If there's people out there who still have a hard time accepting the fact that Sofia Coppola isn't like here father, and has no interest in making movies like her father, they're going to hate her latest film; 'somewhere'. now, if you're a fan of her work, chances are you're going to love this. As far as I'm concerned, 'Somewhere' is the best thing she's done since 'Virgin Suicides'. That might not be saying much because many people considered 'Lost In Translation' to be both; boring & overrated (i personally think its a good movie...just not great) and 'Marie Antionette', although ambitious, was kind of a disaster. But nevertheless, 'Somewhere' is a great film. It represents Sofia Coppola saying; "this is my style, and I'm not compromising anything".
In the film, Steven Dorph plays a Hollywood "bad boy" who's forced to re-examine his wild life after he has to take care of his 11 year old daughter for an unspecified amount of time. I give Coppola a lot respect for keeping my interest in a character that i wouldn't normally care about. For anyone who's seen 'Lost in Translation', by now you should know that Sofia is known for basing characters in her movies on real people (in 'Lost in Translation', Giovanni Ribisi was clearly supposed to be Spike Jonze, Anna Farris was supposed to be Cameron Diaz and Scarlett Johansson was supposed to be Sofia). I haven't been able to pin down who Dorf's character is supposed to be based on, but imagine a movie about Colin Ferrel (or someone like him) taking care of his daughter while juggling an acting career and trying to maintain a typical A-list actor lifestyle. Sounds pretty uninteresting, right? Normally i would agree too, but Sofia was able to make an interesting movie, and give a typically shallow character some depth.
What i loved most about 'Somewhere' is that this is the first time she's really stepped out of her comfort zone (as far as the plot goes. I'm aware that 'marie antionette' was her first big budget movie). Her first 3 films have all been slight variations of the same basic plot: attractive, blond, privileged females trying to find themselves in a suffocating world. I guess there's nothing wrong with that, but at certain point its time to move on, and try something new (which she did). I'm starting to think that a lot of these modern day female directors (lynne ramsey, andrea arnold, claire denis & sofia coppola) are better at showing the sensetive side of their male characters, than male directors.
Like all of her movies, the soundtrack is great (although its still not as good as the score Air did for 'Virgin Suicides'). The cinematography is beautiful, like all of her movies (courtesy of cinemetographer; Harris Savides, who's work can be seen in the films of Gus Van Sant and David Fincher). Now, like i said earlier, if you aren't a fan of her previous work, chances are you may not like this. There are a lot of extended scenes, minimal editing and there's not a lot of dialogue (when compared to your average movie).
Phillip Ridley's 14 year absence from film was not worth the wait. And it doesn't help that the last movie he left us with 14 years ago was 'The Passion of Darkly Noon' (a heavy-handed religious film, with a waste of a cast that included; grace zabriskie, ashley judd and viggo mortensen). I guess i have so much hope for Ridley because he's responsible for one of my all time favorite movies; 'The Reflecting Skin' (something Ive been watching a lot over the last year). For a first time effort, The Reflecting Skin is one of best psychological thriller/horror/coming of age/dark comedies ever made. Unfortunately, Phillip Ridley wasnt able to tap in to the talent he once possessed, and instead he gave us a Polanski-esque, split personality/"its all in your head" thriller.
In Heartless, Jim Sturgess plays; Jamie, a depressed, introverted, socially awkward photographer who still hasn't recovered from the death of his father. He has a huge red birthmark that takes up half of his face (along with one of his arms and some of his chest), which not only makes it impossible for him to meet girls, but he's also the subject of ridicule from his neighbors (their nickname for him is "elephant man"). He lives in a rough London area which has been taken over by a gang of thugs, who might not even be human (one night Jamie quickly snaps a picture of one of them, and he discovers that they're these lizard-looking people with vampire teeth). He's finally pushed over the edge after his mother is mugged and murdered one night. This sends him in to a depression worse than ever. From that point on, the movie turns in to a story that's been done a million times. Jamie makes a deal with the devil (who just shows up out of nowhere) to give him a happier life. In return the devil asks for one favor; that he must kill a random person, cut his heart out and place it on the steps of a random church. That task alone is hard enough, but after completing the task, the devil (being the evil person that he is), goes against his word and wants to use Jamie for something even worse. On a side note, for some reason, the devil character keeps a little indian girl around as his sidekick/helper. I didn't really get that part of the movie.
