An Update To My Upcoming Movie-Watching Plans

Last night I tried out various things to watch but none of them panned out so instead I figured I should talk about and give an update to what I'll be watching in February and March. The latter month I'll still be seeing various foreign films for the most part and sometime during the month I'll post my Top 10 list for 2014.

As for February, I decided due to various reasons not to go to AMC to watch some of the Best Picture nominees; those two Saturday screenings are in the middle to latter part of the month. Still, some of the films I'll see next month will be contenders for the Top 10 list.

Due to my schedule the next few days (including tonight's UFC show and the Super Bowl tomorrow) I won't return until Tuesday night, but barring catastrophe when I come back it will be with a review.

How The West Was Won

How the West Was Won (1962)

Runtime: 162 minutes

Directed by: John Ford/Henry Hathaway/George Marshall/Richard Thorpe

Starring: A cast of many famous faces, including Gregory Peck, Henry Fonda, James Stewart, and Debbie Reynolds

From: MGM

First off, my apologies for not posting anything at all yesterday. Tuesday and Wednesday wasn't the best of days for me; I won't delve deep into it, except that Tuesday various things just did not go right, including watching a film (the disc I was watching, it literally stopped working about a quarter of the way through; I was not happy) and Wednesday, there was even an issue with this film when I saw it on the big screen, but I'll get to that in the Letterboxd review, which is below. I will return Saturday night and I'll make that date.

After it seemed like fate conspired against me and prevented me from watching a film this week so far, last night I was finally able to see something, and it was a classic film... on the big screen, via the Cinemark chain. Of course I wish it would have started on time but it didn't due to their incompetence. But at least I got to see this classic film for the first time, and it happened to be in a theatre, where I could enjoy seeing such an epic movie with huge vistas and large scenes in a big manner. No, it wasn't a Cinerama showing but who has a giant curved Cinerama screen in 2015?

If you don't know, this is a Western which tells several tales revolving around the Prescott family in a timespan of about 50 years, from them originally planning to move out West, to the California gold rush, the Civil War and the building of the Transcontinental railroad to a look at how dangerous life can be in the Old West.

Viewing it on the big screen was a treat. Due to the original process much of the film was shot from a distance rather than using close-ups. Thus, watching the film this way seems like the most logical thing to do, and it's unfortunate that most people now won't have the chance to see it except on a TV screen or heaven forbid, their laptop screen.

As for me giving it such a high rating, there are several reasons why. I was genuinely entertained by the long-encompassing story and the various snapshots at how people wanted to migrate to that area of the country and all the troubles that happened due to this desire. It's long but I was certainly never bored. Also, it has many different elements: action/adventure (there are some great scenes which represent this), some comedy, romance, drama, tragedy, melodrama, and even some songs are sung. There's something for everyone, and a tale that required 4 directors to direct all those segments.

And of course, what an incredible cast. Among the names are Henry Fonda, Debbie Reynolds, Karl Malden, Gregory Peck, James Stewart, John Wayne, Eli Wallach, Harry Dean Stanton, Lee Van Cleef, Richard Widmark... what a collection of talent and even if their roles may be small they are all at least fine. As expected you can't go wrong with such a lineup.

While I understand those who don't think too highly of the movie it was something I really dug, a spectacle that Hollywood just doesn't make anymore.

Blackhat

Blackhat (2015)

31% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 123 reviews)

Runntime: 133 minutes

Directed by: Michael Mann

Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Viola Davis, Tang Wei, Wang Leehorn, Holt McCallany

From: Legendary/Universal

Here's my first 2015 motion picture. It was one I wanted to see last week but due to circumstances beyond my control I had to wait until last night to do so. My Letterboxd review is below and I'll return Wednesday afternoon.

My first 2015 film is one I was interested in seeing, even after hearing very mixed reviews, a middling score on the IMDb and a rotten rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I had still heard some who rate it pretty highly meaning that there was the possibility I'd enjoy it myself.

While I understand the complaints (except for the one about it being “boring”), it was a film I enjoyed, even if it wasn't great, it can be quite ridiculous-including Thor as an expert computer hacker-and it doesn't always make sense and it's amusing how the villain's ultimate plan seems awfully familiar to the plan presented in a not beloved action film from the 80's that I won't reveal for spoiler reasons. Despite such niggles, I was entertained even if I did not think it was as great as it could have been considering the director.

Looking at what happened last year, cyberterrorism is a now relevant fact of life. Its ultimate end goal isn't quite what is portrayed here but it can still be quite damaging so I was glad to see a film about various hackers, from the destructive kind (known as black hat hackers) or the other ones (white hat and grey hat) and the various tricks of the trade they do to succeed. I am not a leet hacker myself by any means but I am familiar with various concepts of the computer world so I was happy to see them presented in the film. You don't need extensive knowledge of that field to understand the movie but for me I was happy to know such info.

