Coco (2017)
97% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 176 reviews)
Runtime: 109 minutes
Directed by: Lee Unkrich/Adrian Molina
Starring: The voices of such people as Anthony Gonzalez, Gael Garcia Bernal, Benjamin Bratt, Alanna Ubach, Renee Victor
From: Disney/Pixar
I haven't seen as much Pixar as I should; at least I got to see this theatrically, and I am glad I did. Read the details below:
Last night I reviewed Olaf's Frozen Adventure, which controversially played before this motion picture. I found that to be “meh” but thankfully I have a rosier picture to paint here. Shamefully I haven't watched as much Pixar as I should have; I've watched all three Toy Story movies and I rate them as very good or better so I have no viable excuse here... although the reception some of their recent work has gotten has not been outstanding but I blame that on Disney buying them. One day I'll be talking more about them and I'll watch or rewatch their actual worthwhile output.
I say that this is one of those worthwhile movies. Sure, beforehand I thought that the idea of a family just hating music in general is a little zany but I went with it and this movie is simply charming. Of course I don't want to reveal much about a movie that only came to the United States a week ago; I'll just mention the basics of how it revolves around a Mexican family during The Day of the Dead; the film does explain the whole deal for those that aren't familiar with the tradition; it's all about family so no surprise that is a critical plot point, as is music. Thankfully the soundtrack-appropriate for the region-delivered and was effective. I am a gringo from the United States but I know enough where I can say that the film shows the proper reverence towards The Day of the Day and the story where a young boy ends up in the Land of the Dead and there are complications to him returning to the world of the living.
The story isn't mind-blowing but compared to some of the trailers I saw beforehand... the plot and film in general are masterpieces. Sherlock Gnomes, Peter Rabbit, and Ferdinand... those did not look good at all. Early Man from Aardman Animations should be fine and the same goes for The Incredible 2 but the first three, they were filled with lame modern references, fart jokes and other puerile “humor”-I was thankful Coco was none of that garbage. It is rather obvious why fans of the books are IRATE with how Peter Rabbit looks pretty vile and overly violent tripe.
Of course the animation looks tremendous and I loved looking at such a colorful world filled with intricate details; the characters being pretty enjoyable is also a plus. The Latin soundtrack fits and while it's not required, I was glad I got to see it in a Premium Large Format auditorium; considering how Justice League has disappointed, at least starting soon that'll be easier for people to do. The movie is cute and yet it also has some heart-wrenching moments and even I know that this is something you should expect from Pixar. It's now the highest-grossing movie ever in Mexico and both the public & critics rate the film pretty highly. I now understand why and this is a film I can recommend whether or not you have children... and no matter if you are Mexican or not.
Thursday, November 30, 2017
An Update
This month I've been busier than usual. Hopefully starting now things will calm down. Thursday night I'll review Coco. I enjoyed that quite a bit... more so than the Frozen short which was originally made for ABC but then for some reason moved into that slot. I did not hate the short, but then again I've never seen Frozen.
Tuesday, November 28, 2017
Into The Storm
Into the Storm (2014)
22% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 148 reviews)
Runtime: 89 minutes
Directed by: Steven Quale
Starring: Richard Armitage, Sarah Wayne Callies, Matt Walsh, Max Deacon, Alycia Debnam-Carey
From: Warner Brothers/New Line Cinema/Village Roadshow
In hindsight, I perhaps never should have desired to see this movie. I explain it all below:
It's a long story I won't get into but at the time this came into cinemas, I was going to watch it there then another film immediately afterwards... things happened and it was not until last night that I finally checked this out, and it was only because starting last week Amazon had an HD rental of this for only a dollar. Turns out, it wasn't really worth the time but at least I finally got to see something I mentioned elsewhere at the time I was gonna see.
It's a partially found footage movie where we have to follow a bunch of arguing and bickering A-holes as they have to deal with “the most destructive tornado in history” as it tears through a small Oklahoma city... this includes a Vice-Principal father and his two teenaged sons and of course they don't get along. There's also hillbilly rednecks who love posting videos on YouTube, and professional storm chasers, who are led by a tremendous tool, a money-grubbing buffoon who was the worst stereotype among a sea of stereotypes.
While this was not a movie I struggled to finish, I am sure it's leagues better than the tornado movies you see on the SyFy Channel (and I am not even talking about the obvious franchise from The Asylum), some of the action was entertaining and there is standard pathos which is not bad, overall this is not good. The characters and story are what make the chances of this being good entertainment fly away like a cow in a tornado. I did not enjoy all the needless conflict; all the griping got pretty old pretty quick. Then there's this movie being stump-dumb. A cornucopia of examples I could catalog here, but I'll instead mention a few:
Whether it's one of the sources for the found footage or the regular movie, it all looks and sounds the same. The cameras that people use are also pretty resilient against rain and water. There's a random 30 second scene at the end where we suddenly shift to a major airport, where the storm does damage... why the hell is there a major airport right next to a small Oklahoma city? Then there's a character who suddenly gets scared due to how dangerous those tornadoes are, but after a rousing pep talk he... willingly stands 5 feet next to the fire tornado so he can get a close-up of it?
There's a vehicle that looks like the Landmaster from Damnation Alley and the effects usually look fine. That is not enough for me to ever recommend this. I don't love this movie but Twister is better.
22% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 148 reviews)
Runtime: 89 minutes
Directed by: Steven Quale
Starring: Richard Armitage, Sarah Wayne Callies, Matt Walsh, Max Deacon, Alycia Debnam-Carey
From: Warner Brothers/New Line Cinema/Village Roadshow
In hindsight, I perhaps never should have desired to see this movie. I explain it all below:
It's a long story I won't get into but at the time this came into cinemas, I was going to watch it there then another film immediately afterwards... things happened and it was not until last night that I finally checked this out, and it was only because starting last week Amazon had an HD rental of this for only a dollar. Turns out, it wasn't really worth the time but at least I finally got to see something I mentioned elsewhere at the time I was gonna see.
It's a partially found footage movie where we have to follow a bunch of arguing and bickering A-holes as they have to deal with “the most destructive tornado in history” as it tears through a small Oklahoma city... this includes a Vice-Principal father and his two teenaged sons and of course they don't get along. There's also hillbilly rednecks who love posting videos on YouTube, and professional storm chasers, who are led by a tremendous tool, a money-grubbing buffoon who was the worst stereotype among a sea of stereotypes.
While this was not a movie I struggled to finish, I am sure it's leagues better than the tornado movies you see on the SyFy Channel (and I am not even talking about the obvious franchise from The Asylum), some of the action was entertaining and there is standard pathos which is not bad, overall this is not good. The characters and story are what make the chances of this being good entertainment fly away like a cow in a tornado. I did not enjoy all the needless conflict; all the griping got pretty old pretty quick. Then there's this movie being stump-dumb. A cornucopia of examples I could catalog here, but I'll instead mention a few:
Whether it's one of the sources for the found footage or the regular movie, it all looks and sounds the same. The cameras that people use are also pretty resilient against rain and water. There's a random 30 second scene at the end where we suddenly shift to a major airport, where the storm does damage... why the hell is there a major airport right next to a small Oklahoma city? Then there's a character who suddenly gets scared due to how dangerous those tornadoes are, but after a rousing pep talk he... willingly stands 5 feet next to the fire tornado so he can get a close-up of it?
