Inside Out (No, Not The Pixar Movie)

Inside Out (2011)

Runtime: 93 minutes

Directed by: Artie Mandelberg

Starring: Triple H!, Michael Rapaport, Parker Posey, Bruce Dern, Julie White

From: WWE Studios!

This movie is leaving Netflix Instant after Thursday; it's not something I'd recommend people see but this isn't a crap pile either. I explain it all in my Letterboxd reviews below:

No, I did not see the acclaimed Pixar movie last night; rather, I saw what I think is one of the more obscure WWE Studios productions; it involves a recently released from prison Triple H (currently the WWE Champion-if you can believe it-although that will likely change with Wrestlemania coming up this Sunday) playing someone named Arlo Jayne who is so obsessed with PICKLES that he wants his post-prison life to be devoted to making pickles and how things go wrong when he hangs out with his old criminal friends and things go sour...

You can say that Arlo is in a pickle of a situation, as he experiences the jarring feeling of temporarily living with his pal and his wife... and the three were part of a love triangle in high school and his pal (Michael Rapaport) is the one who is F'ing everything up. Would you believe that the wife is played by Parker Posey, or that the ringleader is Bruce Dern and his illegal operation currently is not trafficking coke or pot but rather untaxed cigarettes? I swear that it's all true. Heck, the daughter of Rapaport and Posey is known as Pepper, and once I realized the goofy reason why the screenwriters used such a name... that is “WWE humor”, believe me.

The movie is definitely uneven in tone and for a melodrama where some serious things happen, there are plenty of goofy moments and five minutes after a character does something bad to someone else, that someone else forgives the person rather easily. Yet, I can't say I wasn't entertained by this Louisiana-set and filmed production, where you are reminded of the setting by seeing several people wear New Orleans Saints t-shirts. The movie is not great but I did not find it to be awful either; the cast (even Triple H) is fine, Dern gets to be his usual Grumpy Old Man persona in this stage of his career, and whether intentional or not I certainly got laughs from its wacky tale it told.

While it's not something that I'd recommend-even if Triple H talking about the act of making pickles is incredible-at least it is not something that I regret seeing as it was thankfully not a waste of time.

New World

New World (Sinsegye) (2013)

Runtime: 134 minutes

Directed by: Hoon-Jung Park

Starring: Jung-Jae Lee, Min-Sik Choi, Jeong-Min Hwang, Seong-Woong Park, Ji-Hyo Song

From: Sanai Pictures

I returned to the world of South Korean films, and a good time was had by me. Read about it in my Letterboxd review below:

Yesterday I was thinking of which foreign film to watch and I realized that I've been saying for awhile now I should see more from South Korea and that's a mantra that I have repeated to myself a countless number of times but I've never actually done it. April, I'll try to see a few more from there. Anyhow, I selected this particular motion picture as it was on Instant and both here and elsewhere I saw high praise. Turns out, the praise was warranted.

The plot isn't too complicated on the surface: a cop is undercover in a crime syndicate and has been doing this for years; the leader suddenly dies and there's chaos. The cop wants out but his boss refuses and wants him to influence the election of the new leader, for the benefit of law enforcement. Yes, I have heard it compared to Infernal Affairs, and as I shamefully haven't seen that-yet-I'll take everyone's word for it. From there, there is a lot of intrigue as you don't know who to trust or whom will turn on someone else. It's more crime drama than action, although what action we do see was quality stuff. Yeah there are some rough and gruesome moments, but it's nothing excessively gross like, say, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance.

I was always intrigued with this story and all the twists & turns it took. As it's not a Hollywood product that means it doesn't wallow in cliché and you can't always predict what will happen. Of course I won't be mentioning any spoilers. It was nicely directed (by Hoon-Jung Park), nicely scored (by Yeong-Wook Jo) and nicely acted by the cast, some of whom I recognized from other films I have seen. I have to note that as the lead, Jung-Jae Lee did a fantastic job. Also, while there are plenty of scummy characters to be seen-it is a “Shades of Grey” sort of thing-all of them are entertaining to watch and are intriguing... even the over the top A-hole.

Like I said, I need to watch more movies from this country, as I typically really enjoy what I see from there.

Safety Last!

Safety Last! (1923)

Runtime: 72 minutes

Directed by: Fred Newmeyer/Sam Taylor

Starring: Harold Lloyd, Mildred Davis, Bill Strother, Noah Young, Westcott B. Clarke

From: Hal Roach Studios

Last night I saw this great silent again-the first viewing was years ago. I was happy to see it again as it's a classic silent for a reason. I explain it in my Letterboxd review below:

A long time ago I had seen some Harold Lloyd movies-including this one-and as I liked what I saw, I couldn't turn down the chance to see this classic again when it showed on TCM late last night. This was a wise decision on my part.

Of course, everyone knows the famous final act where Lloyd actually hanged from a giant clock in Los Angeles-something that has been homaged even in modern times-but this is a lot more than that; he plays an everyman named Harold Lloyd who goes to the big city and works at a department store. He's a victim of circumstance and bad things happen to him, although part of the problem is on him as he's not only a heel at times but he and his friend LIMPY BILL pretend to be more wealthy than they actually are, which is an issue for Harold as he tells his girl-she's still in a rural area-he is doing well and giving her gifts he can't really afford. Then she comes to the city...

The movie is pretty darn funny from beginning to end. There are sight gags, jokes in the intertitles, and other things to go along with the physical humor, which Lloyd was always great at. There are plenty of memorable moments which I won't spoil here but I have to mention that the final act climb up the building is still impressive today; it's not just the insane feat of an actual building being climbed and he actually did hang from that clock (part of it was film trickery but in long shots you see Bill Strother-the guy who played Limpy Bill-actually scale a tall building, and not in a single bound) but it's the humor sprinkled throughout and the participation of other characters in that act which make it stand out almost 100 years later... and of course a few years prior he lost his thumb and forefinger in an accident so doing those stunts while wearing a glove on one hand which hid this makes the feat all the more impressive.

I definitely want to see more Lloyd and do so at least once in awhile.

Alice

Alice (Neco Z Alenky) (1988)

Runtime: 86 minutes

Directed by: Jan Svankmajer

Starring: Kristyna Kohoutova

From: Several European Companies

Here is a movie from the Czech area of Europe and it's a rather strange mix of live action and stop-motion animation. I explain it all in my Letterboxd review below: 

Last night I decided to Czech myself before I wreck myself; I looked at my Netflix Instant queue and saw that this would leave the service at the end of the month so it made the most sense to see it immediately. I hadn't seen any other works from director Jan Svankmajer but I have heard he specializes in rather odd creations, so between that and the general weirdness of the original Alice Through the Looking Glass story (which I've never been a fan of; personal preferences is the main reason why), it's no surprise that he wanted to do his version for years and finally was able to do so in the late 80's.

The plot generally follows the classic tale but there are plenty of points where Svankmajer inserts his sensibilities and this turns out to be rather strange; the film itself states that it's “made for children... perhaps.” I can tell you that it's not! I definitely would not have wanted to see it as a kid, as there are many weird and nightmarish images which I won't spoil here; this is not even taking into consideration how I couldn't possibly accurately give a recap of the plot anyhow due to all the random crap and weird non-sequiturs that happen.