It being an adventure that not only takes place in the United States but also Hong Kong then Southeast Asia was of interest to me, along with the multi-ethnic cast, which delivered performances that are at least fine. The cinematography-well, not the grainy hand-held-is pretty and I enjoyed the action scenes that we got. Thus, overall this was something I am glad I saw on the big screen and I am glad I enjoyed this cybercrime thriller more than many others did.

Supernova

Supernova (2000)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: Walter Hill... and Jack Sholder... and even Francis Ford Coppola

Starring: James Spader, Angela Bassett, Peter Facinelli, Robin Tunney, Lou Diamond Phillips

From: MGM

Here is a movie I had never seen until late last night. It's not an all-time terrible movie, but... it's still no good.

In the Letterboxd review below I reference the official trailer for the movie. It is SO misleading in tone at first I thought it was one of those spoof trailers a la “someone cutting together a Mary Poppins trailer to make it look like a horror film” sort of deal but it's actually legit. The trailer, then the review. I won't return until Monday night.

Unlike those that recently saw this motion picture via the new Scream Factory Blu (I wish I could see the half hour documentary on the disc about the disastrous production of this movie); rather I saw it last night via the MGMHD channel. I had never seen this movie before-the toxic buzz scared me away-but after seeing some people I know recently talk about it here and elsewhere I figured now was the time to check it out. I had never even seen the trailer before. As others have noted, it is SO inaccurate as to what the movie actually is. Just why did they try to make it look like a space comedy with horror elements?

First things first, the movie isn't so awful I was filled with rage or had to fight myself from changing the channel. Much of the CGI doesn't look too bad and at least the capable cast tries (even if James Spader is really the only person to succeed, w/ his Spadering). Unfortunately, things are just oh so dull and it's really derivative of many other films, all of which are better and more interesting than this.

To echo others, it's just obvious there were production woes. Things can be real disjointed and too often it doesn't make much sense. All I know is that MGM constantly clashed with original director Walter Hill and Hill got fed up and left. In came in veteran genre director Jack Sholder than even Francis Ford Coppola, but nothing could save what is a boring tale of a medical spaceship answering a distress call and picking up a mysterious passenger with an “alien artifact”. Things happen then we get a pretty goofy and unsatisfying ending.

There isn't too much else to say about this. While it lost a lot of money for MGM I will presume they have no one to blame but themselves for that. There's really no reason to ever see this and I presume the featurette about the behind the scenes drama is much more engrossing than the actual film.

Night Of The Juggler

Night of the Juggler (1980)

Runtime: 101 minutes

Directed by: At least some of it by Sidney J. Furie, but also by Robert Butler

Starring: James Brolin, Cliff Gorman, Richard S. Castellano, Linda Miller, Barton Heyman

From: Columbia

Today I went to the sleazy side by watching a cult favorite which is at least partially a cult movie due to it never being officially on disc for various reasons. Some people wanted me to see it and it turns out their recommendation was correct and I rate it quite highly. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

Due to some prodding from a few people on a messageboard, I was finally given enough motivation to see this film, which is barely remembered today except for a cult following. It was only released on VHS and has never officially been on disc. Conjecture says that it's because the film's rights are now owned by some sort of soap company (!) and while there are a number of well-known independent outlets that can put it out on Blu, I guess they've refused all offers up to now. It's a shame. Yes, I'll admit I watched it on YouTube as that's really the only way to see it now.

The film is rather ridiculous and over the top and immoral... but in a gleeful manner. Sean Boyd (James Brolin, w/magnificent beard) is an ex-cop turned truck driver who is back home in New York City after completing a run. His daughter is celebrating her 15th birthday and she's off to school... until she's kidnapped by a racist psychopath (Cliff Gorman) who mistakenly believes he has taken the kid of a rich family, who will acquiesce and pay him a large ransom. Boyd sees the kidnapping and off we go, starting with a long chase scene and from there the breakneck pace rarely lets up as he is ultra-determined to get his daughter back, no matter if it's dealing with a no-nonsense cop (Richard S. Castellano), a Sergeant that he used to work with but he exposed was doing something illegal (Dan Hedaya) and the Sergeant is looking for revenge, or a wide variety of colorful and wacky characters who are happy to say politically incorrect things.

While I understand how some would think it's an unflattering look at New York City, I wasn't too bothered by that and instead I marveled at how that place was so bad that a kidnapping could happen in a busy park and no one bats an eye, or how the South Bronx looked so bad and burned-out it looked like it had just survived the apocalypse. Yet all those vivid characters you meet on the journey are rather memorable and earthy it makes the film feel real and alive... even when you see such things as a police officer trying to kill Boyd with shotgun blasts... on a crowded public street. Liam Neeson's Taken this is not in the genre of "rescuing your kidnapped daughter".