There's a vehicle that looks like the Landmaster from Damnation Alley and the effects usually look fine. That is not enough for me to ever recommend this. I don't love this movie but Twister is better.
Sunday, November 26, 2017
Firecracker
Firecracker (1981)
Runtime: 78 minutes
Directed by: Cirio H. Santiago
Starring: Jillian Kesner, Darby Hinton, Rey Malonzo, Ken Metcalfe, Peter Cooper
From: New World Pictures
What a fun B-movie I saw last night. I explain why below:
In my last review I referenced famed Filipino B-movie director Cirio H. Santiago; it only made sense to see another one of his movies. T.N.T. Jackson I thought wasn't too good, but The Muthers was so wacky it was fun. Thankfully I thought this film was also entertaining, even if it's pretty much a remake of T.N.T. Jackson. A young blonde who is also a black belt in karate goes to The Philippines to try and find out what happened to her sister. It involves a crime syndicate of which Darby Hinton is a member of. Some may know him best as the kid from the 60's Daniel Boone TV show; others may be like me and think of his starring role in Andy Sidaris' Malibu Express! As there's feuding in that syndicate, it's a subplot which adds intrigue.
The film is pretty ridiculous, and yet ridiculously entertaining also. Thankfully the lead (Jillian Kesner) looks convincing-enough doing the martial arts, which was not the case with T.N.T. Jackson and was a big problem I had with that film. Sure, Kesner's double is sometimes apparent, but at least it was not glaringly obvious. There's no shortage of action; that and a brisk 78 minute runtime means that this is never dull. Things are not too complex; as it's exploitation, it's preferable for that kind of crown.
I know they would have especially liked the most bravura scene in the picture, when a pair of guys go after her... first off, they may just be random dudes that are like Harvey Weinstein or Brett Ratner and looking to sexually assault our heroine instead of the villain's henchmen, but it doesn't really matter. As a tremendous piece of 80's synth plays, she fights off the pair (who are like Weinstein and Ratner in being persistent) and it's incredibly gratuitous as she has more and more clothes ripped off of her, before she ends up fighting while topless. It's too over the top to really be offended by the scene.
The movie has everything from an “Arena of Death” to Filipino exploitation legend Vic Diaz (playing a character named GRIP), eskrima (referred to in the movie as arnis, which is simply another name for Filipino stick fighting), Hinton's character loving clothing featuring lions on the back-and there's some other threads that made me chortle-over the top deaths and synth tracks borrowed from distributor New World Pictures' musical library. The only tracks I recognized were from Shogun Assassin; several were used. The one I imagine most people will recognize is Lone Wolf's Theme, which was the end credits song in Assassin. Here, that was used several times, which is fine by me as it's a dope AF tune. Anyhow, if you like the old B-action films of old, this is well worth seeing.
Runtime: 78 minutes
Directed by: Cirio H. Santiago
Starring: Jillian Kesner, Darby Hinton, Rey Malonzo, Ken Metcalfe, Peter Cooper
From: New World Pictures
What a fun B-movie I saw last night. I explain why below:
In my last review I referenced famed Filipino B-movie director Cirio H. Santiago; it only made sense to see another one of his movies. T.N.T. Jackson I thought wasn't too good, but The Muthers was so wacky it was fun. Thankfully I thought this film was also entertaining, even if it's pretty much a remake of T.N.T. Jackson. A young blonde who is also a black belt in karate goes to The Philippines to try and find out what happened to her sister. It involves a crime syndicate of which Darby Hinton is a member of. Some may know him best as the kid from the 60's Daniel Boone TV show; others may be like me and think of his starring role in Andy Sidaris' Malibu Express! As there's feuding in that syndicate, it's a subplot which adds intrigue.
The film is pretty ridiculous, and yet ridiculously entertaining also. Thankfully the lead (Jillian Kesner) looks convincing-enough doing the martial arts, which was not the case with T.N.T. Jackson and was a big problem I had with that film. Sure, Kesner's double is sometimes apparent, but at least it was not glaringly obvious. There's no shortage of action; that and a brisk 78 minute runtime means that this is never dull. Things are not too complex; as it's exploitation, it's preferable for that kind of crown.
I know they would have especially liked the most bravura scene in the picture, when a pair of guys go after her... first off, they may just be random dudes that are like Harvey Weinstein or Brett Ratner and looking to sexually assault our heroine instead of the villain's henchmen, but it doesn't really matter. As a tremendous piece of 80's synth plays, she fights off the pair (who are like Weinstein and Ratner in being persistent) and it's incredibly gratuitous as she has more and more clothes ripped off of her, before she ends up fighting while topless. It's too over the top to really be offended by the scene.
The movie has everything from an “Arena of Death” to Filipino exploitation legend Vic Diaz (playing a character named GRIP), eskrima (referred to in the movie as arnis, which is simply another name for Filipino stick fighting), Hinton's character loving clothing featuring lions on the back-and there's some other threads that made me chortle-over the top deaths and synth tracks borrowed from distributor New World Pictures' musical library. The only tracks I recognized were from Shogun Assassin; several were used. The one I imagine most people will recognize is Lone Wolf's Theme, which was the end credits song in Assassin. Here, that was used several times, which is fine by me as it's a dope AF tune. Anyhow, if you like the old B-action films of old, this is well worth seeing.
Saturday, November 25, 2017
The Detatched Mission
The Detatched Mission (Odinochnoye Plavanye) (1985)
Runtime: 89 minutes
Directed by: Mikhali Tumanishvili
Starring: Mikhail Nozhkin, Aleksandr Fatyushin, Arnis Licitis, Nartay Begalin, Sergey Nasibov
From: Mosfilm
What a movie I watched on Thanksgiving night. I explain this surreal Soviet sensation below:
Runtime: 89 minutes
Directed by: Mikhali Tumanishvili
Starring: Mikhail Nozhkin, Aleksandr Fatyushin, Arnis Licitis, Nartay Begalin, Sergey Nasibov
From: Mosfilm
What a movie I watched on Thanksgiving night. I explain this surreal Soviet sensation below:
Here is a bizarre oddity I randomly stumbled on two nights ago; once again it was on Amazon Video and personally I much rather prefer their service to something like Netflix Instant because Instant has a lot of new crap I don't really care about, while Amazon's offering has a much wider selection, and are surfeit in niche titles. Sure, it also has a bevy of new crap I don't really care about, but I can easily ignore that and instead focus on movies that even I haven't heard of before, and as I am a Prime member, plenty of it is for free. That includes random films from the Soviet Union... even if they are under different titles. In this case, you can find this under the nonsense title Solo Voyage: The Revenge.
