Father, daughter, and dog try to avoid hungry alligators during a hurricane. As a lifelong Floridian, I've only had to deal with this scenario three times in the past. There's some bent logic to conveniently justify more suspense, a little too much CGI for my liking, not enough meth for a more Florida than Florida movie, and the dog is the smartest character. In all seriousness, I hate alligators. These movies bother me. I look like Chuck Liddell watching a fight on cocaine the whole time. 6/10
In a highly privatized, desensitized, and exploitative near-future, unemployment is rising, companies underpay workers & violently bust union efforts, and societal bloodlust is a ratings commodity. At this point, I fully expect to see Jason Statham blowing up cars on CNN within the next five years. A former pro driver is framed, jailed, and coerced to compete in a series of ultra-violent televised death races between insensitive prison stereotypes. An arena where the most rugged, leather skinned, battle hardened individuals as well as the most beautiful, voluptuous, 25 year old supermodels can test their mettle. An arena fraught with cruel traps, product placements, and deadly Mario Kart power ups. The movie will try to get us to fall for at least three incarcerated mass murderers by the end. Statham is Statham. He does that well enough. For two hours, he holds the expression that I make when my computer crashes. I'm okay with it. He pulls off the stern try-hard badass better than most action-specific actors. This is a rare movie that I feel would benefit from a higher framerate. Action scenes look ok from afar, but the result of dark contrast and cameramen playing hot potato is choppy looking movement. It's a Guantanamo torture method for an epileptic. Annoying at first, but I got over it eventually. I think I remember this brief period in the mid-2000s when almost every action and horror release with a decent budget thought overly-high contrast cinematography was the way to go, and nearly every piece of text had to look like someone used the letters as a figure-skating platform. I call it the Lionsgateification of cinema. If Michael Bay made movies for normal teenage boys, Paul W.S. made movies for teenage boys who blew out their ear drums listening to nu-metal and carved S into their desk. I have a soft spot for him. I'm not even that much of an action fan, but I gotta say, the races are pretty fucking cool. Car gymnastics with a Nine Inch Nails rip-off score successfully summoned my inner 16 year old. 6/10
Todd is the quintessential hardened super-soldier of the future. However, he's pushing 40 and declared obsolete in light of the new, genetically enhanced breed. Todd is then beaten and dumped on a planet of industrial landfills and little green snakes, wherein he's roughly integrated with the local township. Todd must eventually defend his new home from the fascistic military he spent his life serving. The new wave of super soldiers is stronger, faster, and more durable, but lacks the jaw muscles of someone who looks like they're storing nuts for winter. Todd will exploit this fatal flaw. It's very violent, but not really. Deadly explosions only unleash large gusts of wind on the good guys. Flamethrowers turn victims into fiery starfish. Blood arises from no visible injuries save for scratches. Also, the movie's slo-mo sensor trips whenever more than 20% of the screen is engulfed by fire. I watched this once years ago when I was the perfect age for it, and was so disappointed in Kurt Russell's lack of character. It fits the plot, but there's gotta be a way to pull off the cold anti-hero without sucking all of the life out of him. Giving him a 30 word monosyllabic speaking quota and rushing through his emotional 'awakening' with corny pop music isn't the way. Snake Plissken would be considered peppy next to Todd. Even the name Todd... I want to love this movie. The 80's Einsturzende Neubauten video-world it takes place in could've hosted something amazing, but we're only given a glimpse of it through the narrow lens of a 17 year old boy that wants to make future Rambo. Here lies my main gripe. The most interesting part of the movie (Todd's character arc amidst the township) should've been given a lot more time and depth. Or, at least more time could've been afforded to the township itself. Still, it's a cool dumb fun sci-fi action movie. No frills, and feels shorter than it is. Most of my negativity arises out of disappointment in something that had the potential to be better and more expansive. 6/10