The cast does help with their performances. Brolin is aces as the dad who simply wishes to save his kid. Besides the people I already mentioned there's Mandy Patinkin in a small role as a Puerto Rican cab driver who... well, “manic” may not be a strong enough word for how crazed he acts but he was definitely memorable. The score from Artie Kane was unforgettable too and I don't know what the ratio is but I understand at least parts of the film were done by Sidney J. Furie before he left and Robert Butler (who once directed a Disney film but later went on to do such goofy films as Turbulence and Up the Creek) did the rest.

If you enjoy films involving the Sleazy New York City of old-or just enjoy trashy motion pictures in general-then this is a must-see and maybe one of these days it'll finally be able to be released on disc and find a larger modern audience.

I'm Pushing Things Back A Day

I hate doing it but this week has been busier for me than expected so no time for movie-watching. I will return tomorrow night with a film review, maybe another noir and maybe not.

"C"-Man

“C”-Man (1949)

Runtime: 77 minutes

Directed by: Joseph Lerner

Starring: Dean Jagger, John Carradine, Harry Landers, Lottie Elwen, Rene Paul

From: Laurel Films

I return to the world of film noir with this random film I found. Unfortunately this is only about average at best but at least I gave this obscure motion picture a shot. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return Wednesday night.

I'll be honest here, I watched this tonight as I realized I hadn't watched a film noir in about two months and I stumbled across this film on a certain website and I was not only interested in it “being shot in a semi-documentary style” but also its two main stars being Dean Jagger and John Carradine; note that Carradine's role is rather small, lasting just a few minutes long.

The film is definitely low-budget but they tried shooting it different, so that's why it's called a semi-documentary. It has that look and style. The musical score is odd and yet it somehow fits, even if it's overbearing at times. While it's shot better than expected, unfortunately the story (about various people who are looking for an expensive and fancy necklace, with Dean Jagger's Customs Agent for the U.S. Treasury Department Cliff Holden leading the way; his buddy gets killed in the mess so now it's personal) is too often confused and for being the hero, Cliff Holden doesn't have the moves like Jagger; rather, he's ineffectual too often and he lucks into a few things.

While it may look the part (looking at old New York City was interesting too), have occasional narration, have some hard-boiled dialogue and there are sleazy bad guys, overall I can only rate this as average at best.

Tonight's The Night For Letterboxd Things

What I mean is that among various things I'll be doing tonight, I'll type up the descriptions that will appear with two new lists I'll be compiling for the site, one being the films of Myrna Loy that I've seen and the other being the film noir I have watched since September of 2014. I've been thinking of doing that for awhile now and tonight's finally the night. I'll post both tomorrow.

Last night I didn't feel like watching anything as I wasn't in the mood, and besides still not being at 100%, there's too much going on today. However, tomorrow I'll have the time to watch something then give it a review, so expect that tomorrow night.

Special Bulletin

Special Bulletin (1983)

Runtime: 101 minutes

Directed by: Edward Zwick

Starring: Ed Flanders, Kathryn Walker, Roxanne Hart, Christopher Allport, David Rasche

From: Ohlmeyer Communications Company

Yes, I watched a TV movie last night, one aired on NBC back in 1983. I'll explain why I did so in the Letterboxd review below. I'll return tomorrow night.

I typically do not watch old TV movies. Sure, I am old enough to remember the days when the networks used to make TV films to show each Sunday night, but I usually didn't watch them. I certainly did not see this as a two year old when it made its debut. Rather, it was something I found out about via Letterboxd and last night via means I won't elaborate upon I checked it out.

Without Warning (the 1994 film shown on CBS that actually did cause an uproar despite them making it clear it was not real) was not the first TV movie which presented a faux real newscast of a major incident, as this did so 11 years earlier. In this case it was a fictional TV network-known as RBS-covering an incident in Charleston, South Carolina, where some terrorists force a local reporter and cameraman to come on a tugboat in the harbor and broadcast their demands; they aren't foreign but instead intelligent Americans who are terrified of nuclear weapons so ironically they construct their own nuclear bomb and if they aren't given all the detonators around Charleston (over 900, so they say) to be sunk in the ocean, up goes their bomb. We only see the story from the perspective of the newscast and it's not in real time. Rather, it's shown as segments of the newscast as the drama plays out over a little more than 24 hours of time.

