sehguhc19 Reviews

Hedwig and the Angry Inch (2001)

Hedwig's Shining, Like the Brightest Star

[1 December 2002]

When one thinks of the concept of `rock musical,' one would usually think of brainless dance extravaganzas with no plot to be had. Well, ladies and gentlemen, whether you like it or not. Hedwig! The tremendously brilliant Hedwig and the Angry Inch counters the one's stereotype of the rock musical; it has intelligence, ingenuity and a deeper meaning. Unlike its predecessor Rocky Horror Picture Show, it is filmed through an artist's view and has the sexual energy and the integrity to match that of an art film.

Hedwig and the Angry Inch began as an Off-Broadway musical in 1997, where it achieved cult status and critical acclaim. It is the story of Hansel (Ben Mayer-Goodman/John Cameron Mitchell), a homosexual young man who grew up in communist East Berlin, and dreamed of leaving his war-ridden homeland to find his soul mate. He thinks that he finds his soul mate in the person of U.S. Sergeant Luther Robinson (Maurice Dean Wint), a man who lusts for Hansel, but does not accept him for who he is. He proposes marriage to Hansel, with the promise that he will take him from East Berlin to America. However, Hansel's freedom comes with a price; he must undergo a sex change operation. Hansel's mother (Roberta Watson) gives Hansel her passport, and her name: Hedwig.

However, things do not go as planned. Hedwig's operation got botched, rendering her with an `angry inch,' and Luther instantly abandons her in a loathsome trailer in Kansas, where she keeps herself afloat with her dreams of becoming a glam rock star. To finance herself, she turns tricks at a nearby military base and becomes a babysitter for the children of commander of the local army fort. As a result, she falls in love with the commander's son, Tommy (Michael Pitt). Hedwig allows Tommy to collaborate on the brilliant songs that she has written and endows him with the rock name of `Gnosis,' the Greek word for `knowledge.' However, when Tommy learns of her sex, he too abandons her, steals Hedwig's songs, and becomes a rock and roll icon.

The film opens with Hedwig and her band, the aptly titled `Angry Inch,' performing in the straight-laced chain restaurant Bilgewater's, to horrified customers. Hedwig and the Angry Inch, along with their manager, Phyllis (Andrea Martin), have been following Tommy's world tour. In fact, Bilgewater's is adjacent to the humungous stadium where Tommy is performing. During her `world tour,' Hedwig recounts her heartbreaking story through a series of flashbacks, implemented through fades of white and different cinematography (absences of color, quality of film, etc).

The driving force behind every aspect in this film is John Cameron Mitchell, who starred, directed, and wrote the screenplay for Hedwig and the Angry Inch. This happening was extremely important, because Mitchell derived the entire concept of the Hedwig and brilliantly adapted it for the Off-Broadway stage. The stage version of Hedwig and the Angry Inch involved Hedwig recounting her past experiences through a narrative, so for the film version, Mitchell simply implemented the flashbacks in live action sequences. Even though his performance as Hedwig is deliciously tawdry sexual, through his brilliant acting talent, one is able to have a peek at Hedwig's loves and inner desperation for acceptance. Mitchell derived the basic concept of Hedwig and the Angry Inch from his own experiences growing up as the homosexual son of an army general. His father served in Berlin, and he had firsthand knowledge of the war situation.

Unlike most other rock musicals, the brilliant songs that Hedwig periodically performed were done so during Hedwig's stage performances, not at random points in the film. This aspect added to the believability of the film, discouraging the absurdity of its predecessors. Stephen Trask, who also appeared in the film, brilliantly wrote the Hedwig's songs. The songs did not have a tinge of campy like Broadway-style songs; they reflected the glam rock principles like the songs of David Bowie and Lou Reed from which they were based. Trask's past is in rock and roll, hence the obvious edge of the songs in Hedwig and the Angry Inch. Mitchell's beautiful voice adds a triumphant punch to all of the songs (he starred in numerous musicals prior to Hedwig.) and lets the emotions of the beautiful lyrics and his brilliant performance shine through.