On a post-apocalyptic Earth, a drone repairman lives in an isolated, hi-tech loft with a sole companion. He ventures out to do his job, unsuccessfully dodging scavengers along the way. Expensive, spectacular sci-fi paraphernalia & CG landscapes with a trope-riffic screenplay. It's exorbitant but standardized sci-fi. The best makeup, the best costumes, the best special effects, the best set design, and a Nolan-fed marketing algorithm generates everything else. This is also one of those movies that makes me play decibel hockey with low mumbles and loud action scenes, praying that deafening blasts don't come out of nowhere. Maybe just a commonality in modern action/dramas. Side note: the last second save is my most hated cliche in all movies. That should only be a spoiler if you're the lowest common denominator audience member that this movie is written for. I'm sorry. This is coming across as overly negative, so let me write something nice(-ish). 'Style over substance' is another cliche that I hate. Not from movies, but from critics. I think in a visual medium, style is part of the substance, and in that regard, this movie is very good. The beauty actually did carry me through occasional groans and storyline apathy. I’m a big Richard Stanley fan. Starting with his two early features, I fell in love with the unique mashing of artsy schlock and psychedelia. Beyond that, I’ve dug into his back-catalog, read some production diaries, and listened to hours of interview material from him because I think he’s one of the most fascinating people alive (if a bit kooky). So, here are his seldom talked about documentaries: The Otherworld (2013) – 6/10 A documentary about a peculiar area in France that’s rich in history & filled with occult folklore that attracts a variety of esotericists. This apparently came about when, having a friend’s film equipment at his disposal, Stanley and co. started shooting an off-the-cuff ‘home movie’ around Montsegur, the area he’s lived in for over a decade. A French producer offered a bit of funding to extend it to feature length on the condition that it met a French speaking quota. So, given the circumstances, it feels a bit aimless. Stanley’s own supernatural experience feels forced as the crux of intrigue that movie is building to, when I feel there are probably more curious tales to tell about the ‘zone,’ and more local eccentrics to interview. The medieval history of the area could’ve been given more attention (odd that it wasn’t considering Stanley seems to have a serious passion for Cathar history, but it seems to have been an editor’s decision). It does have plenty of the psychedelic panache found in Stanley’s narrative films, with a cool score from Simon Boswell. It’s an interesting look at an oddball part of the world that makes me want to see & learn much more. Voice of the Moon (1990) - 9/10 16mm footage of Richard Stanley’s time in Afghanistan during the end of the Soviet-Afghan war, cut into a 30-minute visual poem. The self-subsidized footage was shot by a 3-man crew traveling with Mujahideen groups. Unsurprisingly, the experience was laden with beauty, danger, and drugs. My rating is somewhat artificial because the attraction goes way beyond the footage itself. The account Stanley gives in his commentary makes the movie ten times as fascinating. In lieu of sound, we get another Simon Boswell score and recitations of Afghan poetry. Most of the footage is gorgeous, almost dreamlike, and showcases a sort of embryonic rural life in Afghanistan before delving into the war material. Boswell’s score is beautiful, but I’d say it’s essential to watch this with Stanley’s commentary first. Letting the commentary provide context on the first viewing made the musical second viewing so much more potent. On trying to get to safety after the Battle of Jalalabad: “I think it’s probably a similar problem to maybe coming back from any war. From Vietnam or anything else. You keep thinking you’re going to be okay. You’re going to get home at some point, but of course they keep moving home a bit further away so each time you reach the place you’re going you’ve realized it’s not really where you want to be.” The Secret Glory (2001) - 7 The story of Otto Rahn, an alleged homosexual Jewish Nazi who used his position in the SS to further his search for the Holy Grail in the land of the esoteric. Stanley’s first documentary involving Montsegur benefits from some prior knowledge, or a repeated viewing with director’s commentary. Interviewees are mostly surviving associates of Rahn’s, and Stanley’s commentary suggests that they frequently lied and