While some parts are kind of goofy and the special effects are low-fi, otherwise this is a movie that unfortunately is still relevant today. Nuclear fears aren't as big a fear now but it is not so hard to believe there would be terrorists of different agendas who wish to make big demands and use the media to push their beliefs. The antagonists aren't Bond villains by any means; they're awkward, argue with each other, get stressed out, and otherwise are believable as smart people who are nevertheless way over their heads with this extremely dangerous ploy.

While there are barbs thrown at the way of the government, more often there are digs at the media; for example, how they cover huge events like this, their role in influencing the public and sometimes even those that commit such heinous acts, the insensitivity, all the conjecture that seems to be guesses at best and BS made up at worst, the hype/sensationalism, the exploitative nature, etc.

Sad to say this is still true in 2015, especially with all the cable news networks. CNN is the one that comes to mind first, as they had a rather gross 2014 from all I've heard. I certainly don't get my news from such biased sources that seem to be usually wrong anyhow. Imagining such an event being covered by them if it happened tomorrow... I am sure it would look a lot like what you saw in this movie, only a lot worse.

It was interesting to see some familiar faces in the cast, like Ed Flanders, Roxanne Hart, David Rasche, and in one of his first film roles, a 15 second appearance from Michael Madsen.

The reason why I rate it the way I do is that it's well-acted, it comes across as a legit news broadcast from the time period, and the story is always interesting and still applicable to today.

The Chaser

The Chaser (Chugyeogja) (2008)

Runtime: 120 minutes (at least that's the version I saw)

Directed by: Hong-jin Na

Starring: Yun-seok Kim, Jung-woo Ha, Yeong-hie Seo, Yoo-Jeong Kim, In-gi Jeong

From: Several companies, including Bidangil Pictures

Finally I've returned to watching recently made Korean films; I want to watch more this year than I did last year, which won't be a difficult task as I only saw a few. Nevermind how I watched this movie but I did, and the Letterboxd review is below. I'll be back tomorrow night.

Basically, I decided to watch this movie as I stumbled upon it and I realized I hadn't watched a Korean film from its current “New Wave” period in way too many months so I killed two birds with one stone here.

While I understand that other films of the Korean New Wave are even more brutal and raw than this (at least I am prepared now) this is still a pretty dark watch with some really rough moments. It sounds like a simple tale where a less than ethical detective turned pimp is on the lookout for the whereabouts of several callgirls who work for him but have vanished. It isn't long before he thinks he figures it out, but boy are there many twists and turns along the way, along with a rather incompetent and corrupt Seoul police force.

The movie is kind of ridiculous, to say the least. I won't spoil why that's the case. I was able to look past that (besides, I unfortunately don't have a hard time believing that some police forces are collective buffoons or are more concerned with public perception than doing their job correctly) and enjoy the ride. Well, “enjoy” isn't the most accurate description. “Endure” is better, although I don't mean it in a negative connotation. It's an always interesting story and there are some very tense scenes.

“Gripping” is a term I've heard to describe this and I say it's accurate. I certainly was never bored and I was captivated by both the anti-hero (Yun-seok Kim) and the villain (Jung-woo Ha). The antagonist was quite the awful person, cunning at times and yet rather psychotic often. Needless to say there are some very bloody and violent moments, and also some dark humor so it isn't always so grim.

This reminds me why I need to see more films from the country and I pledge to see more in 2015 than I did in 2014.

The Lily-White Oscars

No movie to talk about tonight; instead it's the Academy Award nominations that were announced this morning and boy are people mad at how the main nominees are all white, all except Selma are about white people, the African-American lady director for Selma not getting nominated, and otherwise it looks even worse than usual for the typically white old male American film industry when there were worthy candidates that didn't get the nod. I understand why people are mad, for sure. 

I'll still be seeing four of the eight Best Picture nominees in a marathon via AMC Theatres. Also, sooner rather than later I will watch Gone Girl on disc, as that could be on the Top 10 list.

I'll return tomorrow night and this time it will be a movie review.

Locke

Locke (2013)

91% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 192 reviews)

Runtime: 85 minutes

Directed by: Steven Knight

Starring: Tom Hardy, the voices of various actors

From: IM Global/Shoebox Films

I finally watched a more modern movie today, and I was reminded why I tend to watch older movies, although I wonder why I find so many movies from the past few years to be overrated, or why I have such different tastes from a common person. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

After having watched some old movies for the past few weeks I decided to finally get more modern and watch something that has gotten near-unanimous praise for months now. I was definitely interested in a story that is set only in a BMW X5 SUV as you follow a man (Ivan Locke, played greatly with a Welsh accent by Tom Hardy) drive from the construction job he's a foreman at to another city, and the phone calls that result from the decision... and other decisions he's made. It's a huge and important job he's leaving, so there are serious ramifications. After all, Hitchcock has proven more than once that an entire movie set in a single location can be good. Unfortunately, in this case...