Even though Hedwig and the Angry Inch is a very low-budgeted independent film, Mitchell turned to his inventive imagination in order to create a richly beautiful and artistic piece. For example, he used imaginative camera angles to produce special effects. During `Angry Inch' performance scene, he executed a low angle medium shot underneath him to make it appear as though he was flying over a room of revolting people. Then, he executed a high angle long shot to depict the people from his perspective. Also, he used cinematography to change the mood of the film from the beginning to the end. For example, in the beginning of the film, Hedwig wore lush, elaborate wigs and brightly colored costumes and lighting was in warm, pinkish hues to depict Hedwig's more positive outlook. In contrast, toward the end of the film, Hedwig wore stark wigs and costumes and the film was filmed in higher contrast to depict Hedwig's tragic breakdown.

Hedwig and the Angry Inch recounts Hedwig's journey to find her soul mate: her journey of becoming `whole.' Mitchell derived this concept from `Plato's Symposium,' in which there were three sexes of people (man-woman, woman-woman, and man-man), with four arms and four legs, that were split in half by Zeus and wandered the earth, searching for their other half. Hedwig views herself as being a half of a whole, and thus does not accept herself for who she really is. Her first two attempts at love proved to be futile, and her current relationship with band mate, Yitzhak (Miriam Shor), is shallow and empty. In the face of adversity, Hedwig finds herself tragically alone. In order to find her destiny, she must look to herself for the answer.

The Sweet Hereafter (1997)

An artistic masterpiece

[26 October 2001]

I honestly do not say this very often, but I truly loved this film. It was sheer perfection. As of yet, I have seen this film six times, and every time, I appreciate it even more.

If Atom Egoyan had not directed this piece, it would not have be brilliant. I was entralled by the intellectually manipulated parallelism and wonderful plot. Quite possibly the greatest aspect of this film was the parallelism between the children's fable of The Pied Piper of Hamelin with the plot. It allowed the viewer to more completely understand the character of Nicole, wonderfully played by Sarah Polley, who was the one of the only survivors of the bus accident. The fable paralleled her and the town in three ways: the control that her father had over her in order to pleasure himself, the fact that she was newly lame and the "bandwagon" control that lawyer Mitchell Stephens (Ian Holm) had over the town. Another great aspect of this film was the simultaneous time changes. The film occured during three five periods: before the accident, during the accident, after the accident, years later with Stephens on a plane, and when Stephens was a young man. The different periods of time allowed the viewer to discover the reasons why other important parts of the film occured, and allowed the viewer to experience the character's grievences along with them. This was achieved subtly by zooming in on news dates or calendars, not cheesy date captions across the screen.

Another great paralell was with Stephens' experience with his drug addicted daughter and why he wanted to bring some "salvation" to the town. I suppose that he wanted to help ease the town's grievences, because in a way, his daughter was dead to him too, and he knew what was going on inside of their heads.

The music also influenced the film greatly. It made your feel the heartbreak of the town, especially Nicole, whose dreams of being a singer were ruined by the accident. Sarah Polley added her own haunting vocals to the songs on the soundtrack, as well as a heart breaking cover of The Tragically Hip's "Courage".

The Curse of the Jade Scorpion (2001)

Woody finally runs out of steam.

[28 August 2001]

I am a huge Woody Allen fan... I adored most of his films and I have seen "Annie Hall" countless times. Because of this, I was terribly disappointed by his latest venture "Curse of the Jade Scorpion". Not only was this bad for a Woody Allen movie, this was bad for any movie.

Uncharacteristic of Allen's usually witty film dialogue, this film had an unusually dull script. Basically, it consisted of lines that seemed as though they tried to hard to be funny. By the end of the film, I grew horribly bored of Allen and Helen Hunt constantly bantering back and forth with unfunny lines such as, "You're a near-sighted cockroach" among others. What happened to the simple "Thank Jew"? Honestly, I laughed a mere three times during the film: his usual opening credits against a jazz backdrop, Allen taking a mug shot and when I dropped popcorn down my shirt.