This film is especially weird... imagine the Russkies doing a version of Rambo: First Blood Part II, except they found a way to make Rambo and its ideas blasphemy. That's what this is. The studios behind the Iron Curtain really did not do any of the 80's action movies Hollywood and plenty of foreign countries did... really, most of the ones filmed in those Communist countries were done by Hollywood studios. Until Communism fell in those countries, the action typically was in war movies. But this is a rare exception; Mosfilm was responsible for it and some have used the label “Soviet Rambo”! That nickname is a misnomer; there are no sweaty oiled-up muscular man running around, kicking a lot of ass. A Lone Wolf hero seems like the antithesis of the ideals that the proletariat are supposed to follow, anyhow.
This movie of course has the Americans as the evil villains-something a lot of people in foreign countries have no trouble believing-and the United States decides to stir up trouble with the Soviets for the sake of profit. This is decided while some “important people” are playing a game of golf. I hate to say they captured the essence of the United States, but... a dude who looks like a unholy cross between Walton Goggins and Michael Ironside is the main American we follow, and it's quite the twist; he is a loose cannon character who is a Vietnam vet and because he was damaged by being in 'Nam-and he doesn't like people from Far East Asia either-he goes crazy and instead of only doing something minor to escalate tensions, he has two nuclear warheads and World War III could begin. Between what I've described already and American military ships & stations having empty Coke and Heineken cans all over the place... what Communist propaganda this is.
Before you can say “perestroika”, the Soviet heroes all work together and for example are willing to help a Yankee couple who were accidentally had their sailboat hit with a missile by their own military... and yeah, those Yankees act all paranoid so there's another negative trait presented. Admittedly, the first hour hardly has any action and even the final act is not action-packed so this doesn't compare to something like Rambo: First Blood Part II or Commando. But I was never bored and it being so unusual helped; heck, this Russian movie has Russian actors and yet much of it was shot in English. It don't matter if they were playing Russian or American, most of them spoke English. Between that, the look of the film, and how at least part of this takes place on a tropical island (in this case, the final act), it's awfully easy to compare this to something done by the Filipinos-Cirio H. Santiago is an example-or by the Italians, such as Bruno Mattei. Yep, that low budget. Remember, a major Soviet studio made and released the picture, and allegedly was quite popular in the USSR.
After the Iron Curtain fell, there were of course more movies of this type to come out; I did not discover it until after Vinegar Syndrome had all their copies sell, but one day I'd love to see 1993's Red Mob as from what clips I've seen, there's an 80's action movie not actually from the decade. This movie is not great but partially due to the novelty factor, I can say this is acceptable-enough. The comrades seemed like decent lads. Presumably this did not quench the thirst of those in the Eastern Bloc who saw those great 80's action films via some brave souls smuggling those in; it's a true story I've heard from several wildly different sources.
Between that and the people of Wakaliwood in Uganda making their own films because they love those motion pictures too... they may not be the greatest of human beings in real life but glasnost, Stallone and Schwarzenegger movies and those of similar style are pretty tremendous, aren't they?
Wednesday, November 22, 2017
Beyond The Seventh Door
Beyond the Seventh Door (1987)
Runtime: Believe it or not, only 73 minutes
Directed by: The amazingly named Bozidar D. Benedikt
Starring: The all around amazing Lazar Rockwood, Bonnie Beck
From: Marvan Films
Runtime: Believe it or not, only 73 minutes
Directed by: The amazingly named Bozidar D. Benedikt
Starring: The all around amazing Lazar Rockwood, Bonnie Beck
From: Marvan Films
What an obscurity I decided to see last night. Peep the details below:
Here is something unusual for me: a movie I actually had heard of before because of Letterboxd but had completely forgotten about until it was mentioned in an online article. In this case, I stumbled upon a piece about Canadian genre films on the Film School Rejects website and the most praise was for this obscurity, and note that this is a “so bad it's good” sort of motion picture.
The plot isn't too complicated: a dude named Boris gets out of prison (for a robbery charge), he meets with his ex Wendy (or, because of his accent, “Vendy”), he finds out she works for a rich SOB who lives in a mansion that looks like a castle, they suspect the SOB has “treasure” hidden in the mansion, and once they break in... it's like Saw, Cube, or The Collector, except this was made long before any of those.
The important thing: many who have seen this in modern times compares the lead to the legendary Tommy Wiseau, and for good reason. He has the amazing name LAZAR ROCKWOOD, he is an interesting-looking human being, has an accent I don't know any other human being has ever had, and he delivers lines like he's an alien who has had little interaction with any humanoid. Appearance-wise, think a Brundlefly version of Jeff Goldblum, Moe from The Simpsons, Billy Drago, Wiseau, and an insect that is not a fly. Like I said, a strange-looking human being. The most amazing thing is that homeboy still acts, and even was a supporting character in that old Yancy Butler TV show Witchblade. Strange but true.
Me, while I recognize that I will say that this movie was like playing one of those puzzle videogames... like in Silent Hill, Lara Croft, or (to use an example I know first-hand) one of those puzzles in Skyrim. At least that's what the first few puzzles were; the rest they were given no hints by the rich SOB, who speaks via reel-to-reel tape... that's just not fair. Note that this rich SOB is confined to a wheelchair and yet he still engages in the type of behavior loved by people like Harvey Weinstein, John Lasseter... and apparently many other men working in Hollywood. It was awfully rich of the movie then to have Vendy spend most of the movie either in a sexy costume or have part of that sexy costume removed for a rather contrived reason and run around below with waist with only panties, a garter and stockings.
Even with the incredibly low budget and how this “basement” suspiciously looks like an abandoned foundry or factory, this does not fully succeed in its potential as an unusual yet intriguing plot. That is OK, though, as there are still plenty of inexplicable moments and bizarre bits that just about made me howl with laughter. At one point Boris and Vendy make love. Yes, they found time to do that. You don't actually see any lovemaking, which is perhaps for the best... because of the amazing fact that they got it on WHEN THERE WAS A CORPSE ONLY A FEW FEET AWAY FROM THEM. It was a random dude who recently failed in his attempts to get said treasure. Oh, there's more... such as Boris smoking a cigarette in most scenes, Vendy being “80's hot” and thus makes for a hilarious pairing with Boris, and an 80's synth soundtrack I of course enjoyed.
Oh, the treasures you can find about online and seemingly more often than not, can eventually track down.