I won't spoil anything as I am not that kind of guy. While I was interested in the story-as I never had it spoiled, thankfully-and it started off well, eventually it felt like it was spinning its wheels at times, as if they were filling time to make it feature length. Not to mention things seemed ridiculous or contrived at times. Then, there's most of the people he called; they were just dumb and annoying as hell more often than not. It may just be me but that's what I thought. Locke is a flawed character for sure and that's fine; the film is all about dealing with the consequences of his actions and it's interesting. But, I had issues with how things played off. Then, there's the ending; I'll just be vague and say it left me quite unsatisfied.

I didn't hate the movie by any means. Like I said Hardy did a swell job with his role. I just feel disappointed that I don't love it like others do. I just had too many problems with it, like cracks in the concrete of the building that this motion picture was.

Tickle Me

Tickle Me (1965)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: Norman Taurog

Starring: Elvis Presley, Julie Adams, Jocelyn Lane, Jack Mullaney, Merry Anders

From: Allied Artists Pictures

Technically I saw this Sunday night and I wrote the review for it and posted it on Letterboxd yesterday but I had no clue what my schedule would be so that's why I decided not to post anything here until tonight. Below is the Letterboxd review and I'll return tomorrow night.

I was not expecting to see another Elvis movie so soon. But watching that cheeseball film Kissin' Cousins then writing about it and realizing the unusual subtext it has, I was greatly entertained and at least I enjoyed it. Thus, I chose a film with a title that sounds like I watched a fetish video, written by two old guys who wrote some Three Stooges shorts-which makes them awesome-and some Bowery Boys movies too. It's about an out of work bullrider who also sings and he works on a ranch... which is a weight loss camp for ladies. A hidden treasure in a ghost town also factors into the plot; what could go wrong?

I had no idea what to expect but thankfully I can at least rate it as average. There's plenty of slapstick, pratfalls, goofy one-liners, and sarcastic moments, which I really shouldn't be surprised by given the writers' background. There are multiple fist-fights with Elvis and he gets to show off his karate skills, which was greatly amusing to me. Sure, the plot is paper-thin, most of the women you see are just there to look pretty, and there's some sexism and stereotyping going on, but I was usually amused and entertained anyhow.

While there's a fellow worker named Stanley-the movie portrayed him as a simpleton-who becomes a big part of the plot (based on looks and how he acted, think a less obnoxious Jerry Lewis) there's still a noticeable shift in the final third of the movie. It becomes really goofy; while it started a few years after this film, think Scooby-Doo, down to the bad guys wearing cheap masks. It was a real cartoon but it didn't totally ruin the movie for me. While Elvis isn't the best actor he still has boatloads of charisma and presence, which does help. As for the songs, all were from the past and yet they're only decent at best.

To mention some odd moments, there's a brief subplot where the older woman who hires Elvis for the job has the hots for him, and you actually get sexual harassment, although it was the female who was the aggressor. Also, this certainly is the only movie I've seen where (implied) sexual favors are offered in trade for... larger pieces of steak! As for why the movie is called Tickle Me, the actual film offers no explanation. When I return to watching the movies of Mr. Presley hopefully I can still be entertained by these silly pictures.

My Schedule For The Next Few Months

To be honest I did not feel great last night or today so I did not see any films. With that and my schedule, I won't be back until Tuesday night and at that time I promise I'll have a review up. Still, I'll at least mention what I plan on watching up to the end of March.

From now to late February not a lot is on the agenda aside from seeing at least one more Elvis film, some films actually made in the last few years, and as usual my wide variety of random flicks. March, things will be different. It'll either be the first weekend of March or the last weekend of February that I'll take advantage of AMC's deal where they'll show like 4 or 5 Best Picture Oscar nominees in a row for one flat fee and it'll take all day. I did that last year and it helped fill out my Best Films list; the one for 2014 will be coming out sometime early in March. I am just presuming AMC is doing it again this year; the one I went to drew a big crowd so I'll guess most locations were like that and they'll be bringing it back. I know it'll help fill out the 2014 list, which will make for a lackluster Top 10 if I posted it tomorrow; I am glad I can enjoy some highly-rated movies in one day.

Oh, and that's not all I'll be doing in March. Letterboxd as a whole decided to do their deal of watching foreign films for a month and move it up to March. It's an optional thing of course and I won't officially take part as I am not going to follow the guidelines of watching 31 films in 31 days, but I can still do it on my own and do it my own way. I'll likely see about a dozen or so foreign flicks that month.

Like I said I'll be back Tuesday night.