Most of the performances were below average as well. Allen seemed to be acting as though he was doing a parody of his usual persona: over-exaggerated stuttering and his thinking that he is actually a babe-magnet (that will take care of the next paragraph). Hunt was especially dull... that's basically all I could say about her. However, I was actually surprised with Charlize Theron's performance; her's was the best in the movie.

Lastly, I hate to say this after being on of his devotees for a few years now, but Woody Allen seems to think that he can still pass as a leading man... he barely could when he was thirty years younger, but it was funny then. He kissed Theron, I believe, twice in the film... is he aware that he is about forty years older than she (and costar Elizabeth Berkeley) are? Hunt is almost thirty years younger than him. If you think about it, even Diane Keaton, his earliest leading lady, was ten years too young. Not only did the women in this movie fall in love with him, they *threw* themselves at him. Allen seems to have the biggest ego in Hollywood... he let Soon Yi go to his head.

Don't bother seeing this movie if you don't want to be bored out of your mind. Preserve Allen's dignity and rent one of his classics such as "Annie Hall" or "Hannah and Her Sisters". Try to remember him the way he was: a comedy genius. This film is obviously not a display of a good film maker... it is the display of a tired film maker.

Bad Bosses Go to Hell (1997)

Interesting short with a great twist.

[7/10 · 27 June 2001]

Usually the case in film shorts, this had a surprise ending. I really enjoyed the satire on our shallow society and the utter lack of appreciation for other people. The most shallow boss of all had to be Amy Sedaris' character, considering that she answered questions with her eightball and was more interested in the interviewee's jacket than her credentials.

Instead of getting frustrated by her five rejections, the interviewee didn't leave the interview calmly... she took action. This film was probably the product the director's knowledge of what everyone wants to do when incredibly frustrated. This was an inventive short.

Film-Fest DVD: Issue 4 - Hawaii (2000 Video)

An interesting look at various stars and films.

[11 April 2001]

The component I enjoyed most about this DVD was the interviews; the Dave Foley interview being the reason why I bought this in the first place. Unlike other more main stream celebrity interviews I've seen (or read, for that matter), these were more uninhibited, and the celebrities weren't constantly plugging their latest projects. For example, Dave Foley just sat in his chair calmly as a duck wandered by, when he later greeted it.

Another great component was the film shorts. I especially enjoyed the short Jorge, in which a shy travel agent falls in love with his Spanish co-worker, and in the process of trying to learn her native language, becomes obsessed with Spanish soap operas. The cinematography was artisically done, and the acting was better than average.

Basically, if you're not a fan of anyone who was interviewed on this DVD, you've probably never even heard of it. I bought it solely for the Foley interview, yet I enjoyed the shorts immensely, but found the other celebrity interviews a bit boring. Bottom line: this is worth buying if you're a fan of anyone who was being interviewed or happen to love film shorts. I would imagine that if you watched it straight through, you would get quite bored.

Shower (1999)

A sweet tale of the undying love between family members.

[7 April 2001]

I went to Blockbuster and was browsing the new releases. A video cover featuring three Chinese men wearing towels caught my eye, and I knew that this was a film that I would enjoy.

This film was Xizao (US title: Shower), the story of an aging man who owned an old-fashioned bath house, who was simultaneously raising his mentally retarded son, Erming (infectiously delightful Wu Jiang). Everything was fine, until his estranged son showed up. He disregarded everything his father believed in: he was a serious young man who lead a modern life, and considered bath houses to be passe. When Erming gets lost in town one day, he realizes how much his father and even himself, love him and rediscovers the importance of family.

He also realizes that the bath house is not solely for relaxation: it is the refuge for several lonely men. One is a portly man who constantly belts out Oh Sole Mio every time he enters the shower (who's voice constantly delights Erming). However, he is unable to sing them in public. Erming's constant approval eventually allows him to do so. Another prime example is a man who is unsatisfied with his marriage. He is told that there is an additive to one of the baths that will cure his impotency... instead, he finds his wife.

