majove Reviews

Death Ship (1980)

Quality Film Making?...NO - Fun Kitsch?.....YES!

[22 June 2002]

Now, I feel I am a man of decent taste, and I don't normally go for films like these, but I have seen it, and don't think Death Ship was too bad for what it is.

Its going back a few years since I've seen it, probably about 8 or 9 now, but it has surprisingly stuck in my head for such a "terrible" movie; which I think is some credit to it.

But really, it was a crappy film - fairly bad acting (despite a decent cast), sloppy directing, a basically non existant plot and an obviously low budget. But for a kitschy kind of tastless horror film, these are the basic ingredients for a great time for the trashy horror film buff.

Although the plot was desperately lacking, the premise of an evil Nazi death ship roving the seas looking for innocent holiday makers to kill in nasty ways, is to me, really terrifying, and a great idea for a horror flick. The director, if nothing else, created a really evil and heavy atmosphere (you could almost smell the decay inside the ship)and in addition to this, or may be due to this, some of the death sences are really chilling and effective and memorable.

Now maybe this is because I was only an early teen when I saw this, or maybe its because I saw it around 1 a.m; but I saw the re release of the Exorcist recently (on the big screen)and I actually remebered being more scared watching Death Ship. The Exorcist was a great film, but it was simply too glossy, too polished, too perfect to be an effective horror film. The dark, low budget,tacky and gloomy feel of the Death Ship conveyed the message of 'unsavoury' alot further, and for me was a more effective and more uncannily wierd horror film.

Critically speaking, its total rubbish lacking a plot, good directing, acting and a budget. As a schlocky horror film that does its tacky little job well, its a decent film to pass a boring evening with. If, unlike me viewers, your a fan of this kind of genre, you'll probably like it even more.

The French Connection (1971)

Atmospheric, Gritty....But Overrated

[18 May 2001]

This film is definitely a film of its day, which isnt a bad thing because it is set in 1971 and it has the feel of 1971, and thats what gives it atmosphere. But it isnt a good thing either. Things that try to be outrageously modern for thier times look really chic in their day, but tend to get around to looking really clumsy and dated as time goes by; take vomit green coloured corduroy sports jackets for example. Now this film was good, I did enjoy it after I forced myself to watch it a second time, but it does drag. William Friedkin was being very experimental and creative with both the screenplay and the camera angles, and this I give him credit for, because I liked his approach to most of the film. However, some scenes simply looked very blase and shallow and didn't allow for the conversation and plot development to sink in; like the scene in the shop where Roy Schieder wants the bad guys girl to model for him for money. That felt very distant and almost unimportant. I found a few scenes to be like this. The scenes where Hackman and Schieder were tailing that dealers were a good idea, but ultimately anaesthetising and mundane. The copy I have at home, bought on 20th Century Fox home video which I asume is a legitimate copy, has really bad 70s colour where the oranges and browns are too burning and the whole thing looks terrible and grainy.But, it was a good movie, just not really as successful as some swear it is. I don't really think it deserved the oscars.Of course, I agree that the subway scene was brilliant and the car chase scene was great too; but then, you have the scene where the young spiffy drug manufacturer was measuring the strength of the drug, counting up the scale as the potency went, stylishly calling out suave quips to describe the substances' strength, culminating in "absolute dynamite!". This scene just felt like an intended cult phenomenon that failed, ala a "you talkin to me?" kind of scene with little zing or impact. I'd like to add that Bullit had a better, more taught, more exciting plot, better actors, sorry but a better director, and yes, a much better, more satisfying car chase complete with the customary shotgun in a Steve McQueen movie. Bullit had a less far-out look and feel about it while still remaining stylish and timelessly appealing, plus you have to hand it to the film for starting the quickly overused (as shown in TFC) determined, but messy, overworked gritty cop with the down to earth side-kick to keep him in check cliche in cop films. I think The French Connection owes a few nods to Bullit, stopping short of thinking or saying that it is just a 1970s version of Bullit. All in all though, an enjoyable film with good actors and a capable director and some really good ideas and innovations which, sadly didn't totally quite pull it off.

Home and Away (1988– )

Was a Decent Soap..........

[31 January 2001]

Comments seem to be varied on this one, but I used to watch this show when I was about 10 or 11 years old. Maybe its because I was young and naive, but I watched one episode, for one storyline about an attractive girl dying of cancer, and I was hooked for about 7 and a half years.