Some of the scenes, acting and music are SO melodramatic that its kinda funny sometimes. And there's a "twist" ending, that you can see coming half way in to the movie. Now there are some positive things about 'Heartless'. As disappointing as the movie is overall, its still had a pretty cool, moody atmosphere (courtesy of Ridley's direction). Half of the cast is made of Mike Leigh's regular actors (Timothy Spall, Eddie Marsan and Ruth Sheen). Eddie Marson is the best thing about the movie. Phillip Ridley carefully places him in the middle of the movie (which is right around the time i started losing interest). Eddie Marson's quick appearance (similar to William Hurt's appearance in 'History of Violence') manages to keep you interested for a little while, but he's only in the movie for a one scene. Once Marsan's character goes away, the movie keeps getting worse until the disappointing ending.
wow, sometimes i see so many movies a year i forget a few. 'Died Young, Stayed Pretty', a documentary about the underground world of concert poster art within indie music, would be a nice companion to this year's popular documentary; Exit Through The Giftshop'. Normally i avoid movies that are labeled; "a hit at sxsw". Because to me, the sxsw logo on a movie poster means nothing more than mumbling 20-something year-olds in a movie about love triangles or "finding yourself" (a genre some call "mumblecore"). Although 'Died Young, Stayed Pretty' has some flaws, it doesn't fit in to that typical sxsw film mold. Its still a solid film on something that's hardly been addressed in the world of film. Even if the subject of this documentary doesn't sound too eventful, at least watch it for the unique poster artists ("print mafia", ronlibreti, brycemccloud, etc) ), and the wide variety of colorful art that they produce ranging from loud & colorful to pen sketches on notebook paper.
This documentaries main problem is the structure (or lack of it after a certain point). As the documentary goes on, the director just kinda jumps around from one interview to the next. This didn't really bother me so much, because the artists and the exhibition of their art was enough to satisfy me, although i totally understand if some people get annoyed at the movies schizophrenic style. There's not much focus on the history or origin of movie poster art either. The documentary mainly focuses on the present day artists, and their views on love, life, and the current state of poster art. One unique quality about this documentary is that it doesn't really focus on the actual music or musicians that the artists make their posters for (although one of the artists does give us some history and insight in to the supposed closet homosexual life of elvispresely). Along with 'Exit Through The Giftshop', 'Died Young, Stayed Pretty' also shares a similar vibe and structure with 'Beautiful Losers' (the documentary about the young 'alternative' artists of the 1990's like Harmony Korine and Shepard Feary). So chances are if you like either movie, you'll like 'Died Young, Stayed Pretty'.
***please keep in mind im excluding active legends like martin scorcese, werner herzog, woody allen, jean luc goodard and people like that. i just think putting them on a list like this would be kinda obvious.***
MICHAEL HANEKE I think as of right now, he might be the most untouchable as far as im concerned. Of any director, he's made the most memorable movies of the last decade (the piano teacher, cache and the white ribbon). And even his recent movies that may not be considered "the best" of the past decade are still better than most (code unknown, funny games and time of the wolf). Similar to lars von trier (who's also on this list), Haneke is so great at fucking with the audience, raising questions that people are affraid to ask, and his movies leave you with an uneasy feeling (although he does all of this in a much less "prick-ish" way than Von Trier does). In one decade, he's taken on some serious issues, has tried different genres and has succeeded each time: the birth of facism (white ribbon), both: "white guilt" and race issues (code unknown & cache) and he even took a realistic stab at the post apocolyptic genre with time of the wolf. And id put code unknown up against crash any day of the week.