Soon after, their father takes a turn for the worse, and suddenly dies. His son has to care for Erming and eventually finds the importance of the bath house and assumes responsibility. This is the only place where Erming feels at home. Although he faces a change of heart, the entire town will eventually be torn down.

I thought this film was a beautiful portrayal of the magnitude of the love that a family feels for each other. Although Mandarin Chinese, this film's message and issues (caring for a retarded brother, etc.) are universal. The performances were all of the highest quality, especially Wu Jiang's Erming. He had an infectous smile and was a pitiful character, yet symbolic of the world's innocence. I loved this film and recommend it to any one who loves fine cinema.

The Godfather Part III (1990)

A great film with some minor, yet pivotal flaws.

[7 April 2001]

`Just when I thought that I was out they pull me back in,' exclaims an exasperated Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) after learning that his family was lured back into the tangled web of the mafia. It was now 1979 and the Corleone family had been legitimate for several years… until they were forced to regain their status as an active mafia family, due to the fear of Michael being assassinated. Director Francis Ford Coppola's saga of the Corleone crime family is brought to a close in this film, The Godfather Part III. In this final installment, Coppola explores an aging Michael, who comes to terms with the wrong he has incurred upon his loved ones and even himself. It also profiles how Michael steps down as the Godfather and hands his reign to Sonny's illegitimate son, Vincent (Andy Garcia). The film also contrasts with the others in terms of Michael and his wife, Kay (Diane Keaton) renewing their relationship and Michael giving up his role as Godfather .

In The Godfather Part II, the once strong bond between Michael and Kay was shattered. Michael had alienated her from his personal life and Kay had rebelled against everything that he had stood for. He took their children away and completely (both emotionally and literally) shut her out of his life. In …Part III, they slowly regained some of their bond after they had been divorced (and Kay remarried) for several years. For example, when their son Anthony decided that he wants nothing to do with `the family' and that he wants to quit law school and become an opera singer, Kay goes to Michael to discuss that she wants to let him do this. Michael initially disagrees, but then gives his support because he sees how promising his career is (he was invited to sing at a prestigious Sicilian opera house), that he is very passionate about singing and that his not wanting to be in the family echoed what Michael's original plan was. Kay thanked him profusely for this, and strengthened their bond. Also, after learning that his family was once again involved in the mob, Michael had a diabetic stroke and was ultimately hospitalized. When Kay visited him, she remarked that that was the only time when he appeared helpless to her, and less of a threat as he was in the other parts of the saga. They identified more with each other at this time, and it made Kay realize that he wasn't as bad as she had originally thought. Lastly, their bond was strengthened when they united in Sicily to see their son perform. As Kay got into a cab, Michael, disguised as a cab driver, turned around with a friendly `Bonjourno' and gave Kay an insider's tour of his homeland, Sicily. He did this without his usual entourage of bodyguards, and at a time when his life was on the line, this was a great risk made merely to pleasure Kay. Later in his room, they revealed to each other that they always loved each other and Michael revealed that the worst mistake he made in life was letting her go. He came to terms with his existence and tried to mend what was still salvageable in their relationship.

The Godfather told the story of Michael's ascension into the role of Godfather after his father Vito died. Directly parallel was the story told in the third installment, when Michael gave up his role as Godfather. He was growing older and was a diabetic, and was also disgusted with the life that he had led for a great deal of years. He saw Vincent as a vital and loyal member of his family who was able to run the family. The story told in part three, in my opinion, was a too obvious vehicle of making Michael's position parallel to Vito's and did not have the emotional impact equal to that in part one. Vincent was a one-dimensional character, a combination of the best aspects of Michael and his brother Sonny, who, I think, did not prove himself worthy of being Michael's successor. However, Michael appreciated Vincent's undying loyalty to him and that he had the capacity to care for his family. Vincent's future position was way too obvious from the minute he walked onto the screen because he had no other purpose at Michael's party.