It was quite a good soap, and it held itself up throughout the early to late 90s with good stories, likeable characters and great cliffhangers. Now this is saying alot, because I'm 19, male, very hard to please and mostly hate soapies, but this one was good. Now the clencher. It now has lost anything it ever had to appeal to me, due to, it seems, an unhealthy, burning desire by the creators (probably caused by heartburn, brought on by the impossibility to digest this programme)to appeal to pre-18 year olds and teens. Gone, apart from a few, are the adult actors who could actually act; replaced by snotty-faced little twerps always scowling about something, probably their absense drom the cover of some teen magazine (give it time). It now has the affect of teen angst overdose, so overdone, it feels like I shouldn't be watching it. Back 5 or 6 years ago, it had a variety of actors, both young and old, so it wouldn't get bogged down in one type of storyline, so it had a wider appeal. These days its really just dealing with kids problems, and often (on the odd occasion I watch it to see how far down its slipped) the makers try to put alot of dramatic accent on something very minor concerning 16 year olds, and it just comes across as plain stupid. Also, they try to handle confronting teen issues as well, and the timeslot poses some serious script barriers, with lines like "you moron!!", "RACK OFF!!" substituting for more apt words which can't be used in prime time, so the result is ameteurish and clumsy. And the directing is getting more art-house which just looks pretentious for a soap. Home and Away has simply overstepped its bounds and run out of ideas, it is simply not interesting anymore, nor intelligent, and the fact that it is still rating is a black spot on Australian society, and I ain't being cynical.

Bewitched (1964–1972)

How Inane.....But I Just love it!

[31 January 2001]

Jeannie and Bewitched have to be two of the most formulaic and predictable shows ever aired on TV. Every episode of Bewitched had ,in different orders and combinations, the same formula of Endora zaps something to muck up Darrin, and it pays off in Darrin's favour; witchcraft of some sort interferes with Darrin's work and he gets fired, then re-hired, when the witchcraft again pays off, or is foiled. While in the meantime, Gladys Kravitz, Mrs Stavens, or some unsuspecting extra is baffled by it all, and theres always some unbelievable explanation at the end of it all which the long suffering cast members swallow. With that in mind, its bizarre that it still rates in re - runs, and its bizarre that I've taped about 7 blank tapes worth of the show from TV that I watch again and again. I can't get enough of it. So. obviously the show has a lot of appeal which allows viewers to look beyond, or perhaps enjoy the formula. I think the appeal lies in alot of things. First, the magic is a huge and fascinating drawcard. Wouldn't we all love to be able to make things appear and disappear with a twitched, and wouldn't we all love Barbara Eden as our Genie who's madly in love with us? We all would (males, anyway RE Barbara Eden), and thats what draws us to the shows. Its also brilliant and magical itself to see the special effects being done nearly forty years ago without computers or complex editing machines. That really put a smile on my face. The characters were all so far - out an exotic, all kind of like British aristocrats who had lost all air of conservatism, and lived carefree lives zapping from the Riviera to lunch in Shanghai. They were so funny, fantastic and appealing. I loved the conflict too; Endora and Darrin, Darrin and Larry; Darrin and Serena etc. And the actors of course were all brilliant, and having a tremendous time playing their roles, and fun roles they were. The chemistry on set between York and Montgomery was so believable and real, the flamboyance and gestures of Endora and Dr Bombay was loads of fun, and the comic timing of York was always perfect. Yes, Betwitched and Jeannie have to be my two favourite TV shows of all time, because they're just unpretentious, lightweight and appealing entertainment, and thats why they've lasted so long, because who would take a show about witches seriously anyway. And thats its charm.

Rear Window (1954)

Great, but over-rated

[31 January 2001]

Im a huge Hitchcock fan, the guy's a visual genius; I mean for a director who can make films that still keep you biting your nails fifty years later cant be put down. But this film didn't REALLY do it for me, especially after Psycho (hope its spelt rite)and The Man Who Knew Too Much and Rope. Don't get me wrong, its still a four star film, but there was something missing, maybe I was expecting too much; but then I was expecting heaps from Psycho, and I was disappointed the first time, but the second time I was blown away completely - not so with Rear Window. I felt that Grace Kelly's role was just there for pathos when she got caught by Burr (and love interest)- I mean really, Thelma Ritter could have provided for the same situation but without sex appeal - ah theres the catch! But so it was for Eva Marie Saint in North by Northwest you say? Not so, yes love interest and sex appeal had a part in her role, but she was also part of a vital plot swing. I think (personally) that that was a woefully unnecessary bit of casting and quite out of character with the master. My apologies to all Grace Kelly fans out there. That couldn't just be the reason why it didn't do it for me, in fact I don't know why it didn't do it for me. I think I WAS expecting too much. To me it seemed a bit stop-start, it seemed to go somewhere and get exciting, then drop off suddenly (especially when Kelly pranched onto the set with customary lack of personality), even the ending - just where it got you on the edge of your seat, it ended and I ejected the video feeling let down and disappointed, unlike other Hitchcock summersault endings where I'm simply begging for more. Maybe I'm just hard to please. But all said, it was a good film, a great film, just compared to his other work, not as fulfilling. I loved the set - it was the biggest ever made until the Ten Commandments, Alfie didn't like the lighting he got on location. It was well directed, scripted and acted and I liked the part where the film's music soundtrack was all from the muso's piano in his flat. He actually (as I learned from this site)became the voice for the Chipmunks!

Yeah, a good film, but besides in theory and creativity, not Hitchcock's best - although one of the directors personal favourites. Sorry Alfie.