and violence of life in Little Italy. Many of Charlie's voice-overs are done by an uncredited Scorsese, giving the film an autobiographical quality. While very different than many of his later films, this still stands out as one of his best.