seemed to all be hiding info from him. Info that may conceal a more sensational tale than what’s presented. An awesome gallery of attractive modern photography placed alongside dark, stylish timeworn images and old archival footage. In the first half, images and information zip by making it a bit hard to keep up, but it becomes a bit more linear in the 2nd as it details Rahn’s involvement with the SS. Unfortunately, the movie takes a huge blow from marred audio. The often out of sync narration (in the Subversive Cinema transfer) sounds like it was recorded underwater, is accompanied by subtitles out of necessity, and is sometimes drowned out by the heavily saturated score. It’s a shame that this sounds like it could’ve been Boswell’s best and most sophisticated score of the bunch. It’s hurt by technical flaws, but the subject and visuals carry it a long way. This is another difficult, somewhat artificial rating. It might be too far gone, but it could be excellent with heavy restoration. The White Darkness (2002) - 8/10
Richard Stanley was apparently hired to shoot an anthropological documentary centered around voodoo in Haiti. During the filming, US military troops were unexpectedly sent down to Haiti as ‘missionaries’ to cleanse the area of Satan and foster the word of God, because only the spread of Christianity could lead to Haiti becoming a democratic society. I know, I know. It must sound like I’m grossly embellishing the troops’ humanitarian mission, but the military personnel interviewed (including a Colonel) explicitly used this sort of language straight out of the 1890s. Apparently they originally thought that Stanley was a sort of missionary filmmaker since he mentioned he was there to film a ‘religious documentary’ (alluding to voodoo), and the troops were very candid with their attitudes and intentions as a result. I don’t know if there has since been any actual humanitarian or economic benefit from the mission in the area, but their blatant intent to propagandize and conform the locals can’t be denied. The locals aren’t presented in a purely innocent light either. It’s mostly a fly on the wall doc with very little text commentary between parts. The voodoo practices are uninhibited and occasionally disturbing (including graphic animal sacrifices). The movie constantly showcases the erratic, id-like behavior of the practitioners, while interviewees explain the philosophy behind it. I feel that, given Stanley’s own magnetic eccentricities, he was able to gain a lot of trust from the locals and was permitted to film much more sensational footage than a typical documentarian would’ve been afforded. It’s a fascinating segment of humanity made even more fascinating by the circumstances that befell the filming. It is occasionally visually striking for a doc, capturing the area’s hazy, humid, muddy aura. I just wish it was a little less tightly edited. Though it isn’t as distinctively psychedelic or artistic as Stanley’s other movies, Stanley has said that it’s his favorite work (as of 2017). Monsieur Hulot wanders around in a quasi-futuristic world. His goal is unimportant. This is a mostly undynamic story built around Hulot and others whimsically butting heads with industrialized society. It furthers commentary started in Mon Oncle. While Mon Oncle could be a look at how technology has influenced modern lifestyles, Playtime is a look at how it's changing global society and culture. This takes customary pokes at citizens becoming desensitized to uniformity. Globalization has reduced cultural hallmarks to indistinguishable grey buildings. Tourists flock to gawk at bland spectacles. In the first half, we’re only once given a brief speck of vibrancy and musical charm when shown a glimpse of the Eiffel tower. However, this is not a soulless dystopia of conformity. It’s not even dystopian, despite the somewhat familiar commentary. Happy accidents and misuse of unintuitive technology make citizens more charming and sympathetic than any typical cogs in the machine. This gives the movie a more humanistic soul than most other fiction dealing with similar themes. It's not focused on the dark side of humanity or the corruption of power, but on bringing the charm out of ordinary people attached to technologically driven life, or 'life out of balance.' *arpeggios intensify We are still allowed to be sweet, silly, rude, etc. Technology has changed our lives, but Playtime won’t let it stifle our spirit. We see Hulot stumble into an invention showroom filled with salesmen advertising tacky products that underline our attraction to