Of course, if you love Alice in Wonderland then you may rate this differently... you could love the unique spin on this, or you could hate it and prefer the animated film or... well, not a lot of people like the Tim Burton-Johnny Depp version, but if you do... I viewed it as a daffy acid-drenched adventure where live-action is mixed with stop-motion animation perfectly and you got plenty of surreal landscapes and dream-like moments. I was certainly entertained even if I didn't always have clue one as to what in the hell was going on.

I have mentioned on Letterboxd and elsewhere that there are plenty of examples of weird media being produced behind the Iron Curtain; I don't know how much a factor the stifling influence of Communism had but whether the Soviets, the Czech or others, you definitely got unique products from them, this being a definite example.

Who Killed Captain Alex?

Who Killed Captain Alex? (2010)

Runtime: 64 minutes

Directed by: Nabwana I.G.G. (yes that's his billed name)

Starring: Kakule William, Kakule Wilson, Sserunya Ernest, G. Puffs, Kavubu Muhammed

From: Ramon Film Productions

Here is a movie that came out a few years ago but went viral last year when it was legally released online. It is a no-budget movie from Uganda that is technically pretty bad but boy is it a blast to watch as the people involved really did try their best w/ limited resources to create an entertaining action picture, which they ended up doing in their own way. My Letterboxd review is below: 

As I have mentioned before, when I do this deal each year where for one month me and others devote much of our time to watching foreign movies, it is nice to see both the countries I am familiar with (Italy, South Korea, etc.) along with more obscure ones... this is now the 4th one I have done and in that span the figurative backwaters of the filmmaking world I have visited included NORTH Korea, Tajikistan, Bahrain, and Kazakhstan. This being from Uganda definitely fits in that category. What a backstory this has...

On a messageboard recently a trailer was posted to something known as Ugandan Expendables. It was totally gonzo with amazingly bad CGI yet the action did look legit entertaining. I looked it up and saw that it was from the director of this movie, which I discovered thanks to Letterboxd but had never seen until today. Note that the director calls himself Nabwana I.G.G. Nabwana and his buddies have made a bunch of no-budget films (allegedly, this one cost only the equivalent of 200 American dollars!) in the small village of Wakaliga, which I understand is a part of the capital city of Kampala.

This movie is barely an hour long but boy, does it stand out for being different. The general plot revolves around the titular Captain Alex, who is a member of law enforcement looking to stop a gang known as TIGER MAFIA, led by a dude named Richard. The law takes Richard's brother, which makes Richard really angry. The two sides do battle more than once, and a mysterious person kills Captain Alex. I won't say who it was... as the movie doesn't even tell you who did it! They admit at the end that they don't answer this question. Are they leaving it for a sequel that may never happen? I don't know... but I say it doesn't really matter. Let me address a few things:

* This movie has a “Video Joker”; that is a narrator known as “VJ Emmie” who frequently makes comments about the film in English... even though this has subtitles that translate the Swahili language to English. He makes pithy remarks about the movie and sometimes even clowns on it. It's all very weird, yet I can't say I was not entertained by this... that goes for the Video Joker thing and the entire motion picture in general.

* The special effects: I don't even know if I could say it's “as good as Birdemic” but they're so goofy they are infinitely charming, and these fine fellows really do try their best with limited resources to create a fun action movie like the ones they have seen and loved before, and like I said I enjoyed this for what it was.

* They “borrowed” music from other places rather than create it themselves. This includes a piano cover of the ABBA song Mamma Mia by a French musician known as Richard Clayderman and a panpipes version of Seal's Kiss from a Rose, which you hear a few times. I can't explain why either were used even in the context of the movie.

* The translated dialogue has some rather unique phrases, including calling someone a "diarrhea squirt".

I am glad that a group of Ugandans came together to create movies for the people of Uganda and provide a special sort of entertainment that they can relate to. There are various articles online about the movement known as “Wakalikawood” and I'll eagerly anticipate the Ugandan Expendables.

At Berkeley

At Berkeley (2013)

Runtime: 244 minutes (not a misprint)

Directed by: Frederick Wiseman

Starring: This is a documentary about the University of California at Berkeley

From: Zipporah Films

I explain below in my Letterboxd review why I was glad I saw a 4 hour long documentary in one sitting, and why I wish I could track down more Frederick Wiseman movies... you can get them directly from his production company but it'd be pricey to get even a few of them: 

While it was years ago that I first heard of the once-banned documentary Titicut Follies, it wasn't until a few years ago that I learned about its director-Frederick Wiseman-and how he is not only prolific but he still does documentaries today and he's in his mid 80's. I understand why low-budget filmmakers would prefer to sell their work personally on their website rather than have it streamed (especially if they do this sort of work) but I still wish there was that option, as I feel documentaries should be more accessible due to the potential impact they could have. Anyhow, I was able to find a copy of this so I watched all 244 minutes in one setting; Wiseman typically does lengthy movies so this isn't too excessive compared to his norm.

Berkeley refers to the University of California at Berkeley, a public school that is world-renowned for its extremely high standard of education. It covers several aspects:

* Many different classrooms or workshops are attended, and you see a wide variety of different subjects taught. The workshops include a device that helps a paralyzed person walk. The talks in class sometimes revolve around such subjects as race relations, stereotyping how good a student is just based on appearance & the color of their skin, and economic inequality.

* The higher-ups of the school are seen discussing the subject of fiscal trouble. I know that the people who follow me scan literally across the world, and I know that in many places higher education is paid for by the government. Not in the United States. Even compared to when I went to a university in Illinois back over a decade ago, the cost of tuition and room & board has skyrocketed. That is mainly due to a decrease in funding from state governments; I don't want to get political here as I don't want any giant arguments but that is sadly a fact, and even a prestigious school like Cal has to deal with such issues.

* Maintenance is shown, from the sweeping of stairs to the mowing of lawns.

* Various activities are presented on campus, from violin concerts and Greek rush to hippie festivals and the ROTC.

* Oh, and public protests also. That has to be noted as in this sprawling documentary, the one big event is a huge student protest against the high cost of going to Cal Berkeley. This is shown from both the students and the faculty.

There's a wide variety of opinions heard here and just from listening to those people talk about their lives and social issues while in the context of discussion during class or talk by faculty about the school, you get to learn a lot about how America is currently, inequality, and how difficult it can be to live or just go to school in this society. This goes along with just how engrossing and vibrant a college campus can be; that's what I remember from my days and with this particular institution, you get to see that the student body is quite diverse. This has plenty of people speaking for lengthy amounts of time but even if it's about topics I wasn't too interested in, I still listened to what they had to say and I certainly did learn new things.

The documentary has such a large scope that it really could have been even longer than it was, but in those 4 hours you still get a great sense of what a college campus is like and all the different things that can take place in a short amount of time. I presume it is a Director Trope that none of the people were ID'ed with any sort of graphics (only the few main people at the school were credited at the end) but I can it could also be because it fits into the “fly on the wall” nature of this, where the director lets everyone speak for themselves and it is up to the viewer to decide what they think about everyone... or, it shows that the experiences at Berkeley could happen at any campus of higher learning all across the country.