Kissin' Cousins

Kissin' Cousins (1964)

Runtime: 96 minutes

Directed by: Gene Nelson

Starring: Elvis Presley, Arthur O'Connell, Jack Albertson, Glenda Farrell, Yvonne Craig

From: MGM

Oh, this ended up being a more interesting-and a lot more fun to write-review than I was expecting. No one on Letterboxd seems to agree (at least yet) but at least I loved it. That lengthy block of text is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

Before I get to talking about the film, let me give some backstory. Yesterday was the 80th birthday of one Elvis Aron Presley. The reason why I didn't watch then review this film yesterday: like Gary Busey in D.C. Cab, I don't work on Elvis' birthday. Actually, I was busy yesterday, but the made-up story sounds funnier.

Anyhow, like many I think that the music of Presley is great with all the classic tunes and yet I had only seen bits and pieces of a few films and never one from beginning to end. Recently at a store I found a box set of all his Warner Brothers/MGM films (at least the ones they have the rights for at this time) for what seemed like a nice price so I picked that up. Periodically I'll watch a film from there. And I do realize from reputation that most of his acting career consisted of cornball films that are average at best. At least I hope to be entertained and think of him in a positive way instead of his fat bloated days where he ingested massive quantities of drugs daily and had his career mismanaged by Colonel Tom Parker.

Now, onto this film, which I picked at random and I thought it amusing that Elvis plays two characters, cousins who look different as one has blond hair. The plot isn't complex: the government wants to build a missile base on a mountain in the Great Smokey Mountains of Tennessee. Problem is, a backwoods hick family (that's how the movie portrays them) known as the Tatums own and live on the mountain and want nothing to do with the government. A small group of Army soldiers and Josh Morgan (an Air Force guy played by Elvis who grew up in the region) try one last time to convince them, and wacky misadventures happen, including Josh discovering he has a cousin named Jodie Tatum who looks exactly like him except for the color of his hair. Yep, except for some old-school photography tricks where you see both in the same shot it's mostly accomplished by doubles.

The movie is indeed a cornball thing; the Tatum family are not portrayed with a deft touch; they are moonshine-making overall-wearing possum-eating poor white trash; think The Beverly Hillbillies or Hee-Haw for the stereotypes you get to see. I won't break down the plot as it's thin and not that important anyhow, so I won't get into the underdeveloped or unresolved plot points.

The film's quite goofy but at least it's inoffensive (the Tatum clan are portrayed as good-hearted folk who are nice simple people and their fears of the government intruding on them are probably well-founded; the broad jabs at the incompetence of the government/military are amusing and unfortunately accurate too) and there are some legitimate laughs to be had. The songs are decent but they definitely aren't classics by any means. The scenery (when it isn't obvious sets that still have their charm) of California as Tennessee was pretty, too. And, you get to see Arthur O'Connell-a long way from Anatomy of a Murder-as the patriarch of the family, Pappy. Yes, Pappy! Also, there's Jack Albertson before Willy Wonka and Yvonne Craig before she was Batgirl on the 60's Batman show.

Let me mention then some odd things. At random times a whole throng of like 15 or 20 women (known as the Kittyhawks!) who appear from the woods for a gag or a plot point. They do appear in bikinis in one scene and appear in a big dance number at the end so I guess they serve a point. One of them was Teri Garr!

Oh, and Josh Morgan and Azalea Tatum (Craig's character) fall in love. At first I though that was nice then the realization hit: hey, wait a minute, these characters are cousins! Their relationship is explained and they aren't first cousins so I suppose it's OK but it's still kind of weird, ESPECIALLY when you further think about it and realize that Azalea loves a guy who looks just like her brother! You know, the movie is more awkward and surreal than I first realized. Yet, it is a good reason to watch these silly films, to notice strange aspects such as that.

War Hunt

War Hunt (1962)

Runtime: 83 minutes

Directed by: Denis Sanders

Starring: John Saxon, Robert Redford, Sydney Pollack, Tom Skerritt, Tommy Matsuda

From: T-D Enterprises

Here's an obscure film I saw late last night. It is most noteworthy for the talent involved, which I'll get into the Letterboxd review below. I will return Friday night, as my schedule doesn't allow me to watch then talk about a film until then.

I watched this late last night on TCM and this is noteworthy as the first film (aside from a bit part) for Robert Redford, but the same holds true for both Sydney Pollack and Tom Skerritt. Who would have thought back then that later on all three would become famous in the film industry? Hell, there's even Francis Ford Coppola in an uncredited cameo as a dude who drives an Army truck so it's actually four people who would go on to fame and fortune, and that's not even taking into considering the long career John Saxon has had and hadn't even been on screen for 10 years before this role and of course he also became more renowned after the fact.