gratuitous conveniences and gimmicks (such as light up brooms, decorated trash bins, and noiseless doors). We end with Hulot attending a night club wherein restaurant staff are desperately scrambling to cover up a crumbling infrastructure from vain clientele. The decorated high-class veneer of civilization keeps coming undone with innocent human error. Even though the movie is pervaded by busy murmuring, traffic, and other sounds of civilization, the comedy is mostly reliant on physical scenarios. It’s also less concerned with telling a story than painting an environmental picture, or sending a message (in the first half). There are no close-ups. You are an onlooker observing a quirky slice of life from next door. Tati’s comedy grew drier with age, and it wasn't too animated to begin with, so don’t expect a knee slapper. Hulot is still a bastion of blissful ignorance stuck in a world he doesn't seem to understand. Within his simple happy go lucky candor lies the soul of a movie that serves to point out the absurdity of an overly tech reliant world. Tati’s style seems like a major blueprint for the offbeat charm (a tough word not to use with Tati) found in Jeunet (& Caro) movies, Sylvan Chomet movies (who used Tati’s likeness in a wonderful movie called The Illusionist), and of course, Mr. Bean. Hulot isn’t nearly as goofy as Bean, but has the similar spirit of a perennial outsider looking in. He looks all around as if discovering things for the first time, and brings to light the humor in trivialities like clean windows and seat cushions. His incorruptibility puts a mostly bland environment, filled with plenty of reasons to be jaded, in perspective. It’s so much more fun not to let yourself get jaded. 8/10
Combat Shock is a stark, semi-exploitative drama from the Troma company about an ill-fated Vietnam vet moping around ramshackle NYC. . . . . . . Drama . . . Troma . . . A few takeaways: - The main character is wearing his church socks. - Narration: “Sometimes I feel like I’m losing out of my body.” I agreement. - When getting fingers cut off: “Oww. Oww. Owwww.” - “When I want a song and dance I’ll get Gene Kelly.” “Who’s Gene Kelly?”: Smut! Greasy hair, battered walls, junkies, maggots, gore, deformed plastic baby, and a shot of a clogged toilet. Of course, with Troma films, crap is the essence. I’m a dirty hypocrite. I like having fun at the movie’s expense, but picking apart a movie like this for silliness and production flaws isn’t really fair. The shoddy production is obviously the charm, and I do love it. The story can be heavy too. Still very camp, but engaging enough to hold interest, and ends very strong. The best thing about it is that the grit feels authentic. 80s DIY is tattooed on its forehead. Maybe it shares a few too many similarities with Taxi Driver, but it’s so much filthier. As much as I love Taxi Driver, it looks like a glossy studio production next to this. This isn’t an effort from professionals recreating a mood; it’s a real fucking street movie. 8/10 I very much enjoyed the novel, but had the impression that this would be its own entity considering how artsy it looked. It retains & distorts some of the Strugatskys’ premise, then leads the viewer down an exponentially weirder and nastier path. Forget about storytelling conventions. The purpose seems to lie in immersing you in a warped monastic world. A scientific team of Earthlings is sent to study a human-like planet undergoing its own medieval period. Even knowing the basis, I had some trouble keeping up. Without the book lending me context, I probably would’ve been S.O.L. The dialogue feels like a multi-directional bombardment from a batsh*t ensemble, and much of it seems inserted simply to weird out the viewer. Extras are almost ubiquitous, and most appear to have been lifted from a sideshow. Characters even occasionally break the 4th to include the viewer in dialogues. The story would technically fall under science fiction, but genre elements obviously take a backseat to the quasi-medieval environment. I believe I would’ve preferred it in color, or at least a washed-out tint, to drab B&W though. Heed my warning: this is vile and repulsive as can be, with an emphasis on spittle, lower intestines, and ass-slapping. Harsh as it is, it’s hard not to laugh at some of the oddball hysterics and vulgarity. There’s also noteworthy sound design that creaks, cracks, drips, & thumps, and the absence of a score puts it at the forefront. Now, the level of detail in this movie is just absurd. The sets are crammed with furnishings, each painstakingly gone over and