After viewing this, I definitely will try to track down more Wiseman to watch in the future.

The Ring (No, Not That One)

The Ring (1927)

Runtime: The version I saw was 86 minutes long

Directed by: This is one of the earliest films of Hitchcock

Starring: Carl Brisson, Lillian Hall-Davis, Ian Hunter, Forrester Harvey, Harry Terry

From: British International Pictures

Simply, I saw this earlier today and while it's not one of the best of Hitchcock by any means, it's not bad either. I explain it in my Letterboxd review below: 

Earlier today I was struck by the thought of not knowing what to watch. Suddenly out of nowhere I got the idea to see some Hitchcock; then, came the idea to see what was available on YouTube; I found this and figured I should give it a whirl, as it fills the March Around the World 2016, Silent and Hitchcock lists I have; this motion picture has nothing to do with any creepy ghosts crawling out of a television (or given the date this was made, a phonograph player). Instead, the ring refers to a boxing ring, although the main focus is on a standard love triangle deal w/ a boxer that fights in carnivals, his lady and an actual boxer in the pro ranks.

I should clarify that in the old days (in England, this happened until relatively recently) there were challenges where a boxer or wrestler would face off against anyone in the crowd and if they could last a certain amount of time, they would win a cash prize. As the boxer or wrestler would be extremely tough and be able to handle himself, the cash prize was rarely won. Well, the actual boxer fights against the carnival guy (One-Round Jack, as he is known) so One-Round Jack has to enter the legit boxing world.

The movie I would only call average if it wasn't for the talent that Hitch already showed this early in his career. It is put together well and the theme of circular objects (such as a literal ring or a bass drum) is presented throughout. Intertitles weren't used often so it is the image that conveys the story more and you have no trouble figuring out what is going on. Unfortunately, one of those intertitles refers to a black fighter by the N-word and that was unfortunate, although I knew about that beforehand so it did not come as a surprise. Also, early on you see a rather strange carnival game where it looks like eggs are being tossed at a black man... I can't explain it past that but I probably don't want to know the details anyway. At least it was not all bad: one of Jack's cornermen is black and he's treated normally.

Like I said this would only be an average tale if not for Hitchcock's influence; he doesn't actually make one of his famous cameos here but his presence can be felt, and I do have to give him credit for getting away with a middle finger gag in the middle of a gag about a buffoon character picking his nose.

The Tribe

The Tribe (Plemya) (2014)

Runtime: 132 long minutes

Directed by: Miroslav Slaboshpitsky

Starring: Grigoriy Fesenko, Yana Novikova, Rosa Babiy, Alexander Dsiadevich, Yaroslav Biletskiy

From: Several Ukranian companies

I continued my foreign movie watching by seeing this production from the Ukraine, one that got attention due to its one of a kind gimmick. I wonder if everyone loves it for that gimmick alone... I hated this, personally. I clarify it all below in my Letterboxd review:

I don't remember when I first heard about this, but indeed it is impossible to forget about a motion picture when you hear it's Ukrainian, it's in that native tongue's sign language and there's no voiceover or subtitles to translate what is being signed. I had no idea WHY it was done that way and well, after viewing it last night I still don't know. I realize that most people won't agree with me here, but I found this to be yet another “pretentious horses---” film.

I kept an open mind about the plot: all I had heard was that a new teenage boy enrolls in a boarding school and he falls into a gang; I did not realize that-as I've seen comparisons to-this gang is like the Droogs of A Clockwork Orange and while the school is rundown and crappy, the entire story is just unbelievable and preposterous as hell; really, that gang engages in underage female prostitution with some of their classmates? I cannot possibly believe this could actually happen, it's so absurd. There are many more absurdities that are even harder to accept could happen but I won't spoil it. Just note that this movie was thoroughly unpleasant, filled with loathsome characters and not enjoyable at all to watch. I have to warn everyone that there are at least a very very graphic moments. It's overlong at 132 minutes to boot. I did not think this was a journey worth taking... and oh God, that ending...

As for the gimmick, you end up following the general story just fine, although again I don't know why it was done that way unless it was just to be a gimmick. I wish it would have been done for an actual enjoyable motion picture instead. The movie was also filmed in long takes where the camera moves then stops for a long while, or it just stays stationary. I don't know why that was done either but that was the least of my problems with this, as the cinematography was good; I already explained what my main issues were... also, what was the point of this movie to begin with? That “deaf people are just like us... including being atrocious and depraved”? I have no idea. I hope the point wasn't “to be extremely shocking and daring”, although I wonder if that's the case. Well, to me it takes a lot more than that to leave a positive impression.

Like I said, this is pretentious horses--- and I should have realized this from its central conceit alone but I didn't. Lesson learned.

Crimson Peak

Crimson Peak (2015)

70% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 209 reviews)

Runtime: 119 minutes

Directed by: Guillermo del Toro

Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Jessica Chastain, Tom Hiddleston, Charlie Hunnam, Jim Beaver

From: Universal/Legendary

This was a rare Redbox rental for me yesterday. This polarizing movie captured my attention in part because it is so polarizing. Turns out, I only rated it as average, which is at least better than all those people who say they hated the film. I explain it all in my Letterboxd review below: 

Yesterday I ended up going to a location with a Redbox, and I had a choice of seeing a few different recent releases. I selected this one, mainly because it's been so polarizing. While not as drastic as Man of Steel (I don't think a more polarizing popular motion picture could possibly be made) I still saw ratings and opinions all over the board for this. I was helped that I knew beforehand how inaccurately it was marketed by Universal so I knew it wouldn't be a straight-up horror picture.

I presume most know the general plot of how it revolves around early 20th century Buffalo, New York (a rare time in cinema a movie takes place in that city) before moving to England and how you deal with a young female author, her family/friends and a rather odd brother/sister from the UK who enters their lives, so I'll move on from that. I'll say that in this story filled with the iris out technique (you know, what you see in cartoons when the screen turns black except for a shape around a character's face and it zooms in on the face until it becomes all black; what an odd stylistic choice by Del Toro), I can say that the visuals are great. While there are some things that are on the pretentious side, it still is a film that looks great; aside from nailing the Gothic aesthetic they were going for, many different colors were seen on screen and it was beautiful to look at. If I would have seen this on the big screen (which almost happened) I know I would have loved seeing it that way.

As for the story, the general idea of what it's about is fine with me. I was also OK with it “being a story with ghosts, rather than a ghost story” (a meta comment on this that was actually said in the film concerning the lead girl and a story she wrote). Problem is, in execution it does not work. I can't go into detail without mentioning spoilers so I will say that for me, it did not work. The film telegraphs things rather loudly (but not as loudly as the score when there are jump scares; yes, this sadly has jump scares) to the point it's extremely predictable and it's one of those things where you figure out things much sooner than the lead does. I can't really complain about the cast-although maybe Guillermo should move on from Charlie Hunnam-and Tom Hiddleston in his role was great casting. I wish the storytelling and characters could have matched up to the visuals, but alas...