So was The Godfather Part III a mediocre end the perfect saga? I happen to think so. The basic plot line of Michael getting pulled back into the harsh world of the mafia was an intriguing one, but the details were hazy and the supporting characters were vague and one-dimensional. I consider myself to be an observant film viewer, but I found myself at times getting lost to why some of the details were taking place. The film lost a lot of integrity via the actors cast in pivotal roles. The worst actor in the film (possibly ever) was Sofia Coppola, who played Michael's daughter Mary Corelone. She had a very important role and basically deadpanned all of her lines. In her death scene, she simply flat-lined, `Daddy?' and collapsed. I felt bad for Michael, but couldn't help laughing at her horrifically bad performance. Another example of a bad actor in a pivotal role is George Hamilton, who played Michael's new lawyer, B.J. Harrison. He tried to replace Robert Duval's excellent performance as Tom Hagan, but failed miserably. Instead of being the rock that Michael could depend on, he ultimately became `the boring guy'. My least favorite part of the film was Mary's affair with her cousin, Vincent. Besides being poorly acted by Sofia, this was a pointless vehicle for Vincent to give her up to show his allegiance to Michael. Coppola (Francis Ford…) should have found a better way to prove this because it was, quite frankly, sickening. There were many good points to the film as well. I found it satisfying that Michael came to terms with all of the crimes he had executed and that he was conscious of all the lives he had affected. I loved the way he patched his issues up with Kay and ultimately confessed that he never wanted to be Godfather in the first place. In part two, Coppola portrayed him as being relatively cold and unfeeling, but I enjoyed that in part three, we were reminded of his emotional core as portrayed in part one. I also liked that uncovered aspects of the previous films were touched upon, and that they were all cohesive. The third installment was created merely to bring closure to Godfather buffs. When compared to the other two, The Godfather Part III was in fact a mediocre movie and that fans and critics alike expected another brilliant masterpiece. When compared to any other film, it would be better than the rest.

The Godfather (1972)

The epitome of great cinema.

[7 April 2001]

`Do you spend time with your family? Good. Because a man that doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man,' remarked Vito Corleone, played by Marlon Brando. By reading that quote, one might have thought that Vito was a virtuous and wonderful family man. However, he was the Godfather to the most powerful crime family in New York who dealt with murder every day. Little by little throughout the film, the viewer easily bought into the myth of the mafia: the family togetherness and their rich traditional background. But, director Francis Ford Coppola also exposed the viewer to what actually goes on in the mafia: death, blood, and calculated murders. Coppola used the elements such as camera angles, lighting, editing and dialogue to compare and contrast the myth versus the reality if the mafia in the scenes in the film, which were the events during Connie Corleone's (Talia Shire) wedding, the baptism of her child and the confrontation between Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) and his abusive brother-in-law, Carlo (Gianni Russo). Before the Corleone family lures the viewer in, they should take into consideration what is actually going on.

A drastic difference between the reality and the myth of the mafia was blatantly expressed during the scene in which Connie Corleone got married. While everyone gathered around outside for a traditional, family oriented Italian wedding, the inside of their Corleone compound hosted crime negotiations between Don Vito Corleone and various members of his crime family. Outside of the compound, the Corleone family members gathered together to sing traditional Italian songs, wore traditional and classic wedding attire, danced joyously and took the family picture. Meanwhile, indoors, Don Corleone granted favors for the wedding guests, these favors often involving murder. To contrast the two scenes, Coppola implemented them with camera angles. Outdoors, the camera angle represented an onlooker and followed the festivities during the day. This gave a sense of belonging to the audience, and helped them `buy into' the myth of the mafia. Simultaneously, during the negotiations indoors, the camera angle represented Don Corleone's point of view. This made the viewer realize the intensity of the mafia and the importance of the role of the `Godfather' because everyone gathered around Vito and was humbled by his presence. Also, Coppola contrasted the scenes by the use of lighting. For example, outdoors, the lighting was very bright and there were barely any shadows. This created an air of happiness and showed the audience how the family made each other happy. In contrast, indoors, everyone and everything was cast in dark shadows to show the dark underworld of what was actually occurring in the mafia.