given grit. All dwellings feel like they were lived in by grimy hoarders. The detail isn’t just in the visuals either. Most of the long tracking shots have myriad elements that pop in & out of view and demand perfect timing. Love it or hate it, it’s a super impressive undertaking. I’ve read comparisons to Tarkovsky, but that really doesn’t do the style justice, nor does it give viewers an entirely accurate impression of what they’re in for. It does have a ton of the foggy landscape photography, but it molds its own style with wide-angle close-ups, an uber-bizarre & colorful ensemble (with no redeeming personalities), and pervasive steadicam movement. It’s made up mostly of long tracking takes, but the pace isn’t slow. This isn’t an art film that dwells on sluggish philosophizing. It’s a radical exercise in grotesque immersion. It feels like a deranged medieval rollercoaster. Walking around after 3 hours of that, I felt like my head turned into a damn steadicam. 8/10
Hoping to gain some independence from an omnipresent boyfriend, a successful model seeks new residence. She lands in a gorgeous old building occupied by a curious lot of tenants. The tone is pretty far from camp, but it’s not too long before she has an abrupt flashback of walking in on her elderly father having an out-of-shape orgy. Freud might’ve called this Kubrick envy. Once our protagonist begins to settle into her new quarters, she encounters a blind old priest who stares out of a window all day, and some fun eccentrics who love animals and communal masturbation, respectively. Her ceiling also creaks at night. Along the way, there are some clever, sometimes subtle red herrings ranging from paranormal gaslighting to prescription drug delusions. I intentionally left out some twisty detail, and I'll arrogantly recommend not reading too much more if you plan to see it. Even most of the posters contain a potential spoiler. This is a good watch, and the mystery only gets stronger in the second half. It’s well shot, scored, acted, written, and recorded. Meaning, nothing really distracts from the plot. It’s surprisingly light on atmosphere, but the scares are strong, if not scarce. The innocent-mannered lead is great too. We’re also treated to Christopher Walken chewing gum for a few seconds, detective Eli Wallach, and Jeff Goldblum with a phony dub. It’s very accessible and ‘of the time,’ but still not afraid to get a little weird. 7/10
A pillar of expressionism! A fantastical projection of the future through the lens of a 1920s epic melodrama! An expressionistic base gives science fiction sets a unique quality that still stands apart from other passé examples made through a span of decades afterwards. Unlike much sci-fi, the backgrounds here are often minimal, king-sized, and even integrate some Gothic imagery. Much of the stuff accommodating the labor-intensive lower class has a nuts & bolts industrial look as well. Of course, science fiction still bears Metropolis’ hefty boot prints. The ubiquitous sprawling cityscapes are stuff of legend. Metropolis follows a now common theme of technology gone awry, and underlines the unscrupulous fellows abusing its power. The subordinate side of society sees strict uniformity among workers driven by mindless duty, while the dissenting humanist morale of the lead attracts the laborers search for solace. It’s either that or his dashing 1920s German balloon pants and six pounds of makeup. The melodrama here seems taken right off the stage, and exaggerated even for the 20s. Lang even later relegated the stories message a ‘fairy tale.’ For modern audiences, that may make it a tough first foray into silent cine, but the wild gesticulations and histrionics stress the grandiose subject matter in a fun way. The editing and cinematographic techniques can also be wonderfully disorienting (perspective shots, a quaking cam, multiple exposures, surreal montages). Moreover, metaphorical death is seen unleashed upon the city, men become a salacious hivemind driven to lunacy, synced up machine-like workers are seen encompassed by the steam of industry and labor, and there’s more than enough climactic bombast to satisfy the epic label. The flexible imagination accommodates the exalted rep. So, it’s been considered historically significant for a long time, and then a sizable chunk of new footage was uncovered a decade ago. Timeworn footage normally appeals to me, but when juxtaposed to a clean, remastered transfer, the damage of the tacked on extra footage can take you out of the moment. I’m grateful that it’s at least there now though. 8/10 |