Sunday, November 19, 2017
Hit Man
Hit Man (1972)
Runtime: 90 minutes
Directed by: George Armitage
Starring: Bernie Casey, Lisa Moore, Sam Laws, Candy All, Pam Grier
From: MGM
I've been busy the past few days but I was able to squeeze this in last night, and I am glad I did. This is a remake of a famous film, as I explain below:
It's been way too long since I've seen any blaxploitation, so I stayed up very late last night to see this movie on TCM Underground. Someone I know praised it so I figured it was worth a watch. Besides, it starred the late Bernie Casey and (no lie) this is a remake of Get Carter. What Sly Stallone did in 2000 wasn't the first American effort. Shamefully I still haven't seen the original. One day I'll get around to it, and give a better review to the Stallone version, which I thought was OK but to be honest, me swooning over Rachael Leigh Cook may play a part in the rating...
Anyhow, the plot is what you'd expect if you've seen Get Carter. Casey is Tyrone Tackett, who is a lawyer and he goes to Los Angeles to investigate his brother's murder, and finds a rather seedy world, and he also has to deal with his niece; here she isn't Doreen but instead is Rochelle. The movie takes its time but I found that to be OK as I was always invested in the story. The final act, it was worth the journey. That's when Pam Grier first shows up, but that's not the only reason by any means. A lot happens, and it is quite bloody. Casey was awesome as the lead, believable as a badass.
Seeing this reminded me how it is usually fun seeing works in this genre. The 70's vibe, the funky music, the fashion... there's hilariously awesome clothing to see all throughout. I wish this would be easier for people to track down as if you enjoy the original Get Carter-which I am sure I will-then this also needs to be seen.
Runtime: 90 minutes
Directed by: George Armitage
Starring: Bernie Casey, Lisa Moore, Sam Laws, Candy All, Pam Grier
From: MGM
I've been busy the past few days but I was able to squeeze this in last night, and I am glad I did. This is a remake of a famous film, as I explain below:
It's been way too long since I've seen any blaxploitation, so I stayed up very late last night to see this movie on TCM Underground. Someone I know praised it so I figured it was worth a watch. Besides, it starred the late Bernie Casey and (no lie) this is a remake of Get Carter. What Sly Stallone did in 2000 wasn't the first American effort. Shamefully I still haven't seen the original. One day I'll get around to it, and give a better review to the Stallone version, which I thought was OK but to be honest, me swooning over Rachael Leigh Cook may play a part in the rating...
Anyhow, the plot is what you'd expect if you've seen Get Carter. Casey is Tyrone Tackett, who is a lawyer and he goes to Los Angeles to investigate his brother's murder, and finds a rather seedy world, and he also has to deal with his niece; here she isn't Doreen but instead is Rochelle. The movie takes its time but I found that to be OK as I was always invested in the story. The final act, it was worth the journey. That's when Pam Grier first shows up, but that's not the only reason by any means. A lot happens, and it is quite bloody. Casey was awesome as the lead, believable as a badass.
Seeing this reminded me how it is usually fun seeing works in this genre. The 70's vibe, the funky music, the fashion... there's hilariously awesome clothing to see all throughout. I wish this would be easier for people to track down as if you enjoy the original Get Carter-which I am sure I will-then this also needs to be seen.
Thursday, November 16, 2017
Sex & Fury
Sex & Fury (Furyo Anego Den: Inoshika Ocho) (1973)
Runtime: 88 minutes
Directed by: Noribumi Suzuki
Starring: Reiko Ike, Akemi Negishi, Ryoko Ema, Yoko Hori, Christina Lindberg
From: Toei
This is a cult film and I can understand why; that'd be the case even if it wasn't for Kill Bill "borrowing" its most famous scene. I explain all that below:
It was a messageboard discussion which inspired me to see the film; it sometimes happens that way. I've known of this movie for a long while now but there was talk of Thriller-A Cruel Picture. At an Alamo Drafthouse this past weekend (as an aside, they should feel lucky the stories about the gross things going on there-whether or not they feature the man-pig Devin Faraci-broke earlier this year and not around this time... otherwise they'd have gotten a lot more blowback about it than they did) they screened a 4K print of that film, and the lovely Christina Lindberg was there in person for a Q&A. It made me realize I should watch another one of her movies, and this recently was put on Amazon for rental.
The plot... is it even really that important here for this kind of film? The setting is 1905 Japan, and Reiko Ike not only deals with political intrigue and is on the hunt for the men that murdered her father when she was a kid, but Ms. Lindberg is there as part of the former. There's more, but that's the basics. There is indeed both sex and fury... and what I deem plenty of “sexual assault”, which is definitely a hot-button issue now. I know some people who saw this movie and did not like it at all; this was a few years ago but they always are wary at best when it comes to sexual assault in movies, which is more than understandable to me. Our heroine is also tortured and they were uncomfortable with that too.
I won't go into what I know of the whole “pink film” in Japanese cinema and pinky violence, but this was my first pinky violence movie (at least how I define it) and I am not sure if I want to watch this sort of exploitation film too often, no matter which country it is from. Seeing women get revenge on totally awful men is great and all (no surprise that Christina was in something like that, and no surprise her character was also assaulted) but seeing them be horrifically abused is not the easiest thing to watch. Anyhow, there is still plenty of sleaze and trash for those that like such things... such as me, sometimes.
There are some scenes of violence, and they can be quite memorable. How can you forget such things as a group of women dressed as nuns and carrying switchblades? Someone definitely remembered an early scene here where Ike is attacked while taking a bath and they end up going outside and she murders a bunch of dudes as snow is falling... yes, that's why that scene was in Kill Bill. Whether you want to say it was “inspired”, “lifted”, “ripped off”, “a homage” or something else is up to you and will depend on what you think of Tarantino and how he uses his influences.
I can't rate this as better than fine, but I will acknowledge the arty moments that director Noribumi Suzuki interjected into the picture, there is the novelty of Lindberg speaking both English & Japanese, and it does end in memorable fashion. It's not the best of its type in the exploitation field but as long as the sleaziest moments aren't an automatic "nope" for you...
Runtime: 88 minutes
Directed by: Noribumi Suzuki
Starring: Reiko Ike, Akemi Negishi, Ryoko Ema, Yoko Hori, Christina Lindberg
From: Toei
This is a cult film and I can understand why; that'd be the case even if it wasn't for Kill Bill "borrowing" its most famous scene. I explain all that below:
It was a messageboard discussion which inspired me to see the film; it sometimes happens that way. I've known of this movie for a long while now but there was talk of Thriller-A Cruel Picture. At an Alamo Drafthouse this past weekend (as an aside, they should feel lucky the stories about the gross things going on there-whether or not they feature the man-pig Devin Faraci-broke earlier this year and not around this time... otherwise they'd have gotten a lot more blowback about it than they did) they screened a 4K print of that film, and the lovely Christina Lindberg was there in person for a Q&A. It made me realize I should watch another one of her movies, and this recently was put on Amazon for rental.
The plot... is it even really that important here for this kind of film? The setting is 1905 Japan, and Reiko Ike not only deals with political intrigue and is on the hunt for the men that murdered her father when she was a kid, but Ms. Lindberg is there as part of the former. There's more, but that's the basics. There is indeed both sex and fury... and what I deem plenty of “sexual assault”, which is definitely a hot-button issue now. I know some people who saw this movie and did not like it at all; this was a few years ago but they always are wary at best when it comes to sexual assault in movies, which is more than understandable to me. Our heroine is also tortured and they were uncomfortable with that too.