Another scene that showed a comparison of the myth versus the reality of the mafia was the baptism montage. Coppola ensured that this scene was implemented by using an editing technique called parallel action, in which two scenes are shifted back and forth to compare and contrast. In this example, the parts of the scene undergoing parallel action were when Michael was witnessing his godson's baptism and when the murders of all of the Dons that Michael had planned were being executed. At the baptism, the Corleone's proved their family togetherness and showed their belief in God. Michael even renounced the devil and pledged his allegiance to the church. However, he knew that as he as saying this, the murders he had planned were taking place. The brutal murders obviously showed how fiercely protective the mafia is and also served as irony, considering that Michael was renouncing Satan as people he ordered to die were being slain. In the order that the scenes were placed proved how both aspects of the mafia were considered to be alike in some ways to Michael. For example, the dripping of holy water off the baby's head and the dripping of the blood of the victims and the crying of the baby and the murders blended together to show how they were perceived as being quite mixed up and distorted in the heads of the mafia.

Lastly, a scene that contrasts and compares the myth versus the reality of the mafia was the confrontation between Michael and Carlo after his child's baptism. Coppola accomplished this comparison chiefly by the use of dialogue. Michael explained to him how he knew of his beating Connie and his plan to kill Sonny. After Carlo obviously feared for his life, Michael gently explained that he would only banish him off to Las Vegas and that he wasn't allowed to partake in the `family business'. He then said that he would never make his sister a widow, rather kill the father of his godchild. This showed that Michael had family values and prioritized his family over his `family business'. Then, Carlo was escorted to a car, and then strangled. The reality of the mafia, in this case, was that they would deceive anyone to achieve revenge and wouldn't let anyone stand in their way, even their families.

I believe that the mafia isn't all about killing and crime. The people involved truly believed that they were doing the best they possibly could to protect their families, even if that meant murdering people along the way. However, I admitted that while watching The Godfather, I bought into the myth of the mafia. I found myself legitimizing the terrible events that Michael had orchestrated because his was trying to carry on his father's legacy and to protect his beloved family. This was a product of Coppola's intent to create almost a `home video' from the Corleone family: the frequent murders were as essential to them as their lavish weddings and their family dinners. So, if a viewer heard the quote, `…a man that doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man' might think that Vito Corleone is incredibly enraptured with his family… but which one?

Citizen Kane (1941)

Brilliance from the master of cinema, Orson Welles

[8/10 · 19 December 2000]

Citizen Kane is said to be the greatest film ever made. I haven't seen all of the films ever made in the world; therefore I couldn't make a decision, but if the greatest film is out there, and even slightly resembles Kane, it is nothing short of sheer brilliance. The intense Orson Welles, the mastermind of the film, was a perfectionist; and it showed. He did not confine his film to the limits of the period it was made in and it helped to revolutionize the film industry with Kane. The lighting, editing and cinematography were all basically new to the world. Based on this, it shocked the film industry into being the greatest film ever created.

The main factor that sets Citizen Kane apart from other films as being brilliant is the lighting. Welles manipulated the lighting so that it wasn't just another causality of a motion picture, but served as symbolism and emotion. Also, he used the type of lighting more often used in theater productions. For example, every reporter conveyed in the film was filmed in shadow, regardless of the natural lighting in the scene. This showed that Welles pictured all reporters as one like being: they had no personality of their own and were only focused on unearthing the meaning of Kane's final word, 'Rosebud'. This view of Welles', actually, was very apropos, considering that Welles and the film were hounded by the media as a result of the Hearst scandal. Also, Kane's elaborate mansion, Xanadu, was also filmed in shadow. This symbolized that Xanadu was a product of Kane's dark obsession with greed and his quest for power and acceptance. The lighting in this film heightened effect of various characters and objects throughtout the film and made the message of the film more visual to the audience.

