gliptitude Reviews

After the Wizard (2011)

Bizarre and Profound Oz Interpretation

[7/10 · 25 February 2019]

I am a 40 year old man and I watched this movie on one of the streaming services at my mom's apartment last year. I watched very intently while she tuned in and out while doing other things. While I have a hard time calling this movie good, I did thoroughly enjoy it.

There are many awkward and amateurish aspects to the production but these are also part of what make the movie so distinctive and intriguing and what make this what I consider to be a pretty special installment in the Oz universe.

The train scene where Tin Man and Scarecrow have a protracted conversation with another passenger is probably the most successful moment in the movie, in conventional terms. But the movie is full if dissonant performances that create a unique and porous reality which is dynamic and appropriate to the subject matter. .. The location shooting is a big part of this and the bumbling visitors from Oz make for excellent surrogates for anyone who is curious and wandering in a sometimes sad and confusing land.

I was enjoying this movie when it seemed to end prematurely and I would have liked to have seen more happen.

I give After the Wizard 7 stars because it warrants a cinephile viewing. The flaws in this movie are part of what make this movie as dynamic as it is - very dynamic. If you love cinema and you like to wonder about and question what it is while you are witnessing it, you may find this movie a suprising and rewarding viewing like I did.

The Dark Planet (1989 Video)

Not a lame comic book movie

[9/10 · 18 August 2013]

I have stumbled on this video and been dazzled. I was very surprised to learn that the writer director was Heavy Metal illustrator Richard Corben. ... This is certainly not the same sort of entertainment as the comics.

The video has a distinct sensibility that has more in common with the films of Kenneth Anger, Nick Zedd, the Kuchar Brothers, etc. ... Maybe a Psychotronic creation myth.

Dark Planet is not for a general audience, and probably not especially of interest to Heavy Metal fans. More appealing to Cinephiles. The "special effects" may be distractingly amateurish for some viewers, but they are a delight if you are a fan of experimental narrative films. The movie succeeds in creating a mood and an environment, and the scale of the whole thing is a big part of that.

There is some great landscape cinematography, very flavorful and iconic, very effective and ambiguous closeups, a unique pace and timing and some beautiful lighting scenarios.

Honestly I have only watched the first 30 minutes so far. But that was enough for me to start digging and looking into it. I'm into it and looking forward to spending more time with it, preferably on a television rather than this computer.

Paris, Texas (1984)

Warning! Achtung! Cuidado!

[4/10 · 14 December 2011]

I regret watching this movie. The characters and performances are shallow and irritating. The cinematography is nice, but the direction is bland, substance-less and devoid of style. I understand that a lot of people who feel inclined to review Paris, Texas are so inclined because they really like the movie. ... but having just watched it, partially based on seeing so many gushing reviews here, I really feel that a contrary review is in order.

My friend and I both just watched it and both regret it. Here are some of our mutual favorites, for reference, so you know who we are:

In A Lonely Place, Chinatown, Brazil, Taxi Driver, Maltese Falcon, Blue Velvet, Stroszek, Persona...

We both agree that Paris, Texas is THE most regrettable viewing experience we have shared.

For additional reference of what this ranking means to us I will list other things we've watched besides our favorites, all of which we regret less (if at all) than Paris, Texas:

The Quatermass Trilogy, Dune, High Sierra, Aquaboy cartoons, Melancholia, Plan 9 from Outer Space, the Sinister Urge, Gates of Heaven...

I would say that if you happen to be one of the folks who will end up liking this movie, then you would have a good feeling after watching the first bit of it. But if you start watching it and feel irritable after only 15 minutes, you should stop watching it because that's the movie. That is what I wish I had heard from a trusted source several hours ago.

Less Than Zero (1987)

It is a movie, not a book. A stylish movie.

[9/10 · 22 September 2008]

I have not read the book so I cannot share the rage or disappointment of some of the commentators here. But I am aware of some discrepancies between the two, and I don't see how the movie could do a better job. For example, it is just not possible for a commercial film to depict a major character acting in a kiddie porn to work off drug debts, as happens in the book.

The movie stands on its own and it is very solid. It has a form and style that is rare among commercial films and you really don't have to have a serious interest in the subject to enjoy this film, reminiscent of New Wave cinema. James Spader's character is diabolical, and entertaining. The film has a semi-voyeuristic feel to it, and none of the performances distract from this.

It is absurd and pedestrian to expect movies to imitate books. A movie is a movie and a book is a book. The dramatic form has completely different limitations and strengths than does prose. If you want to read a book, go to a different website, or read the book. This is a good movie.

What Is It? (2005)

watch the trailer

[4/10 · 29 August 2008]

I firstly and completely and confidently disagree with the user who calls this a "spoof". Crispin Glover is very serious about his film. He personally introduced the film at the screening I saw in Chicago. He had worked on the film for years and it is the first in an intended trilogy. "What is it?" is Crispin Glover's attempt at an art film in the vein of those he idolizes by Herzog, Lynch etc.