Without any doubt I can understand why I have seen so many different opinions regarding this motion picture. I can at least rate it as average due to its looks and the general idea of the story. I wish it would have turned out better as I have no issues with Del Toro and has others have noted in recent times, we need more original ideas such as this at the box office rather than the rehashed or hackneyed or lazy poppycock we commonly see get wide releases in the United States.

Dead Sands

Dead Sands (2013)

Runtime: The version I found online was 86 minutes long

Directed by: Ameera Al-Qaed

Starring: Mohammed Junaid, Razan Jamal, Fatima Dincsoy, Nujood Al Mahmood, Zeeshan Jawed Shah

From: FANtasy Features

I don't have much of an intro to say. I explain it all in my Letterboxd how I saw an unknown to the Western world Bahrain zombie movie, and how it's pretty terrible: 

I realize that in the past week I hadn't been paying much attention to continuing my list of watching foreign movies this month; I got tied up with other things. Well, last night a mutual liked a list from someone else and they had compiled 181 different movies from 181 different countries and put it all together. The title of this and it being from what is figuratively a backwater (Bahrain) in the filmmaking world captured my attention. I imagine there are some that don't know where in the blue hell Bahrain even is. I can tell you it's in the Middle East, a small island country located between Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This is a zombie picture, and many people-me included-are already tired of that trope. I was hoping that this would do something different with that.

Well, I discovered what a zombie movie would be like if it was filled with unlikable bitchy whiny characters, and the weakest most basic gore effects. You certainly don't see anybody get eaten. I know it's not the first to do that, but this showed that it can be done in any setting in any country. Whether they speak in Arabic or English (subtitles are provided for both languages, and I understand many people there speak both), most of the characters-of course, almost all of them are young adults-you see throughout are pretty terrible people, Bahranian asstagonists. The movie namechecks “Romero movies” (I don't think I need to explain how much better even the worst ... of the Dead movie is to this), references Nightmare City in that they visit a hospital-but don't go in-and they end up in a cinema, I guess because it happened in Demons. I swear to Allah, there's even a visit to a mall. Sigh... those films are also superior to this. I did not get much of an impression of how live in Bahrain is... unless all of the youth there are raging A-holes.

Basically, a bunch of random things happen to characters that you couldn't give an F less about, and then the movie stops rather than ends... and they got the idea from American films that you have to threaten a sequel, even if it's likely it will never happen. It's not satisfying for the gorehounds either as like I said, what you see is only the most basic effects and you see no one actually eaten. Really, this is a giant waste of time; as hardly anyone has said they have seen this in the Western world, I guess I have to be the one to tell (potentially) millions of people that this really sucks and there are seemingly thousands of similar motion pictures that are more worthy of a watch or rewatch. According to the IMDb this was made for not even 15,000 American dollars and the country is not experienced in motion pictures; even then, they should have come up with something better than this, and create characters who aren't gigantic pieces of dung.

Still, in case anyone wants to know, think Nightmare City or Planet Terror when it comes to these zombies. They don't wield weapons but they are of the fast-moving variety and at the beginning, they are talking about it as if it was a virus, so the comparison is easy to make.

The Bellboy/Smorgasbord

The Bellboy (1960)

Runtime: 72 minutes

Directed by: Jerry Lewis

Starring: Jerry Lewis, Alex Gerry, Bob Clayton, Sonny Sands, Eddie Shaeffer

From: Paramount

Smorgasbord (i.e. Cracking Up) (1983)

Runtime: 89 minutes

Directed by: Jerry Lewis

Starring: Jerry--- Who Else? (that's how he was billed), Herb Edelman, Milton Berle, Sammy Davis, Jr., Zane Busby

From: Warner Bros.

I saw these two movies last night on TCM, as that's when Jerry's 90th birthday was. Read both those reviews below, The Bellboy first:

Yesterday was the 90th birthday of the legendary Jerry Lewis. Now, I haven't seen too much of his work in my life aside from a few films-such as The King of Comedy, which I'll review here one day once I finally see it again-but I am willing to see some of his work, no matter what I think of him personally. The telethon stuff is great and all... the way I've seen him act, though, he came across as a real boor and real obnoxious in real life, and that's not even taking into account his attitudes on the opposite sex, mainly that women shouldn't be in comedy for a variety of reasons, and it deals with them being “would-be mothers”, and to me it sounded so Neanderthal. It did not exactly give me a lot of motivation to delve deep into his work. Still, I'll try to ignore those prejudices when I talk about the movies I see him in. I saw a pair of them last night when they showed on TCM; I went with two that can't easily be seen by streaming means.

The movie starts off with an executive explaining that this is a plotless film that is basically a series of sketches, probably because that was a novel thing at the time. From what I know of the sort of movies that he starred in and directed, it is not hard for me to understand why there is the joke (which I understand used to be a thing but that hasn't been a thing for years; at least that's what someone from the country said on a messageboard) that the French love Jerry Lewis, what with the different plot, characters and the way it's shot. Certainly, I can imagine them needing a change of underwear at the very thought of doing a movie without a plot!

Anyhow, Old Jerry plays a bellboy named Stanley who works at the fancy Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach; except for one instance he is a mute, which is part of the gag. Like I said there's no plot but it is like a silent movie in that a good number of the comedic bits involve physical humor, and as I enjoy silent comedies, it was a reason why I did enjoy watching this. Jerry also plays himself and while annoying at times, at least there were some nice satiric barbs about what is known now as a star's entourage.

The movie is hit or miss, although it does help that there are so many gags, if you don't like one, it won't be long before you get to one that you like better. Personally, even at only 72 minutes I realized there was a reason why most films have some sort of a plot, as it started to feel longer than that. Still, with what was present this was a pretty entertaining picture.

Now, onto the movie sometimes known as Cracking Up:

This was the second and last Jerry Lewis movie I watched on TCM last night. It was one of his movies which aren't easily found via streaming means so I figured I should watch it... besides, several people here on Letterboxd rated it real highly, and that got my attention. I can only rate it at 3 stars but that is nothing to be ashamed of. It is noteworthy that this is the last film directed by Lewis and as he liked to direct, write and produce movies this is really the final time we get unfiltered Jerry, for better or for worse.

The plot is ostensibly about a klutzy man named Warren Nefron (Jerry--- Who Else? That's how he was billed in the credits. Another good gag in the credits is saying that the title song is by Marcel Marceau) who fails in an attempt to kill himself-a scene that thankfully is amusing instead of tasteless-and he visits a psychiatrist to try and fix his problems. However, it's really a series of sketches involving not only Nefron and the psychiatrist but also a bunch of different characters, many of whom are played by Lewis. You get to see him be everything from an old Yogi and a Frenchman from a few centuries ago to a 1930's gangster and a version of Buford T. Justice, which was definitely something else. I am not sure why at the last minute Warner Brothers changed the title to Cracking Up, as the original title is a word that factors into the film; I don't get it.

As you might expect from a series of sketches that usually don't have anything to do with one another aside from the main story and a character or two popping up a few times later (for example, if legendary American football player Dick Butkus tells you not to smoke, you better listen to him), it's a real mixed bag... at least the movie lives up to its original title. I can say that it has enough solid laughs to where it's a 3 star picture.