RICHARD LINKLATER, OLIVIER ASSAYAS & STEVEN SODERBERGH
I grouped these three directors in to one, because they all pretty much represent the same thing. None of these directors are affraid to take risks, try completely different genres from one film to the next (soderbergh: bubble-> the ocean's 11 movies-> che, linklater: school of rock -> scanner darkly -> me and orson welles, assayas: demonlover -> clean -> summer hours -> carlos). They can work with either; big budgets or almost no budget, release 2 movies in a year, and they can get amazing performances from their actors (weather it be an ensemble or an individual standout performance). Of the three directors mentioned, Olivier Assayas might have the best track record (in my opinion, he hasn't made a bad a film yet). Soderbergh and Linklater both fall in to the same category, in that they actually do have more bad movies than great movies, but the great ones completely overshadow the bad ones. For example, all the of the ocean's sequels and full frontal seemed like silly movies, but just Che and Traffic alone overshadow all of that stuff. And of the three directors mentioned, Soderbergh is best at working with non proffesional actors (in fact with the exception of Gus Van Sat, he might the best of anyone on this list). Soderbergh even did the unthinkable and remade Solaris. RELAX, i recognize the original is way better, but his version isnt as bad as people make out to be. I use to hate it myself, but gre to like it. And the same thing with Richard Linklater. The Bad News Bears remake was pointless, but he still made Me and Orson Welles, Before Sunset and School of Rock which totally cancel out bad new bears (and other slip ups like fast food nation). And as overrated as scanner darkly was, it was still a fun movie, and a him trying something different.
COEN BROS.
I know they had a shitty first half of the last decade (although they did make O Brother Where art Thou), but No Country and Serious Man brought them redemption. I almost didn't wanna put them on this list simply because i hated Burn After Reading SO much (and it couldve been a great movie), but if im going to have one entry on this list for "the people", which basically means the one that wont have people bitching at you because you left them off your list (you know, the tarantino's and the christopher nolan's), i'll chooe the coens (although Nolan does get an honorable mention).
LARS VON TRIER That shy/asshole grin that he always has makes me think that Von Trier is well aware of what he's doing, which is fucking with people. He started the last decade fucking with us by giving us the unexpected ending in Dancer In The Dark, and ended most recently with another headfuck; 'Antichrist'. In any group, you need a prankster. And Lars Von Trier fits that description to a Tee. Just about every movie he's made in the last 10 years has some kind of flaw, but similar to Soderbergh and Assayas, hes not afraid to take risks (although the risks Von Trier takes serve a different purpose). Also, almost all of his movies from the last decade, with the exception of 'Boss of it All' are bound to bring out many serious discussion, debates and stir up some serious emotions, which i think at the end of the day is his ultimate goal. So no matter what way you cut it, he's succeeded.
CLAIRE DENIS
its almost like she was groomed for greatness. if you go from working for jim jarmusch to wim wenders (as well as working as casting director for tarkofsky at one point) you almost CANT fail as a filmmaker. Unlike many of her fellow popular female directors of the moment (specifically Sofia Coppola), Denis has no problem focusing on issues besides female problems. And even her films that do deal primarily with female issues aren't cliche and overdone (rape, abuse, etc). One of her most recent films; 35 Shots Rum was a great example of this. Many other directors would have taken the basic plot of that film; the relationship between a father and his daughter, and turned it in to a predictable story of incest or abuse. She did the complete opposite. In Beau Travail she was able to make a film with obviously homosexual undertones, and yet still make it feel masculine. She can do both; straight forward storytelling (35 Shots of Rum) as well as surreal & subjective storytelling as well (The Intruder). All of her movies contain beautiful cinematography and AMAZING music (courtesy of Tindersticks). She even took a stab at horror (or Denis's own interpretation of horror) with the somewhat disturbing; Trouble Every Day.
GUS VAN SANT He can go through periods when you're kinda like "wtf" (even cowgirls get the blues and the psycho remake), but for five films in a row, he hasnt slipped up yet (although as good as paranoid park was, he was very close to doing a repeat of 'elephant'). Kinda of like Soderbergh, some of Van Sant's films are so different in; the look, film making style and subject from one film to the next that some people aren't even aware that the same guy responsible for Good Will Hunting is also responsible for 'Last Days' and 'Gerry'. Also, as an openly gay director, he's never afraid to touch on homosexuality, but at the same time does it in such a subtle way that its not even the issue of the film (with the exception of 'Milk', which is still still a good movie too). In a decade he covered school shootings, did 2 bios (harvey milk & kurt cobain), worked with A-list actors (matt damon, sean penn and james brolin) to high school kids who've never acted before (elephant & paranoid park) and has had equally successful results each time.