I had heard rumor of this film years ago "epic porno movie with all down-syndrome cast directed by crispin glover". When it finally came out i watched the trailer on-line and read the synopsis and i was foaming at the mouth with anticipation. ...I went to chicago to see it and it was a major disappointment. If he took out the goofy sh*t, such as the pot-smoking grandma, and the dancing dolls, he would be left with something much better, but only about 10 minutes long.

In other words just watch the trailer, be entertained, and leave it at that. There are some striking images and fantastic juxtapositions and phrases, but its lack of focus amounts to disappointment.

Incredible Suckers (1995)

fascinating

[10/10 · 24 March 2008]

i highly recommend this documentary. I am presently trying to replace my lost VHS copy with a DVD. I have watched it several times and enjoyed each one. This is a program that can be watched and rewatched. It's also a soothing one to fall asleep to.

The filmmaker/biologist has made several films on the subject of cephalopods. This one is the most revisited. The subject is indeed incredible, but INCREDIBLE SUCKERS is also a well made film - much more interesting film style than anything ken burns has made. This colorful film includes a sequence of still photographs that document the shipwreck in which the film crew lost a large amount of precious film footage.

Cephalopods - octopus, squid, nautilus and cuttle-fish - are extremely novel creatures. This documentary parallels the novelty of those creatures, and presents cephalopods as well as any program I have seen. I especially enjoyed seeing a demonstration in which cuttle fish seemingly flash runic signs with their tentacles in response to a life size television feed of other cuttle fish making their mysterious signs next to the aquarium.

You really don't even have to like wildlife programs to enjoy INCREDIBLE SUCKERS. The subject is just so spectacular, and the film so entertaining, that any viewer of any age should see it. It will only take an hour of your time. It will be a highly saturated and efficient one hour.

Mouchette (1967)

my least favorite bresson film so far

[6/10 · 18 March 2008]

mouchette may have been ruined for me by the jean luc godard "cut" trailer that i watched on the DVD before watching the film. this trailer demonstrates and exaggerates the pornographic aspects of the film. the film is much less sensational than the trailer suggests, but there is that aspect of it. for example, it was not necessary to film schoolgirls swinging upside down on a playground, flashing their panties. it's not outrageous when you see it in context, in the film - rather it is as un-pornographic as that subject could be. but after seeing the godard trailer it is hard not to see the whole film through his eyes, and hear as if from a fellow viewer, perverted snickering during each such scene.

i disagree with the IMDb commentator who claims the "one happy scene" of the movie to be boring and lifeless. the bumper car scene is brilliant. the entire time (it is a drawn out scene) i was thinking, "why have i never seen a bumper car scene?" and "what an interesting social dynamic bumper cars are." aside from entertaining, it alone also shows that mouchette is a regular girl, and not always a victim.

i prefer A MAN ESCAPED and PICKPOCKET. these are the only 3 bresson films i've seen.

Return to Oz (1985)

box office failure, cult classic

[9/10 · 6 September 2006]

I like world cinema, art films and classics and Return to Oz is one of my favorite movies to watch. Return to Oz is a little like the movie DUNE in that is kind of a big budget flop with an immortal afterlife (and both are 80's fantasy movies). I will eventually admit that the MGM Wizard of Oz is "better", for a number of reasons, but I would choose to watch Return to Oz rather than the former, any day of the week. It has a similar feel to some of the other fantasy pics from that general time period (Labyrinth, Never Ending Story etc.), but it holds up much better than the others and does not seem dated or cheesy.

After watching it recently I was looking into the history and back-story of the production and the theatrical release. Wikipedia says that it was released shortly after Micheal Eisner became Disney's CEO and that he "dumped" it to make himself look good and the old guard who made it look bad. Many people think the many bad reviews it received were planted as part of this strategy.

That being said, the movie still lacks the cohesive story of the MGM Wizard of Oz, possibly because the script combines two of Baum's books. It is a little awkward having two enemies (princess Mombi and the Nome king). It kind of feels like something is missing from the story. Oh yeah, and it is a really morbid movie. However, none of these things ruin it, and maybe they indirectly make it better. Its a weird movie with a unique atmosphere.

My friend and I spent the whole movie trying to figure out how they made Tik Tok walk. Apparently he was a puppet because the IMDb lists a "goof" in the movie where you can see a puppeteer controlling him. We had not noticed that and the best guess we came up with was that someone was curled up inside, using their arms to walk, because the legs are too far apart for a human's legs to be inside.

I guess I wrote this for my own amusement because there are already 144 reviews. Oh well. I really like this movie. If you are home sick on a rainy day this is the perfect movie for you. I wish it was longer so I could spend more time watching it.