I won't go into what I know of the whole “pink film” in Japanese cinema and pinky violence, but this was my first pinky violence movie (at least how I define it) and I am not sure if I want to watch this sort of exploitation film too often, no matter which country it is from. Seeing women get revenge on totally awful men is great and all (no surprise that Christina was in something like that, and no surprise her character was also assaulted) but seeing them be horrifically abused is not the easiest thing to watch. Anyhow, there is still plenty of sleaze and trash for those that like such things... such as me, sometimes.
There are some scenes of violence, and they can be quite memorable. How can you forget such things as a group of women dressed as nuns and carrying switchblades? Someone definitely remembered an early scene here where Ike is attacked while taking a bath and they end up going outside and she murders a bunch of dudes as snow is falling... yes, that's why that scene was in Kill Bill. Whether you want to say it was “inspired”, “lifted”, “ripped off”, “a homage” or something else is up to you and will depend on what you think of Tarantino and how he uses his influences.
I can't rate this as better than fine, but I will acknowledge the arty moments that director Noribumi Suzuki interjected into the picture, there is the novelty of Lindberg speaking both English & Japanese, and it does end in memorable fashion. It's not the best of its type in the exploitation field but as long as the sleaziest moments aren't an automatic "nope" for you...
Tuesday, November 14, 2017
The Supernaturals
The Supernaturals (1986)
Runtime: 86 minutes
Directed by: Armand Mastroianni
Starring: Maxwell Caufield, Nichelle Nichols, Talia Balsam, Bradford Bancroft, LeVar Burton
From: A crappy low-budget company
Believe it or not-despite this being on Amazon Prime-this was not a random watch for me. Years ago, I heard about this film and while I suspected it to be bad, how could I forget something which had a plot of “Confederate soldiers in the American Civil War” rise up as zombies after over 100 years to kill a small regiment of soldiers training in the Alabama woods” and a cast including Maxwell Caufield, Talia Balsam, LeVar Burton, and Nichelle Nichols; of course I've always laughed at this featuring someone from Star Trek and another person from Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Last night I finally saw this film and wow, is it not good. I don't watch this TV show but I imagine things would have been better had the Winchester brothers and Castiel been around. Instead, most of the troops are immature buffoons who are better off in the Police Academy franchise; it's hard to imagine them as actual soldiers. Some are obsessed with “getting laid”, for example, and the one female soldier is someone they obsess over. Their sergeant is Nichols and while she does sometimes chastise those dumbasses, I wish she would have been constantly angry and constantly cursing them out like her Dorinda character did in Truck Turner.
Instead, what you get is a lot of boredom and as you see a trickle of blood, I suppose that counts as “gore”... typically the few zombies you do see stand around or walk slowly around... “tedious” does not even begin to describe this yawn-fest. It's not scary in the least, either. Then again, it fails even harder at telling a cohesive, logical story than it does at offering frightening moments. There isn't really much else to say about this film; it's not worth the effort to parse out why exactly this film is so terrible; just note that it is. Not even the cast or the novelty of Burton cursing up a storm is worth a viewing.
Actually, I will mention one last thing: sometimes a Prime video does not hide that it's a direct VHS or DVD rip; there's the FBI warning, the opening logo plays for whomever released it, etc. In this case, it was obviously a print from a tape that was 31 years old (meaning, it looked absolutely terrible) and the ending told me it was indeed a 1986 Embassy Home Video release.
Runtime: 86 minutes
Directed by: Armand Mastroianni
Starring: Maxwell Caufield, Nichelle Nichols, Talia Balsam, Bradford Bancroft, LeVar Burton
From: A crappy low-budget company
Believe it or not-despite this being on Amazon Prime-this was not a random watch for me. Years ago, I heard about this film and while I suspected it to be bad, how could I forget something which had a plot of “Confederate soldiers in the American Civil War” rise up as zombies after over 100 years to kill a small regiment of soldiers training in the Alabama woods” and a cast including Maxwell Caufield, Talia Balsam, LeVar Burton, and Nichelle Nichols; of course I've always laughed at this featuring someone from Star Trek and another person from Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Last night I finally saw this film and wow, is it not good. I don't watch this TV show but I imagine things would have been better had the Winchester brothers and Castiel been around. Instead, most of the troops are immature buffoons who are better off in the Police Academy franchise; it's hard to imagine them as actual soldiers. Some are obsessed with “getting laid”, for example, and the one female soldier is someone they obsess over. Their sergeant is Nichols and while she does sometimes chastise those dumbasses, I wish she would have been constantly angry and constantly cursing them out like her Dorinda character did in Truck Turner.
Instead, what you get is a lot of boredom and as you see a trickle of blood, I suppose that counts as “gore”... typically the few zombies you do see stand around or walk slowly around... “tedious” does not even begin to describe this yawn-fest. It's not scary in the least, either. Then again, it fails even harder at telling a cohesive, logical story than it does at offering frightening moments. There isn't really much else to say about this film; it's not worth the effort to parse out why exactly this film is so terrible; just note that it is. Not even the cast or the novelty of Burton cursing up a storm is worth a viewing.
Actually, I will mention one last thing: sometimes a Prime video does not hide that it's a direct VHS or DVD rip; there's the FBI warning, the opening logo plays for whomever released it, etc. In this case, it was obviously a print from a tape that was 31 years old (meaning, it looked absolutely terrible) and the ending told me it was indeed a 1986 Embassy Home Video release.
Monday, November 13, 2017
Three Stooges Shorts Are Still Neat
That is all... except that I'll be back tomorrow night with a new review.
Friday, November 10, 2017
Murder On The Orient Express (The New Version)
Murder on the Orient Express (2017)
59% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 163 reviews)
Runtime: 114 minutes
Directed by: Kenneth Branagh
Starring: An all-star cast
From: 20th Century Fox
This is not better than the 1974 version, although as I heard people say this beforehand, I was not disappointed when this was only "fine". I give some thoughts below:
Yes, Wednesday night I saw the 1974 Orient Express as preparation for seeing this brand new version of the Agatha Christie story. It hasn't had the most rave of reviews so my expectations were lowered, which was good. This was fine and does seem like "an old-timey film" but it is not the Sidney Lumet version. The general plot is the same, but there were some changes compared to the earlier film and judging by a review I heard, the Hercule Poirot seen here is not the classic literary character. While watching the film I wondered if he was supposed to have Asperger's or not; to borrow a phrase, think Tony Shaloub's Monk TV character and that's the Poirot in this movie. If you love the character, you might be quite aggravated at this interpretation.