CARLOS REYGADAS
He's probably the best new director to emerge from the past decade, and one of the few people worthy enough to fill tarkofsky's shoes (especially with japon and silent light which are both obvious homages to tarkofsky's style). This might be the one debatable entry on this list because his movies aren't for everyone, but i personally think he makes some of the most beautiful movies out, so i kinda feel like its too bad for people who may not enjoy his movies.
MIKE LEIGH
Mike Leigh is one of the few directors left that represents real people and real issues. He walks in the shadow of John Cassavetes, yet manages to copy NOTHING from him (usually when people claim to show realism or express truth in film, they always have to resort to that knock-off handheld camera, improv style of cassavetes as if they're actually doing it justice). Mike Leigh is great at both getting an amazing performance from his entire cast (all or nothing) as well as getting standout performances from his actors as well(vera drake and happy go lucky). Although all his movies are set in the UK, and some people label his movies has "british films", anyone can relate to them.
Honorable Mention: *LYNNE RAMSAY - if she was more active, she would've been on my current top ten for sure (only 2 movies in 11 years). *CHRISTOPHER NOLAN - he brought batman back and inception is probably one of the most fun movies of this year. Even though he does get overrated sometimes, he still deserves to be mentioned *MICHAEL MANN - put down the 1980's camcorder, and you'll be on this top ten list no question. *DARREN ARONOFSKY - Another one of the best directors to emerge from the last decade who deserves to be mentioned. *WONG KAR WAI *PEDRO ALMODOVAR *PAUL GREENGRASS *PT ANDERSON - I personally think he's done a great job of carrying Robert Altman's torch
I got a nice sneak peak of Claire Denis's latest; 'White Material' last night (a movie that i wish i saw at last years NY film fest over Todd Solondz SUPER disappointing; 'Life During Wartime'). Honestly, I've had my fill of movies set in Africa that are from the perspective of a white person. If its not Morgan Freeman sacrificing his life for Stephen Dorf in 'The Power of One' or Donald Sutherland and Marlon Brando saving South Africa in 'Cry Freedom', its Clint Eastwood making an oscar bait film with Matt Damon as the 'face' of south africa as a rugby player, conveniently released after Spike Lee called him out for his lack of representation of black soldiers in his war movies (which i think is a pretty pointless argument and also conveniently came about just as Spike Lee released his disappointing 'Miracle at St.Anna). And dont get me started on all the movies that portray african soldiers as senseless murderers (like 'Black Hawk Down' or 'Tears of the Sun'). Only recently have films that are set in the Continent of Africa actually deal with something other than apartheid or some other type of economical or political struggle ('waiting for happiness' and 'u-carmen'). But for Claire Denis, probably one of the best directors out right now, i'll make an exception and put aside all my preconceived notions about films set in africa (lets not forget that she, unlike many other white directors, actually grew up in africa and has a better perspective on things). If her films aren't actually set in Africa ('chocolat'-not the johnny depp movie, 'beau travail' or 'white material'), then they at least focus on africans or african immigrants living in france ('35 shots of rum', 'i cant sleep', 'no fear'). In fact, even though the location of 'White Material' is supposed to be anonymous, it was filmed in the same country as her first film; Chocolat (a semi-autobiographical film about Denis's childhood in Africa).