This was on the shelf for awhile so Jerry was in his mid 50's when he did all those pratfalls here. Before this movie showed on TCM, they showed an interview clip from a few weeks ago where Lewis said that there wasn't a day he did not wake up in pain for the past FIFTY years. I do feel bad for him there as that is pretty crappy, to say the very least. Ignoring the toll it took on his body, the pratfalls he did here were pretty amusing, the highlight being him finding an office floor as slippery as ice, and his ways of combating that. This apparently barely got released in the United States; maybe the audiences then didn't care for Old Jerry; me, I say that this anarchic picture gave me some good chuckles.

Wyatt Earp

Wyatt Earp (1994)

Runtime: 191 minutes

Directed by: Lawrence Kasden

Starring: Kevin Costner, Dennis Quaid, Michael Madsen, Linden Ashby, Jeff Fahey, Gene Hackman

From: Warner Bros

Here is me catching up now; tonight I'll post a pair of reviews at the same time as they both feature the same auteur. With this motion picture, it's not as great as Tombstone but that doesn't mean it's bad, not at all. I talk about this in my Letterboxd review below:

I have had this movie on Blu for a long while; I just wanted to wait to see this until after I had rewatched Tombstone; as I explained in my last review, I put off that rewatch until Sunday night, so finally I was able to get to this. Thankfully I had the free time to watch this 3 hour film in one sitting.

The plot is simple: It is a bio-pic of the famed lawman of the late 1800's. We start off with his childhood and see his dad is Gene Hackman. We see Wyatt from cradle to the grave, pretty much. Needless to say, there are comparisons to be made between this and Tombstone; there are a number of characters who appear in both, such as his brothers Morgan and Virgil, Doc Holliday, Big Nose Kate, Sheriff Behan, Josie Marcus, etc. To me, it's personal opinion which performances you think are “best”. I will say that the big name cast here (from Gene Hackman's small role to Jeff Fahey, Mark Harmon, Michael Madsen-who couldn't get out of this to be Vincent Vega-Bill Pullman, Isabella Rossellini, JoBeth Williams and Tom Sizemore; there's also a few people that became more famous later, like Tea Leoni and Jim Caviezel) all perform admirably, but I have to note that Dennis Quaid as Doc Holliday in a different sort of performance than what Val Kilmer did as the character was just about as great; I mean, it was real close when you compare the two, IMO.

I don't need to say that this fudged certain facts from Earp's life; after all, that's what Tombstone did... hell, Wyatt himself stated tall tales and various myths about his life. It's just that some moments were clearly done to be cinematic and it just seemed goofy, you know. At least I can say that the movie seemed to portray Earp in an honest manner. I do not know much about his personal life or how he acted, but the movie was not afraid to show that he was “cold-hearted”, a phrase you hear uttered a few times. To be honest and blunt, at times he came across as a real dick. He did not treat his brothers' wives nicely, and then there was him cheating on his common-law wife with Josie. This was originally going to be a six hour miniseries and it may have been better that way; sure this is 191 minutes long but with the eventful life he had, only some parts of his life were covered.

Still, I can at least say that this was good; as I mentioned before there were nice performances all around, there was some very pretty scenery and while this wasn't a biopic that hit a home run, you still got the idea of why Wyatt Earp was one of the more famous figures of the American West; he steadfastly believed in upholding the law and yet if you mess with his family, you will face retribution. It may be because I am a history nerd but I was never bored with this and I am glad I finally checked this out after putting it off for a long time.

One last thing: I remember back in 1995 when my dad (a big fan of both the Western genre and of history) saw the movie, he remarked that he wasn't sure if it was accurate that the movie contained an F-bomb, asked by a bad guy pondering, “Who the F is Wyatt Earp?” In the pre-Google days, he was able to look it up by other means and he discovered that yes, the F word was around back then. Hell, it has been used for a few centuries now.

Tombstone

Tombstone (1993)

Runtime: 130 minutes

Directed by: George P. Cosmatos

Starring: An incredible cast; it includes Kurt Russell, Val Kilmer, Sam Elliott, Bill Paxton, and Dana Delaney

From: Hollywood Pictures

Of course this is yet another deal for me where I look back at a movie I had seen before but the last viewing was many years ago. I had it in my head for awhile to watch this again, and that is what I finally did last night. I was happy to see this again. I talk about it in my Letterboxd review below: 

For me, sometimes the hardest struggle of the day is deciding among the wide selection of choices I have just which particular motion picture I want to watch. Sometimes I just decide on a whim to pick something out of nowhere. This is what happened here; at times I thought of revisiting this as the last viewing was way too long ago, but they were fleeting thoughts. Finally, it came to mind last night at the right time so I was hoping I made the right choice and my memories of youth weren't in error; thankfully those memories were correct.

The plot is straightforward: legendary lawman Wyatt Earp and his brothers arrive in Tombstone, Arizona. He says that he is retired but a dastardly bunch of bandits known as The Cowboys-who always wear red sashes-raise hell so the siblings have to mount up and protect the town. Things escalate (even after the famed Gunfight at the O.K. Corral) and you see much in the way of gun battles and male posturing.

I don't know all the details but I know that there were various production issues and drama on set; considering all that it is quite fortunate that we were able to get a memorable picture that acquired many passionate fans at the time and even now there are plenty that love it. I've heard plenty of praise over the years. Looking at its cast, what an incredible lineup of people, from Kurt Russell (no relation, sadly) and Val Kilmer (what an amazing performance as Doc Holliday) to Bill Paxton, Powers Boothe, Michael Biehn, Sam Elliott, Dana Delaney-who definitely had the biggest female role and even Charlton Heston. Then, there's the faces that became more famous later, such as Stephen Lang, Thomas Haden Church and Billy Bob Thornton.

I understand some of the complaints that have been made about this; it is true that most of the female roles are little more than window dressing, and it's a he-man macho film with some over the top melodrama and a few silly situations. Even with all that said, this is still a thrilling movie to watch, as there are badasses all over the place (both with the good guys and the bad guys) who chew up the scenery and do awesome and/or over the top things. It was simply a good time and it reminds me that I need to see more films in the Western genre in general.

The Gambler

The Gambler (Losejas) (2013)

Runtime: 109 minutes

Directed by: Ignas Jonynas

Starring: Vytautas Kaniusonis, Oona Mekas, Rimas Blockis, Giedre Giedraityte, Lukas Kersys

From: Several Lithuanian companies

Yes, this is my first ever movie from the country of Lithuania. Yeah, that is a big reason why I chose this, along with the plot sounding interesting to me. Overall, it's fine. I talk about the film in my Letterboxd review below:

“You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold'em”...

Oh wait, this isn't based on the song by Kenny Rogers, the movies that Kenny did for television that WERE based on the song, the James Caan/Paul Sorvino film from the 70's or the 2014 remake starring Mark Wahlberg. Instead, this is the first Lithuanian movie I have ever seen. It is on Netflix Instant and the short plot description sounded interesting.