I won't go into detail on the other changes as it's spoilers, except that more time was spent outside the train than I expected. I am not sure if those changes were needed, or even how many of them worked. At least the film has nice cinematography and the talented cast does well with what they're given. I just preferred how the 70's movie did things instead; that had more sleuthing and finding clues, while this was more explaining things and at times you don't see how Hercule discovered some clues so it's like he pulled it right out of his ass.
Oh, and I know people weren't happy Johnny Depp was in this film, despite the character's ultimate fate. I imagine some would like a few recently exposed (oh wait, bad choice of words, sorry) problematic actors to be Ratchett instead... and be stabbed multiple times in real life.
59% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 163 reviews)
Runtime: 114 minutes
Directed by: Kenneth Branagh
Starring: An all-star cast
From: 20th Century Fox
This is not better than the 1974 version, although as I heard people say this beforehand, I was not disappointed when this was only "fine". I give some thoughts below:
Yes, Wednesday night I saw the 1974 Orient Express as preparation for seeing this brand new version of the Agatha Christie story. It hasn't had the most rave of reviews so my expectations were lowered, which was good. This was fine and does seem like "an old-timey film" but it is not the Sidney Lumet version. The general plot is the same, but there were some changes compared to the earlier film and judging by a review I heard, the Hercule Poirot seen here is not the classic literary character. While watching the film I wondered if he was supposed to have Asperger's or not; to borrow a phrase, think Tony Shaloub's Monk TV character and that's the Poirot in this movie. If you love the character, you might be quite aggravated at this interpretation.
I won't go into detail on the other changes as it's spoilers, except that more time was spent outside the train than I expected. I am not sure if those changes were needed, or even how many of them worked. At least the film has nice cinematography and the talented cast does well with what they're given. I just preferred how the 70's movie did things instead; that had more sleuthing and finding clues, while this was more explaining things and at times you don't see how Hercule discovered some clues so it's like he pulled it right out of his ass.
Oh, and I know people weren't happy Johnny Depp was in this film, despite the character's ultimate fate. I imagine some would like a few recently exposed (oh wait, bad choice of words, sorry) problematic actors to be Ratchett instead... and be stabbed multiple times in real life.
Thursday, November 9, 2017
Murder On The Orient Express (The 70's Version)
Murder on the Orient Express (1974)
Runtime: 128 minutes
Directed by: Sidney Lumet
Starring: An incredible cast, as I mention below
From: Paramount
Last night seemed like the best night to finally see this film. I am glad I did, as I explain below:
As the Kenneth Branagh film is just about to be released to cinemas, I figured last night was the perfect time for me to see the 1974 movie version, directed by Sidney Lumet and featuring an incredible cast. Even if there wasn't the new flick, I still should watch a movie that brings together Albert Finney, Martin Balsam, Lauren Bacall, Ingrid Bergman, Jacqueline Bisset, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Sean Connery, John Gielgud, Anthony Perkins, Vanessa Redgrave, Michael York, and Richard Widmark.
Honestly, before the film I was in the dark about the plot aside from the setting and how the hero has to solve a murder while the train is stuck and stopped due to snow. I hadn't read the Agatha Christie novel... heck, I haven't read any of her novels period. Indeed, the plot was famed Belgian detective Hercule Poirot. He was an eccentric individual; then again, there were plenty of over the top characters here. As it was not a subtle story as presented, that is why many of the characters played it loud.
I dare not spoil the story; I imagine that while there are many who are familiar with the plot in some way, there will be many others who are not. I'll just say the film does highlight some lines of dialogue and you'll probably spot those moments; it does come into play at the denouement as Poirot explains his theory of what happened. It is a deal where once things are explained, what is said early in the film makes sense. The very beginning spends a few minutes showing a Charles Lindbergh's baby being kidnapped-esque story where the famed aviator's child is taken, held for ransom, then killed. This movie's kidnapping was of the Armstrong family's tyke being taken and killed; it does factor into what happens on the train.
In short, while over the top this is still a fun movie to watch. Besides, I did guffaw at what the hangup was of Perkins' character. Yes, it actually was what you'd guess it would be.
Runtime: 128 minutes
Directed by: Sidney Lumet
Starring: An incredible cast, as I mention below
From: Paramount
Last night seemed like the best night to finally see this film. I am glad I did, as I explain below:
As the Kenneth Branagh film is just about to be released to cinemas, I figured last night was the perfect time for me to see the 1974 movie version, directed by Sidney Lumet and featuring an incredible cast. Even if there wasn't the new flick, I still should watch a movie that brings together Albert Finney, Martin Balsam, Lauren Bacall, Ingrid Bergman, Jacqueline Bisset, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Sean Connery, John Gielgud, Anthony Perkins, Vanessa Redgrave, Michael York, and Richard Widmark.
Honestly, before the film I was in the dark about the plot aside from the setting and how the hero has to solve a murder while the train is stuck and stopped due to snow. I hadn't read the Agatha Christie novel... heck, I haven't read any of her novels period. Indeed, the plot was famed Belgian detective Hercule Poirot. He was an eccentric individual; then again, there were plenty of over the top characters here. As it was not a subtle story as presented, that is why many of the characters played it loud.
I dare not spoil the story; I imagine that while there are many who are familiar with the plot in some way, there will be many others who are not. I'll just say the film does highlight some lines of dialogue and you'll probably spot those moments; it does come into play at the denouement as Poirot explains his theory of what happened. It is a deal where once things are explained, what is said early in the film makes sense. The very beginning spends a few minutes showing a Charles Lindbergh's baby being kidnapped-esque story where the famed aviator's child is taken, held for ransom, then killed. This movie's kidnapping was of the Armstrong family's tyke being taken and killed; it does factor into what happens on the train.
In short, while over the top this is still a fun movie to watch. Besides, I did guffaw at what the hangup was of Perkins' character. Yes, it actually was what you'd guess it would be.
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
Nature Boy
Last night I saw an ESPN documentary and it was on a topic of interest to me, as I explain below:
I am a pro wrestling fan (I don't watch modern wrestling as I think most of it is insufferable; it'd take far too long to go into detail as to why) so of course I'd have to see this ESPN 30 for 30 documentary. It's been on the shelf for awhile, so after a commercial break they had to do a cut-away and mention Ric Flair's recent serious medical issues, where he had to defy the odds just to survive. Nature Boy did show that he led a very hard life and that was the main cause of those health problems.
The film was rather straightforward: his childhood and life before pro wrestling were discussed, then the incredibly difficult training he had to do in order to even become a pro wrestler... it was like a Marines boot camp. His rise in the 80's to usually being the champ in the rival organization to the WWF is shown, and it was made clear his federation was the polar opposite of the cartoony WWF, and instead it was blood and guts and something adult men would enjoy, where often wrestlers would be bleeding.