Much like how 'Inspector Bellamy' (as disappointing to me as it may have been) was with Claude Charbol and Gerard Depardieu (a long overdue collaboration of two french film legends), 'White Material' was the first (and yes, long overdue) collaboration between Denis and Isabelle Hupert (two modern day french icons). In addition to that, Denis brought along many other familiar faces and regulars; Michael Subor (The Intruder, Beau Travail), Isaac Debankole (chocolat and no fear) and Tindersticks, who had previously done the music for 4 of Denis's previous films (nenette and boni, trouble everyday, 35 shots of rum and the intruder). In 'White Material' Hupert plays; Maria, a white coffee plantation owner in an unnamed African region that's in the middle of a civil war between the army and the rebels (who are mad up of mostly AK-47-carrying children and teenagers). Because the climate is becoming more and more dangerous, all of the locals are starting to leave, yet Maria feels she and her family have to stay in order to save their crop and not lose money. This task becomes more and more difficult due to the fact that there are hardly any workers left to hire (almost everyone has left in fear of their lives). Also, Maria's ex-husband and co-owner of the plantation played by Christopher 'Highlander' Lambert (where the hell has he been??), is trying to sell the land and get out as well, behind Maria's back. In addition, there's a subplot that focuses on a character known as; 'The Boxer' (played by Denis regular; Isaac Debankole). The leader of the rebels who has a bounty on his head by the military. He eventually finds his way to Maria's plantation, where she helps him to hide out. The trailer for this film may mislead you to believe its a film that's nothing but a sympathetic look at a white women living in a dangerous climate in Africa. It really isn't. Its a bit more complicated than that (much like many of Denis's other films). If anything, 'White Material' focuses on the assumption that just because a white family has been planted in Africa for generations that they will be an exception to the violence around them. Maria, aside from her obvious pride in not wanting to leave her coffee plantation, almost assumes that she's just like any other local black person. She almost looks at herself as an equal. But through a series of "reality checks", she slowly comes to realize that's not the case.
In a way, the atmosphere of 'White Material' kinda draws some comparison to Denis's earlier film; The Intruder (although white material has a much more straight forward plot). This is mainly due to Tinderstick's amazing soundtrack (which is very similar to their music in the Intruder). In true Denis fashion, there are many small implications and hints to things that at the same time tell the whole story. There are also many unanswered questions, and open ended issues (mainly the ending), and the angle about Maria's son kinda going insane. Like always, Denis doesn't miss a beat, and 'White Material' is on par with all her other work. I have yet to see a film by her that i'd rate less than 4 out of 5 stars.
I'm pretty disappointed just for the simple fact that i sat through a 5-1/2 hour movie only to come out saying; "Yeah, it was ok". If i sit through a movie that long i wanna come out amazed. That shouldn't be too much to ask especially when I've dedicated the majority of my day to watching it. Olivier Assayas' biopic (his first in fact) about pro-Palestinian terrorist; "Carlos The Jackal" (Ilich Ramírez Sánchez) had many problems. Don't get me wrong, it was well acted, especially by lead actor; Edgar Ramirez (who's set to portray Pablo Escobar in his next role). It was also shot very well. I was so excited to see this mainly because aside from Steven Soderbergh and Richard Linklater, Olivier Assayas has the most eclectic range of any director working today. Watch 'Demonlover' and 'Summer Hours' back-to-back, or watch 'Irma Vep' and 'Clean' (both films star Maggie Cheung) back-to-back to see what I'm talking about. Now i give Assayas respect for taking on such a tough project. As a filmmaker he's never made a movie quite like this (although on a personal level for him, it actually makes sense that he directed 'Carlos' seeing that he grew up in France during the time period where Carlos The Jackal was very active and most known).
For some reason these super-long biopics that are based on true events ('red riding') or focus on both; the rise and file of a famous historical figures (che guevarra or carlos the jackal), always seem to start with a bang, but the last half of the film always seems to fall short and just drag on. Take 'Che' for example. The first part of 'Che' was almost perfect as far as I'm concerned, but the 2nd part seemed to have no direction at times. But because the first part was so great, it still kinda made up for the problematic 2nd half (i cant say the same about 'Carlos'). 'Che' is probably the perfect movie to compare 'Carlos' with. Both films are about controversial historical figures who some consider terrorists while others consider heros (i personally think Carlos was way worse than Che Guevarra, but that's just me), both movies are long as hell, neither get too much in to the childhood/early years of the subjects (although 'Che' didn't really have to do that because we already have 'Motorcycle Diaries') and like i said earlier, both have somewhat disappointing endings.