The story: Paramedic Vicentas is pretty good at his job; he often gets recognized at work for the good job he does. Problem is, he has a gambling problem. Sure, most of the other people who are his co-workers also engage in that vice, but they don't have loan sharks constantly on their tail due to mounting debts. He starts a rather morbid lottery where they literally bet on when their patients due, and except for Ieva, everyone participates. Vicentas starts a relationship with Ieva and as you might expect, those two things come into conflict, especially when things spiral out of control in ways that surprised me.

I have to note that this is a pretty bleak movie. Sure, the lottery that drives the film is darkly comic and there indeed are black humor moments, and because I am me I laughed at all of them. But, things are stark. Without giving anything away, bad things happen to various characters. If it was designed to warn the viewer not to engage in gambling, then I say it succeeded as you don't want to deal with the sorts of situations that happen in this picture!

The filmmaking is fine (although at times it shows off in a noticeable way, IMO), the acting was at least decent, w/ the two leads playing Vicentas and Ieva doing the best job, especially with some of the moments they had to deal with. I just have to note that there were several moments or scenes which left me puzzled and flummoxed. I can't say that all those bits were because of things lost in translation, either. I can't go into detail without divulging spoilers, but there were times where I was confused and wished I knew what the director was trying to do there or what he was trying to say.

That said, I can still say that this movie was fine and I do not regret watching it; the dark satirical moments did tickle me pink, and while not maybe executed as great as it could have been, the general idea of the plot is gold... or rather, it's worth a lot of coin.

White God

White God (Feher Isten) (2014)

Runtime: 121 long agonizing minutes

Directed by: Kornel Mundruczo

Starring: Zsofia Psotta, Sandor Zsoter, Lili Horvath, Lili Monori, Szabolcs Thuroczy

From: Several Hungarian, German, and Swedish companies, but this is mainly a Hungarian movie

Here is another foreign film from me. It's mainly Hungarian and I've known of it for awhile. I explain the backstory about it and everything else in my Letterboxd review below... note that I am not a fan of this at all:

Awhile back on various sites I heard all about this Hungarian movie and how it was about dogs finally having enough of humans' bark and turning against them and I thought it sounded odd but I did not reject the movie on the spot. I heard a wild mix of opinions about the film and I had no idea what to think. Thankfully, Netflix Instant threw us a bone and put it on their service, so I took a bite at it and well, I'll be doggone but this was simply horrible, and not even all the cute doggies-or how the filmmakers used real life hounds-could save it. I could use many terms containing foul language; I'll just keep it clean and say this was pretentious twaddle and nonsense.

I say that the whole plot was stupid and did not make a lick of sense. I am not even talking about how lead dog Hagen is able to lead that uprising to begin with. I don't want to try and untangle that Gordian knot and try to figure it out. I am talking about the plot as a whole, and how there's suddenly a tax on mongrels done by “the State” as they want purebred only so everyone gets rid of mutts. That makes zero sense, even as a metaphor or allegory or satire, apparently against those that are xenophobic. It's just asinine. This movie honestly screwed the pooch, and that is even with nice performances by the twin dogs that played Hagen. They were certainly better actors than most of the humans.

Then, there's how most of the adults you see here are irredeemable; I mean, just thoroughly unpleasant characters, evil in the most ham-fisted lazy ways imaginable. One of them might as well have been Snidely Whiplash and tied a dog on a set of train tracks. I did not enjoy watching these people and no matter the revenge that you figuratively or literally saw from the dogs, I was not left with the feeling that I spent my two hours (talk about an overlong film; it was a ruff experience) in a wise manner. I love dogs and it's nice to see them on screen... but even there this movie was insufferable. This is definitely no Rise of the Planet of the Apes (the movie that this is always compared to) or Samuel Fuller's final American film White Dog, which had to be the only reason why this was even called White God. I've never reviewed White Dog here, but while it's not a 5 star classic it's still better than this dog turd of a motion picture.

Then, there's bad filmmaking on hand, from how the camera shakes about too much-yes, this had damn shaky-cam!-to how they did the pointless thing of showing part of the ending at the beginning; why was this even done? What a two paws down moment. I don't know why people rate this so highly, but I'll just chalk it up to something that I'll never understand-if they were in heat over this, that is fine-and I'll just bury the thoughts of ever having seen this. I mean, I'd rather get neutered than watch this overblown wankery ever again!

Triple 9

Triple 9 (2016)

55% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 127 reviews)

Runtime: 115 minutes

Directed by: John Hillcoat

Starring: Many famous faces, but I'll mention Casey Affleck, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Anthony Mackie, Clifton Collins, Jr. and Kate Winslet

From: Open Road

Here's a movie I saw last night, despite it not getting great reviews. I watched it in the Tampa area at a Muvico, as I hadn't been in that area for months and my last visit to a Muvico was years ago. It was a nice-enough place and this film is fine, although it's not great. I talk about it in my Letterboxd review below:

I don't know how other people feel but for me, lowered expectations do have an impact on how I feel about a movie. I think that this is an example of that. I do not remember when I first heard about this motion picture; I just know that once I heard about the plot, the director (the only other film of his I have seen is Lawless, which I will watch again in the future so I can give it a proper review on this site, but I did enjoy that) and the great cast... it seemed like a winning formula. Well, once it came out, the reviews proclaiming it a disappointment poured in, and many said it was below average. I was surprised to hear that it wasn't great, but I still wanted to see for myself, so that is what I did last night. Turns out, I was the only person at the screening, but I was fine with it; it's not like I was seeing a comedy where other people laughing would help, or a horror film where people's shrieks would be a benefit.

The plot isn't too complex: some bad cops/ex-cops perform robberies. We see them acquire something important at a bank for Russian Jew mob boss (an inspired turn by Kate Winslet); well, she wants them to do one last job as it would really help them out, but despite the large amount of cash, it requires breaking into a Homeland Security Building. They come up with a plan; I know it's a spoiler but as it's right in the title, a 999 in police code means that an officer is down. There are plenty of bad people we get to follow, but at least there's Casey Affleck as a good cop and his uncle is the very eccentric detective played by Woody Harrelson; the cast is great but Woody and that character Jeffrey Allen are the most memorable to me.

I do agree that there are some script and plot issues; I won't spoil them here for those that still want to see this motion picture; I just wanted to acknowledge they were there. Also, the characters were on the one-dimensional side. Yet, I still found this to be entertaining-enough. Like I said it has a great cast; as I mentioned in my review for The Martian it's always nice to see Chitwetel Ejiofor get a big role, and the other people do nicely with their roles, even if some of them get short-shrifted. I wouldn't have minded seeing more of Gal Gadot, personally... I was still always interested in the story and while most of the characters aren't good people, at least they weren't insufferable p***** and loathsome f**** like everyone was in the other recent movie set in Atlanta about bad law enforcement known as Sabotage. There are some quality action sequences and the electronic score from Atticus Ross and friends is pretty damn awesome.

I've debated in my own head since late last night how to rate this movie. I guess I'll say that it's fine so 3 stars it is. It has enough cool elements to where I can say it's better than average, but its issues can't make me rate it higher than that, and while I am not upset it wasn't better, I wish it would have been considering all the talent involved. I should probably also watch the better films that this apparently ripped off.

Police Academy 3: Back In Training

Police Academy 3: Back in Training (1986)

Runtime: 83 minutes

Directed by: Jerry Paris

Starring: The usual faces

From: Warner Bros.