It was also shown how the Flair character has become popular in pop culture, with many entertainers and athletes enjoying his catchphrases and his cockiness. The character was an arrogant rich playboy who bragged about how great he was, the Lear jets he flew around in, all the partying, and all the women he bedded. Of course that would be appealing to plenty of people. Unfortunately, he lived that character 24/7; it's bad enough that at the time the popular pro wrestlers were rarely at home so they missed their kids growing up... his nonstop partying and sleeping around led to several failed marriages and his children resenting him. What happened to his son Reid... very sad; I don't want to reveal it for those who don't know and want to see this in the future. I'll just say it's heartbreaking.
Me, I am a pro wrestling nerd so I knew most of what was in the documentary beforehand. Heck, I've even read Flair's autobiography back in the day, which was good. I wish this would have been longer than about 70 minutes; various things were glossed over and I know it's hard to cram all that info into 70 minutes, but this doesn't go above “fine” in my eyes. My prior knowledge does color things and if you only knew about Ric casually, I am sure you'd rate this differently. At least there wasn't too much revisionist history going on and the film was honest in showing he led a flawed life and while he was great in his job as professional wrestler, his personal life was a mess. Thankfully he doesn't drink or party anymore and he's with a woman who cares about him and she should be a stable influence for him.
Oh, and it was neat seeing all those wrestling clips, photos, and comments from various wrestling personalities. I hadn't seen too many pictures of Flair before he became Ric Flair, so that was a treat.
I am a pro wrestling fan (I don't watch modern wrestling as I think most of it is insufferable; it'd take far too long to go into detail as to why) so of course I'd have to see this ESPN 30 for 30 documentary. It's been on the shelf for awhile, so after a commercial break they had to do a cut-away and mention Ric Flair's recent serious medical issues, where he had to defy the odds just to survive. Nature Boy did show that he led a very hard life and that was the main cause of those health problems.
The film was rather straightforward: his childhood and life before pro wrestling were discussed, then the incredibly difficult training he had to do in order to even become a pro wrestler... it was like a Marines boot camp. His rise in the 80's to usually being the champ in the rival organization to the WWF is shown, and it was made clear his federation was the polar opposite of the cartoony WWF, and instead it was blood and guts and something adult men would enjoy, where often wrestlers would be bleeding.
It was also shown how the Flair character has become popular in pop culture, with many entertainers and athletes enjoying his catchphrases and his cockiness. The character was an arrogant rich playboy who bragged about how great he was, the Lear jets he flew around in, all the partying, and all the women he bedded. Of course that would be appealing to plenty of people. Unfortunately, he lived that character 24/7; it's bad enough that at the time the popular pro wrestlers were rarely at home so they missed their kids growing up... his nonstop partying and sleeping around led to several failed marriages and his children resenting him. What happened to his son Reid... very sad; I don't want to reveal it for those who don't know and want to see this in the future. I'll just say it's heartbreaking.
Me, I am a pro wrestling nerd so I knew most of what was in the documentary beforehand. Heck, I've even read Flair's autobiography back in the day, which was good. I wish this would have been longer than about 70 minutes; various things were glossed over and I know it's hard to cram all that info into 70 minutes, but this doesn't go above “fine” in my eyes. My prior knowledge does color things and if you only knew about Ric casually, I am sure you'd rate this differently. At least there wasn't too much revisionist history going on and the film was honest in showing he led a flawed life and while he was great in his job as professional wrestler, his personal life was a mess. Thankfully he doesn't drink or party anymore and he's with a woman who cares about him and she should be a stable influence for him.
Oh, and it was neat seeing all those wrestling clips, photos, and comments from various wrestling personalities. I hadn't seen too many pictures of Flair before he became Ric Flair, so that was a treat.
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
I Still Don't Care For Super 8
I watched and reviewed Super 8 back around 6 years ago, and I only thought it was OK. The scenes with only the kids was pretty good, the scenes with kids and adults was only alright, and adults only was pretty bad. That's what I thought then, and that's what I think now after revisiting the movie last night. Plus, it doesn't help the movie's cause that the 2017 It and Stranger Things have a lot in common and those two things did it better than Super 8 did.
Sunday, November 5, 2017
Friday, November 3, 2017
Have Rocket, Will Travel
Have Rocket, Will Travel (1959)
Runtime: 76 minutes
Directed by: David Lowell Rich
Starring: The Three Stooges, Jerome Cowan, Anna-Lisa, Don Lamond
From: Columbia
Note that I won't be talking about the Three Stooges shorts I see on this page; that'll be Letterboxd only. In case you forgot, my page is here. Below I talk about this feature film, which does not have Curly or Shemp or even the much-maligned Joe Besser, but instead Curly Joe:
This is the perfect time for me to say that in the future, I'll sometimes (and maybe it'll be often during some stretches) I'll go through all the shorts that The Three Stooges did. I have them all on DVD and as I am able to do so on Letterboxd... I will try not to blow up everyone's stream and I'll space out the reviews if I do a bunch in one day. I imagine they won't be as lengthy as what I usually do, but it's just a guess. I've literally watched the Stooges since I was a little kid so doing this and seeing 190 shorts will be awesome; many of them are at least good, although the last few years were pretty rough.
Note that this is a feature-length movie, done after Columbia decided to stop doing shorts. The times have changed as all the other studios stopped doing those by then. Columbia did various shady things involving the Stooges but that's another topic for another time. As the shorts ended up on television in the 50's and were a huge hit, no surprise Columbia decided to have them do feature films; back in the day Moe preferred the trio not do theatrical movies as that'd be more difficult in every way. As things changed... by this time, Curly and Shemp died and Joe Besser left the act. They found Curly Joe DeRita and he was fine, although him acting like Curly was just not the same as the original article.
As for the Stooges in outer space, it is quite silly. They are janitors at Not NASA (a common trope for the trio is them having “common-man” jobs such as plumber, sanitation, carpenters, etc. It made sense during the Great Depression era as of course the audience could easily sympathize; that trope stuck) and they manage to create a fuel that allows Not NASA's rocket to actually work. Due to hijinx they end up on the rocket and fly to Venus, where wackiness happens. There's a talking unicorn, a giant tarantula that shoots a laser beam, and machine has wiped out man; I will presume that idea has existed in science fiction long before the late 1950's.
This isn't as good as many of their shorts but I can still say the movie is average. While the story is rather slapdash, at least there's still the slapstick the Stooges are legendary for. Of course I've always enjoyed that, but there are other things, like the wordplay, sight gags, and one-liners, which you get some of here. There is also material that makes fun of the rich; there's another Stooges trope from the 1930's. I laughed enough where I can't say this is poor or lousy; it's just OK.
Runtime: 76 minutes
Directed by: David Lowell Rich
Starring: The Three Stooges, Jerome Cowan, Anna-Lisa, Don Lamond
From: Columbia
Note that I won't be talking about the Three Stooges shorts I see on this page; that'll be Letterboxd only. In case you forgot, my page is here. Below I talk about this feature film, which does not have Curly or Shemp or even the much-maligned Joe Besser, but instead Curly Joe:
This is the perfect time for me to say that in the future, I'll sometimes (and maybe it'll be often during some stretches) I'll go through all the shorts that The Three Stooges did. I have them all on DVD and as I am able to do so on Letterboxd... I will try not to blow up everyone's stream and I'll space out the reviews if I do a bunch in one day. I imagine they won't be as lengthy as what I usually do, but it's just a guess. I've literally watched the Stooges since I was a little kid so doing this and seeing 190 shorts will be awesome; many of them are at least good, although the last few years were pretty rough.