The setting is the last days, the vestiges of the Korean War and a Private known as Loomis (Redford) joins a new regiment. There's a soldier known as Endore (John Saxon) who is feared by his fellow soldiers for being crazy and well, if he was out on the streets back in America rather than Korea, he'd be a dangerous criminal due to his love of killing; he does solo missions at night and well, him leaving a calling card (using his knife to draw a circle) around the bodies he kills is one of the signs presented that he could even be a serial killer. Obviously war has brought out a bad side of him, and yet his superiors enjoy his success, if not his awkwardness when it comes to military protocol.

Yet, he has a pal... a Korean orphan named Charlie. Sure, he was played by a little Japanese boy but this is a low-budget production so I am glad he was actually from the Pacific Rim. The conflict of the film is between Loomis and Endore and their interest in Charlie, and what will happen when the war ends.

The budget means that this was not an action-packed extravaganza. Rather, this is a drama-a character study-about the toll that war takes on young soldiers and how some have psychotic tendencies that are brought out in the setting. The movie is more than just the convergence of all that talent and yet it's managed to slip through the cracks. Even if the plot could be seen as a little wacky, this is a nicely-acted tale that states its anti-war message well. The wide-eyed neophyte quickly finds out that actual combat embitters people and these men are leading unpleasant lives, waiting until this futility is finally over with. The movie has quality acting-especially by Saxon as the unhinged soldier-and there are several tense scenes.

This quiet moody film does deserve more attention in the genre of anti-war than it has received. I understand it got some attention when it came out but since then... and it's unfortunate.

The Sting

The Sting (1973)

Runtime: 129 minutes

Directed by: George Roy Hill

Starring: Paul Newman, Robert Redford, Robert Shaw, Charles Durning, Eileen Brennan

From: Universal

You know, I swear I once reviewed this once before on this page, way back when. But, when I tried searching for it using more than one method, I struck out. Thus, I figured I should watch this tonight when they showed it on TCM (which is spending Tuesday night's all month showing Redford films) so I could talk about it here and on Letterboxd. That review is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

Each Tuesday night this month (January 2015) TCM is showing Robert Redford movies and this is the first one. I have seen it a few times before (including once on the big screen, like 6 or 7 years ago) but I figured it was time to watch it again and this time talk about it on this site.

I am sure that most of you are familiar with the plot so I'll be brief: Johnny Hooker (Redford) is a grifter, a con-man in the suburbs of Chicago, 1936. He and two other guys pull off a scam... but they rip off the wrong person, a crime kingpin known as Doyle Lonnigan (Robert Shaw). In retaliation one of the trio is murdered. Hooker meets up with Henry Gondorff (a master at scamming people) and eventually they agree to pull off a elaborate parlor trick involving many people and a lot of effort in order to pull a fast one on Lonnigan and it involves staged betting on fictitious horse races.

While I admit the whole scam is rather wacky due to how much exertion and acting that was required to make it work, it's really a moot point when the movie is as well-done as this is, where you want the two charming leads to succeed, the story's so entertaining, there's a panoply of memorable scenes, the entire cast performs really well, the 1930's feeling shines throughout (even in the film-making itself, such as the editing) and of course there's the jaunty ragtime music from Scott Joplin that's unforgettable and it sets the mood also.

In short, the movie is just fun to watch and it is still effective even if you have seen it before, with a quite satisfying ending. It's always engrossing and there are many twists and turns but while it's elaborate it's never confusing, so it can be enjoyed by a wide variety of audiences.

Dial M For Murder

Dial M for Murder (1954)

Runtime: 105 minutes

Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock

Starring: Ray Milland, Grace Kelly, Robert Cummings, John Williams, Anthony Dawson

From: Warner Brothers

I do not know when I'll get around to watching more Hitchcock but this is actually a first time watch for me, despite it being a popular title. I now wish I would have seen this sooner. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

Just why they made a 3D movie that was an adaptation of a stage play (by Frederick Knott) and is a dialogue-heavy thing mainly set in one apartment, I cannot explain. I'd still like to see that version to check out the depth of field and all that, but I rented it from the library so it was just the old DVD I got to check out instead of the Blu that has both versions which was released back in '12.

The plot is straight to the point: Ex tennis pro Tony (Ray Milland) is married to Margot (Grace Kelly) but it's an unhappy marriage. She is cheating on him with novelist Mark (Robert Cummings) and when Tony finds out, he concocts what he thinks is “the perfect murder” of his wife and he blackmails Swann (Anthony Dawson) into doing the deed. Things go awry, though. Can Tony think on the fly and still be able to get to the end game? Can Chief Inspector Hubbard (John Williams) figure it all out?