Another aspect that made this film revolutionary was the editing. Orson Welles was the first director/screenwriter to use the effect of flashbacks, so the film was not in chronological order, as the case with others of its period. For example, the film started with Kane uttering `Rosebud' and slumping over in death. Basically, the entire film was composed of a series of flashbacks. The reporters interviewed all of the integral people in Kane's life and each person reflected back on their most important experiences with him. The various people traced back from his happy and poor childhood to his cold and lonely death. Another aspect of the editing used in the film was to show the passage of time between scenes and how it affected the principle characters in it. For example, when Kane and his first wife, Emily, were sitting at the breakfast table, they began with sitting very close to each other and acting very warmly towards each other. The scenes were formatted in a montage, in which Kane and Emily sat farther and farther apart (and acted estranged) as time progressed. Also, when Susan Alexander, Kane's second wife, was feeling alone in their loveless marriage, she began to do a jigsaw puzzle. Again, a montage was composed of her gradually doing the puzzle and a cut to the clock and so on, until the puzzle was completed.

Citizen Kane also expressed revolutionary cinematography. Orson Welles and the rest of the staff went beyond any other film with the techniques they used to create Kane. For example, Welles dug a hole in the floor in order to create a low angle in the shot. This gave the characters an order of power and also caused the studio to furnish the sets with ceilings. They had to do this because the low angles exposed the ceilings in the shots, and all of the sets built in the forties did not have ceilings. Also, it was filmed in deep focus photography. Films of that era usually focused upon the main object in a shot, and the background was out of focus. In Citizen Kane, Everything, including the background, was in focus, causing the scene to have greater depth and the audience to be able to see what the characters are doing in the background.

So is Citizen Kane the best film ever created? I am not the world's biggest film buff, but I do know that it is incomparable to anything that I have ever seen before. It is truly original, and that is what makes it so incredibly brilliant. One main factor makes Citizen Kane regarded as the greatest film ever made… and that factor is Orson Welles. He was the mastermind behind a film that changed the face of cinema as we know it. Besides being remembered as the greatest film ever made, Kane is also remembered for the word `Rosebud'. What did Welles want that word to signify? Happiness cannot be bought. As you watch the movie, you will figure out what it means for yourself and also expand your mind for having watching such brilliance.

The Wrong Guy (1997)

The funniest movie I've ever seen.

[10/10 · 24 November 1999]

What do you get when you combine the illustrious Dave Foley with his sheer brilliance in comedy writing? The Wrong Guy. Dave's comic genius shines through the story of the business minded Nelson Hibbert (Foley), who is up for an important promotion, but is overlooked by his boss. When he storms into his boss' office, he finds him dead, and thinks that he would be the prime suspect for his murder. Little does he know, that the real murderer was already caught on the surveillance camera. Nelson becomes a fugitive, and no one is actually chasing him. Only Dave Foley could come up with a premise as hilarious as this. If you love Kids in the Hall, you will definitely love this movie. The Wrong Guy is a combination of sheer wit, comic presence, and Dave Foley at his comedic best.

It's Pat: The Movie (1994)

It's time for monotony, here comes Pat!

[30 August 1999]

I could sit through a two minute Pat sketch on SNL. A two hour long movie is another thing. It's Pat started out okay, but then wavered off into boring drivel. I liked the basic storyline. Pat Riley (Julia Sweeney) meets an equally androgynous mate, Chris (Dave Foley), fall in love, and become engaged. That's just super! But then comes seemingly normal neighbor Kyle (Charles Rocket), who becomes obsessed with whether Pat is a man or a woman. Oh, the mystery that is Pat. This boring turn in the story makes the rest of the movie practically unbearable, although the end was pretty funny. After Chris and Pat break up, Chris goes on its way to Tibet to find itself. Pat realizes that it loves Chris, and rushes to stop it from leaving. They run into each other's arms, and later wed. If you listen to the end narration, you can get an idea of who is the man and who is the woman. I would have to say that this movie had it's funny moments and good performances by both Foley and Sweeney, but overall, it was a very boring film. It's time for monotony, here comes Pat!