Note that this is a feature-length movie, done after Columbia decided to stop doing shorts. The times have changed as all the other studios stopped doing those by then. Columbia did various shady things involving the Stooges but that's another topic for another time. As the shorts ended up on television in the 50's and were a huge hit, no surprise Columbia decided to have them do feature films; back in the day Moe preferred the trio not do theatrical movies as that'd be more difficult in every way. As things changed... by this time, Curly and Shemp died and Joe Besser left the act. They found Curly Joe DeRita and he was fine, although him acting like Curly was just not the same as the original article.
As for the Stooges in outer space, it is quite silly. They are janitors at Not NASA (a common trope for the trio is them having “common-man” jobs such as plumber, sanitation, carpenters, etc. It made sense during the Great Depression era as of course the audience could easily sympathize; that trope stuck) and they manage to create a fuel that allows Not NASA's rocket to actually work. Due to hijinx they end up on the rocket and fly to Venus, where wackiness happens. There's a talking unicorn, a giant tarantula that shoots a laser beam, and machine has wiped out man; I will presume that idea has existed in science fiction long before the late 1950's.
This isn't as good as many of their shorts but I can still say the movie is average. While the story is rather slapdash, at least there's still the slapstick the Stooges are legendary for. Of course I've always enjoyed that, but there are other things, like the wordplay, sight gags, and one-liners, which you get some of here. There is also material that makes fun of the rich; there's another Stooges trope from the 1930's. I laughed enough where I can't say this is poor or lousy; it's just OK.
Thursday, November 2, 2017
Poltergeist
Poltergeist (1982)
Runtime: 114 minutes
Directed by: Tobe Hooper... and Steven Spielberg, so the rumors say
Starring: Craig T. Nelson, JoBeth Williams, Beatrice Straight, Heather O'Rourke, Dominique Dunne
From: MGM
I am a little late with this, but oh well. This is still very good; a lot of legend surrounds the film, and you shouldn't let that overwhelm the movie's qualities on its own:
This movie was shown on Turner Classic Movies (on Halloween) and it seemed like a fitting way to end this Halloween season of watching scary, spooky movies. Of course I had seen this before (including once at a revival screening) but the last viewing was before I joined this site in early 2013 so I had never rated/reviewed the film until now.
I won't rehash the story as I will assume most are familiar with it. Thus, I'll say this is still a very good film. It wasn't something I really watched as a kid so I don't have the “nostalgic feels” like some do. I can say it's a lot of fun as an adult. You get to know the average suburban Southern California family before things go terribly wrong. The parents are hippies from the late 60's so them smoking some pot in their middle-aged years isn't too surprising... except it's something you don't see in these sorts of movies in “modern times”, as things have changed. The handymen harassing the teenage daughter that is underage and the mom laughs as they interact with each other and she gives them a vulgar gesture... that seems odder now, and that's not even factoring in how it's REALLY creepy now in this current climate with how there have been so many in Hollywood who have been accused of heinous acts...
But anyhow, the special effects still work 35 years later (for the most part. Even if the “face in the bathroom” thing may not have aged well, it continues to be pretty gross) so that's why I say the film has remained an effective thrill ride which has both scary moments (I presume it's one of the reason why many are skeeved out by clowns) and exciting ones. I'll mention two last things. The first is “The Poltergeist Curse.” It is disturbing how real skeleton were used in the climax; I am not one for curses... but I of course feel bad for the cast members who passed away due to cancer or at too young an age. It is sad for a young woman to be strangled to death by an ex and a child to pass away due to something that was not diagnosed correctly. Then there's who actually directed the movie... I have no idea what to think as people have different stories over how much Spielberg actually directed instead of Hooper. I don't want to disrespect Tobe (especially considering he only passed away a few months ago) and even if he may have had “personal demons” at the time, I know this is a hotly debated topic and some have skillfully written how you can see some of Hooper's fingerprints all over the film so he did have an impact on how it turned out.
Point is, there is plenty of legend surrounding the movie. If you can forget all that and just focus on the ordeal the Freeling family went through, the film still works.
Runtime: 114 minutes
Directed by: Tobe Hooper... and Steven Spielberg, so the rumors say
Starring: Craig T. Nelson, JoBeth Williams, Beatrice Straight, Heather O'Rourke, Dominique Dunne
From: MGM
I am a little late with this, but oh well. This is still very good; a lot of legend surrounds the film, and you shouldn't let that overwhelm the movie's qualities on its own:
This movie was shown on Turner Classic Movies (on Halloween) and it seemed like a fitting way to end this Halloween season of watching scary, spooky movies. Of course I had seen this before (including once at a revival screening) but the last viewing was before I joined this site in early 2013 so I had never rated/reviewed the film until now.
I won't rehash the story as I will assume most are familiar with it. Thus, I'll say this is still a very good film. It wasn't something I really watched as a kid so I don't have the “nostalgic feels” like some do. I can say it's a lot of fun as an adult. You get to know the average suburban Southern California family before things go terribly wrong. The parents are hippies from the late 60's so them smoking some pot in their middle-aged years isn't too surprising... except it's something you don't see in these sorts of movies in “modern times”, as things have changed. The handymen harassing the teenage daughter that is underage and the mom laughs as they interact with each other and she gives them a vulgar gesture... that seems odder now, and that's not even factoring in how it's REALLY creepy now in this current climate with how there have been so many in Hollywood who have been accused of heinous acts...
But anyhow, the special effects still work 35 years later (for the most part. Even if the “face in the bathroom” thing may not have aged well, it continues to be pretty gross) so that's why I say the film has remained an effective thrill ride which has both scary moments (I presume it's one of the reason why many are skeeved out by clowns) and exciting ones. I'll mention two last things. The first is “The Poltergeist Curse.” It is disturbing how real skeleton were used in the climax; I am not one for curses... but I of course feel bad for the cast members who passed away due to cancer or at too young an age. It is sad for a young woman to be strangled to death by an ex and a child to pass away due to something that was not diagnosed correctly. Then there's who actually directed the movie... I have no idea what to think as people have different stories over how much Spielberg actually directed instead of Hooper. I don't want to disrespect Tobe (especially considering he only passed away a few months ago) and even if he may have had “personal demons” at the time, I know this is a hotly debated topic and some have skillfully written how you can see some of Hooper's fingerprints all over the film so he did have an impact on how it turned out.
Point is, there is plenty of legend surrounding the movie. If you can forget all that and just focus on the ordeal the Freeling family went through, the film still works.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)