While there was a time or two that I went “Hey, wait a minute...” overall I particularly did enjoy this tale. The setting may sound limiting, but it was never boring; the script is very tight and filmed quite well by a great director with a more than capable cast. It's never dull visually or aurally. The dialogue is always entertaining, my personal favorite was when someone else tried to poke holes in Tony's plans and he explains, “Oh no, I thought of that already, and...” It's oh so fun. However, note that even the perfect murder may look flawless on paper but in execution something unforeseen is bound to happen; sticking to concocting such things on the written page (as Mark does) may be best.

Anyhow, this is a thrilling movie which is an example of "less is more".

Nothing Lasts Forever

Nothing Lasts Forever (1984)

Runtime: 82 minutes

Directed by: Tom Schiller

Starring: Zach Galligan, the incredibly named Appolonia van Ravenstein, Lauren Tom, Sam Jaffe

From: MGM

Here's a movie with quite the unique backstory, something I explain in the Letterboxd review below. In short, it was unseen for many years for reasons unknown, but even that didn't last forever as it was on TV late last night. Onto the review and I'll be back tomorrow night:

Imagine my surprise when late last year while looking at TCM's website to see what they would be showing this month on TCM Underground, I saw that for the first time ever this movie would be shown to a wide audience, at least in North America. It was last summer that this film got attention. MGM shelved it before it was to be released and for unknown reasons the only way it was to be seen was if you saw it air on European television, as it did a few times. Well, some random person on YouTube got a copy and uploaded it to his page; it only got copyright taken down after articles were written about it. But finally it could be officially shown, albeit at a time (the middle of the night) where many may have completely missed it.

The reason why it got attention-aside from it being rare-is the talent involved. It was produced by Lorne Michaels and directed/written by Tom Schiller, who worked on Saturday Night Live in its early days. It stars Zach Galligan and has an eclectic cast full of old people (Sam Jaffe and Imogene Coca, for example) and has a brief role from Dan Aykroyd and a more substantial part for Bill Murray.

Oh, and it's weird, quite weird. It goes for a 1930's aesthetic and usually succeeds. A lot of it is in black and white but there are some sequences in color. As for the story, it involves an artist who isn't that great but he still tries; however, the society he lives in has become oppressive to such things so he has to work at a tollbooth, before meeting odd people that guide him along the way and it ends up with a bus trip... to the moon. Yeah.

If others got more out of this than I did, that is OK with me. I personally thought that while they got the style down and it is certainly bold in telling a unique story, I didn't think it was effectively told or paced right. Thus, I am not quite sure what the point of it was, besides paying homage to classic films of old, such as Battleship Potemkin); it isn't that funny and it's not exactly an airtight plot either. So I guess I'll have to rate it as average overall due to it being too oddball for my tastes.

At least it's different and plus, it's nice how it's not hidden away anymore.

Stage Fright

Stage Fright (1950)

Runtime: 110 minutes

Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock

Starring: Jane Wyman, Marlene Dietrich, Michael Wilding, Richard Todd, Alastair Sim

From: Warner Brothers

I have no time for a proper intro so I'll note that I'll be back Sunday night and here's what I wrote about the film on Letterboxd:

A few days ago I went to the local library to rent a few DVD's of Hitchcock films, all of which I have never seen before. The first one I chose for viewing was this, as it's “lesser-known”, at least by the director's lofty standards.

The plot: A popular entertainer-Charlotte Inwood-(Marlene Dietrich) in an English city accidentally kills her husband, and her lover (Richard Todd) is accidentally seen at the scene of the crime so he has to hide out and he uses his friend Eve (Jane Wyman) to avoid the cops and she does various things to try and clear his name. A detective, a scheming lady that dresses Ms. Inwood and even her parents get involved.

The main thing is that the film has a conceit which of course I won't reveal here for those who haven't seen this before; at the time it wasn't well-received as it was a pretty new thing. In these recent times it's done more often and now that plot point looks better, and in the context of this motion picture it does work.

The movie does feel its length of 110 minutes, the whole thing is rather ridiculous and while not a slight considering his astounding career, it's still lesser Hitch. However, the reason why I rate this the way I do... it's certainly well-acted by a talent cast and there are some great characters, such as Eve's dad (Alastair Sim) and a vivid Cockney speaking lady (Kay Walsh). Of course it was filmed very well and the ending is quite strong. Plus, you get to see Marlene perform.

Those positives help mask the negatives and make this a movie that you may want to check out if you enjoy the director but mainly have only see his most famous works. Many of his famous tropes are here but as typical they are done in a different way so you won't feel like things are stale as you watch it.

Happy New Year

I don't have much time to say more than that but I will be back tomorrow night with a review and in 2015, things won't be too much different from 2014; I may not do as many reviews but we'll see about that.