I randomly watched this yesterday and I was glad it was able to provide me some chuckles and chortles. I talk about it in my Letterboxd review below: 

Yesterday was an “eh” day for me at best so I decided it was probably a good time to see something goofy and silly so I can have some laughs. I had seen this as a kid but I did not remember too much about it, and I recalled nothing about the final act.

What a threadbare plot it had: the area has two police academies but the state has to make budget cuts so one of them have to be closed down. Sad to say the idea of states running out of money and thus having to make such cuts is all too believable. Anyhow, there's a small committee going around looking at both programs, and as others have said this is one of many examples in the 80's trope of two groups feuding with each other. We're back in the same location of the film (I don't mean just Toronto; it's obvious it is filmed there; during the finale you see the CN Tower a few times. I mean the same academy as the original) and we get several scenes and moments repeated. Goofy, but then again the series changed into a PG thing as kids loved the first two. It doesn't mean that they left out the moments of racism, sexism, and a visit to the gay leather bar known as the Blue Oyster.

The movie is pretty stupid and there isn't much of a plot. Yet, it was nice that the films had continuity and some supporting characters from the first two returned... although a little of Zed went a long way. Not all gags worked, yet there were plenty of them so there was going to be some that worked, and I did have enough laughs to where I can at least rate it as average.

Besides it being nice to see those familiar faces, there are other things I enjoyed. I once again realized that Art Metrano did a quality job as a real butt-kissing A-hole. And it was definitely an 80's film through and through. There was even a musical scene where some members of the cast sang, and a saxophone was played. There was the 80's politically incorrect moments, and the score for the final action scene was definitely a product of the era. So was there being an Asian person (Takashi from Revenge of the Nerds) who OF COURSE knew karate. Oh, and I remembered that most of the films in the franchise ended with a halfway decent action sequence, and that was the case with the jet-ski finale we saw here.

At least I still got enjoyment out of this and my memories of it weren't tarnished.

Come Drink With Me

Come Drink With Me (Da Zui Xia) (1966)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: King Hu

Starring: Pei-Pei Cheng, Hua Yueh, Hung Lieh Chen, Chih-Ching Yang, Yi Feng

From: Shaw Brothers

I saw this movie last night on Netflix Instant; it does deserve its high reputation. The movie I mean, although the same can go for Netflix Instant. After all, I was able to see this subtitled instead of a goofy dub. I talk about this in my Letterboxd review below:

Not that long ago, Netflix Instant added some Shaw Brothers movies to their service. I figured it was about time for me to try it out and see, for example, if the films would be subbed or dubbed. They were subbed, which I unquestionably did appreciate. I chose this one as it is one of the more famous Shaw films and a big early hit for them.

The plot is simple yet effective: some bandits kidnap the son of the Governor, as the government has their leader. They want a trade, or else the son dies. Well, the Governor happens to have a daughter named Golden Swallow who is a badass, and a graceful one at that. The lady happened to be a ballet dancer in real life so some of the fighting is more graceful than realistic... but I was good with that, as it was all exciting and thrilling. She meets up with someone named Drunken Cat (who has a troupe of kids, one of whom may or may not be Jackie Chan; it's just a rumor that he was) and he's not what he first appears to be. From there we get plenty of sword action & such things as daggers and poison darts.

I will give this movie a high rating not because of its grand reputation but because it deserves a nice rating. There are scenic outdoor settings and nice sets too. Lead Pei-Pei Cheng does a corking job at being a vicious engine of destruction... and being a very cool lady. The rest of the cast perform admirably but she and Drunken Cat were the highlights for me. A great scene was early on when Golden Swallow enters an inn and despite it being stocked with villains, she's not scared and we see how quick she is to deflect any sort of object coming their way, then she whips all their asses. Besides the action and the drama, it was a lengthy scene so things had time to build up.

I am glad I finally saw this. It was an exciting story where the relationship between Ms. Swallow and Mr. Cat was interesting, and Cat has a layered backstory too. The final act has an entire crew of female fighters and I found that to be pretty dope. There are some wacky moments but I rolled with the film when-for example-you see steam shoot out of people's hands. Overall, its reputation is deserved.

Lethal Weapon 2

Lethal Weapon 2 (1989)

Runtime: 119 minutes

Directed by: Richard Donner

Starring: Mel Gibson, Danny Glover, Joe Pesci, Joss Ackland, Patsy Kensit

From: Warner Bros.

I wasn't planning on seeing a movie this late afternoon and posting another review tonight but that's how it turned out. This movie is pretty great, still. My Letterboxd review is below: 

I was not planning on watching this movie late this afternoon into this early evening but that's how it turned out, and I am glad I saw it again as the last viewing was many years ago and this was the first time I had seen the Director's Cut, although that only has three random scenes that don't amount to much.

I presume everyone is familiar with the plot and how Riggs and Murtaugh are now buddies (Riggs does his laundry at the Murtaugh residence, after all) and they deal not only with a case of a corrupt South African diplomat and his buddies (as Apartheid hadn't quite ended yet, of course it is brought up) but also the State's witness known as Leo Getz-a little of him truly goes a long way-and the two are connected... so I'll move onto the details.

I won't compare this to the original as I think both are great in their own ways. I mean, detriments that can be mentioned here is how the motormouthed Leo can get to be quite annoying, and there's also a plot twist involving the late wife of Riggs; people have argued if it was really necessary and I say that's not a bad point to argue. Even with all that, I can still rate this very highly and there are a few reasons why.

It's just so damn entertaining. There's great action scenes-that are clearly shot-(the movie starts off right away with a quality car chase sequence). There are some pretty big laughs to be had. There are some unforgettable scenes (literally), such as the bomb on the toilet and what ended up being a commercial for condoms. There's still some time for heavy drama. And even if you exclude the whole Apartheid thing, the villains are really rotten people so you love them getting their comeuppance. Also, it has to be said that the score from Michael Kamen, David Sanborn and Eric Clapton is very good and fitting to this motion picture. I am thankful that a film I loved seeing as a youngster is still awesome in 2016.

When Animals Dream

When Animals Dream (Nar Dyrene Drommer) (2014)

Runtime: 84 minutes

Directed by: Jonas Alexander Arnby

Starring: Sonia Suhl, Lars Mikkelsen, Sonja Richter, Jakob Oftebro, Stig Hoffmeyer

From: Several different Danish companies... and a French one too

I have returned after not having seen a movie in a few days. I had other things to worry about. But now I am back and things should be more normal now, at least for the time being. My review of this foreign movie is below in my Letterboxd review:

I haven't posted any reviews in the past few days as real life got in the way; don't worry it was nothing bad or serious, but I had other things to worry about. However, I am pretty much in the clear for the next few weeks barring any unexpected setbacks. I knew I had to get back on the train of foreign film watching, so why not check out something that I heard a number of people compare to Let the Right One In? After all, LTROI is one of my personal favorites so why not see another Scandinavian horror movie w/ a young female protagonist?

The story concerns a 16 year old girl named Marie; her family are considered outsiders in the small Danish town they live in; her mother is in a wheelchair. She notices her body changing (yeah, a girl becoming a woman was clearly a definite theme) and well, I think the cat is out of the bag already when it comes to this: Marie and her mother are werewolves. She gets mistreated and you can guess what happens with that.

I heard that the movie was slow-paced, so at least I knew that going in, and what I heard was correct. I also heard there wasn't a lot of lycanthropy action and with both, I am fine with that as for me it's not an automatic detriment. Sonia Suhl did a nice job as Marie, although her character wasn't exactly dynamic. Sad to say I can only rate this as average, despite game performances all around and good cinematography. I won't get into the issues I had with it as I think I've already spoiled enough. The idea was better than the execution. This is far down the list of complaints but I am not quite sure why two masked man attacked Marie in a gross way... only to unmask themselves in full view of her. While that Eurotrash character Felix was a highlight in the time he appeared, this movie did not wow me like it did some people.

This is no Let the Right One In, IMO. Many films will suffer in comparison and plus, those two stories are real different. Yet, what LTROI did and the story it told was of more interest to me and it was definitely better executed. I know that some love WAD and you may feel the same way; I just can't rate this above average despite some nice points and a decent ending.

Blindside

Blindside (1987)

Runtime: 101 minutes

Directed by: Paul Lynch

Starring: Harvey Keitel, Lori Hallier, Lolita Davidovich, Michael Rudder, Durango Coy

From: Simcom Limited

Here is a rather obscure movie I stumbled upon Tuesday night (I've been busy this week; I won't return with a review until Sunday) on Netflix Instant. It apparently sat on the shelf before it came out either in 1986 or 1987... I've seen both dates used. This Canuxploitation has been forgotten through the passage of time and in this case, it's not such a crime that has happened. It's not awful, but it's not great either. I say a few words about it in my Letterboxd review below:

Just (on Tuesday) I signed back up for Netflix Instant; I am off and on with that service. I am a part of it again as it will be the main source of the foreign movies I will watch this month. I randomly stumbled upon this film while searching for something else; I had never heard of it and looking around online there aren't too many people who have seen this or admit to have seen it before, if you judge things by sites like this one or the IMDb. I saw that it featured Sarah from the original My Bloody Valentine, Lolita Davidovich, and Harvey Keitel, so that captured my attention. I laughed out loud when I saw that Keitel was the lead and his character was named PENFIELD GRUBER. What a name. The fact that this is a Canadian film that admits it's set and filmed in Canada is nice also, in terms of the March Around the World thing.

Penfield is a former behavioral scientist who is an expert in surveillance but a tragedy in his life led him to running a sleazy crappy motel. He unwittingly gets involved in a war between rival gangs and besides having an exotic dancer “friends with benefits” with the stage name Lusty Lilac, but he falls in love with a girl who is involved with one of the gang members. Things happen... and sadly this is only an average picture. It's on the dark side, which is fine, except that it's just average.

Really, there isn't much else to say about it; things happen, Penfield is still upset by that tragedy in his life (it involved his then-wife), there's some pretty hammy acting, there is a surprising ending, the guy who directed this also directed the original Prom Night, and the screenwriter not only still works today but what he's written includes such prestigious Steven Seagal pictures as Maximum Conviction and Force of Execution.

Sometimes, a movie is forgotten through the passage of time and it's unfortunate that the people of today don't know about it. Other times, it's perfectly alright if something is forgotten; this picture is the latter, as there is nothing noteworthy about it which would make me want to tell everyone to check it out. It's not poorly made; it's just unexciting.

Mahakaal

Mahakaal (1993)

Runtime: The version I saw was 129 minutes long; there's a cut out there that's like 145 minutes long

Directed by: Shyam Ramsay/Tulsi Ramsay

Starring: Karan Shah, Archana Puran Singh, Johnny Lever, Mayur Verma, Reema Lagoo

From: Cine Films

Would you believe that this is a Bollywood remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street... or that there was several different remakes of that in India? Well, this would be the most famous one to Western audiences and as I've known of it for years and it can be watched on YouTube, that is what I watched last night and it was as wacky as you'd expect. I talk about it below in my Letterboxd review: 

For years now I have heard that there's an Indian version of A Nightmare on Elm Street. Actually, I have heard that there's more than one of those, but this-also known as Mahakaal-is the one most known to Western audiences. Well, as the DVD of it on Amazon (paired with another film) goes for over 100 bucks (!), that is why I-ahem-watched it on YouTube. Lord, what an experience. Let me list some highlights:

* Aside from it being upper class Indian college attendees, it follows the original Fred Krueger movie rather closely.

* As it's from India, of course there are random song and dance numbers throughout, none of which feature Indian Freddy Krueger, sadly.

* The first dream scenes we witness are in an abandoned place with giant chains hanging from the ceiling and fog all around... so basically, similar to the Wild Boys video from Duran Duran.

* There is a comedy character named CANTEEN; we first meet him in a restaurant which has up posters of Rambo and the cover to the Michael Jackson Bad album and he dances to the song Thriller, then some tremendous 80's electro. He dances to 80's electro a few other times later in the picture. He kisses the A-hole who lusts after the main girl (Anita) despite the fact that Anita has a boyfriend anyway. Why Canteen kisses a guy when he's not portrayed as homosexual (in fact, he plays Peeping Tom on another girl later!), I am not quite sure. Also, Canteen usually wears a tremendous red Puma tracksuit.

* The way that Indian Freddy looks... think trenchcoat, grey burn-makeup that is not quite up to what we saw Krueger wear.. .and he has a MULLET. It's not the only mullet seen in the movie either.

* The guy who plays Canteen also plays a hotel owner for Lord knows what reason. I presume something got lost in translation as the hotel owner acted like he just ingested an eight ball of coke!

* There's more than one moment where someone starts sexually assaulting a girl or a gang starts doing that to a pair of girls; this results in kung-fu fight scenes from the heroes. The almost rapes are treated more like a goof than it should have been.

* There is a version of the “Tina in the clear bodybag” scene from the original NOES... except that this involves giant blocks of ice.

* Other horror movies are ripped off, like The Evil Dead and Day of the Dead. Also, the waterbed scene from the 4th NOES is “borrowed”.

It is an odd motion picture with bizarre and wild switches in tone and attitude, but how is it overall? I can rate it as being “fine”. It's not even for sheer entertainment factor in not knowing what wacky song will come up next (there's one about being at a picnic), or what odd out left field bit will pop up out of nowhere. It actually does have some creepy moments and not all of them are direct copies of NOES. At times they did their own versions of famous Freddy moments. Besides the aforementioned clear bodybag scene, there was Indian Jsu Garcia not being killed due to hanging in the jail cell but rather being attacked by a bunch of snakes in his jail cell. Besides, the backstory for Indian Freddy Krueger (i.e. Shakaal) is different; it is more personal for Anita and her family.

Point is, it's not as good as the Wes Craven classic although I'd say I had a better time with this than some of the Freddy sequels. Like I said it's uneven and it feels pretty long w/ the 129 minute version I saw (apparently there's a 145 minute cut out there that people have seen) yet I can say that it was entertaining overall and I don't regret enjoying the one of the kind experience that is Bollywood cinema once again.