In the film Olivier Assayas takes us from Carlos's first mission to prove himself for the pro Palestinian organization; PLFP, to his most notorious mission (raiding the OPEC building in Vienna) to his downfall into obscurity due to too many failed terrorist attempts and the fall of the Berlin wall (marking an end to the cold war). In my opinion, there's no real mention as to why Carlos was so gung-ho on being this pro-Palestinian terrorists, when he was Latino. I understand wanting to fight for other oppressed people, but there's gotta be a REALLY good reason to wanna risk your life so many times for something that doesn't really directly affect you. Carlos was Venezuelan-born and raised in England. Neither; Palestine or Israel have that much to do with him (although I'm sure someone will find a way to prove that statement wrong). I mean Che Guevarra may not have been Cuban, but he eventually (TRIED) to take his fight to all of Latin American (and pretty much failed). I could sense that the film was trying its best to be fair and balanced and not take a side, but no matter what at the end of the day this movie kinda portrays Carlos as this cool, womanizing, globe-trotting, gun-carrying agent, when in fact he was just a terrorist responsible for many innocent deaths.
I understand that there is a shorter 160 minute version of 'Carlos' (the version i saw at IFC was in fact a mini-series that was turned into a long roadshow movie with an intermission). Maybe the shortened version is better. But at the end of the day Olivier Assayas tried something different and I still consider him one of the 10 best directors working right now.
Well its over a year later and I'm still conflicted with Carlos. After chatting with a few folks about it recently (specifically Eric Prfiender - another contributor, like myself, at the pink smoke and Sean over at the World of Video) i get that Carlos was essentially the first "rockstar terrorist", he came about during a time when French people (like Assayas and his father) were very much in to revolution, communism, socialism, etc. and that's part of what Assayas was trying to convey in the film. Cool. The more I learn about Olivier Assayas' upbringing (raised by anti-fascist parents and was an impressionable teen in France during the height of revolution, revolt and counter-culture being "cool") the more it makes sense that he was the perfect person to make this film (like originally said in my review). To be honest Olivier Assayas could direct anything and I'd watch it. He made an erotic thriller/espionage film centered around animated pornography and i loved it. He's slowly moving in to that Michael Haneke/Claire Denis category of "can do no wrong". I also realize that upon my first viewing of Carlos I completely overlooked that the film was quite action packed and entertaining. To quote Eric on facebook: "It plays like one of the Bourne movies, but its real. Its six hours long but never boring". I even dig the fact that this film/mini-series got Olivier Assayas a little bit of mainstream attention (it was nominated for a golden globe). I now see that all these things are true, but I still have a problem with Carlos the person. And I know you don't have to like or root for someone just because they're the main focus of a film. Alexander Sokurov made a great film about Hitler ('Moloch') and I had no problem with it. But the main difference between a film like 'Moloch' and 'Carlos' is that its almost impossible to not feel like Carlos is this awesome person when in reality he wasn't. Were parts of his heart in the right place? Sure. ...Kinda. ...Maybe. But I still have a hard time accepting that Assayas doesn't have a little bit of a crush on him.
I'll continue to be more open-minded about 'Carlos' but I don't think I can ever fully LOVE it. There's plenty of bad people I like and root for in movies but they're all fictiscious. Carlos The Jackal was real.
Hilarious could almost be looked at as a 'Bill Cosby Himself' for a newer generation (in fact Louis Ck sited this is one of his main influences). If you enjoy the stand-up/one man show style of Bill Cosby along with introspective and self depreciating humor you'll love this. What i love about each Louis CK stand-up special is that each one is kinda connected to the next. Each stand-up feels like a sequel, unlike other comedians who try to explore totally new material with each big stand up. In 'Hilarious' Louis CK give us all new material and stories about a lot of the same people as his previous stand-up specials. His children (a common subject in his stand-up) have grown since 'Shameless' and 'Chewed Up', bringing on new all material about them (like his oldest daughter being bitten by a pony and his youngest daughter taking a shit on the floor). He's still complaining about his weight and the stupid people he comes in contact with on a daily basis, but because CK is such a talented comedian and has such great delivery, i never get tired of hearing him talk shit about every day people.
Whats new is that now he's divorced, which brings on all new stories dealing with the 40-something year old CK trying to date again after being married for almost 10 years (this, along with some of the material in 'Hilarious' is a precursor to a lot of the material in his tv show on FX). Ever since 'Pootie Tang', Louis CK always seems to question weather or not he's a 'real director', but I think this movie is a prime example of his film making ability. If you follow any of his interviews or radio appreances (especially on Opie and Anthony), youd know that CK's knowledge of film is far more superior to the average stand-up comedian. In fact he sights Henri Clouzot's 'Diabolique' and Stanley Kubrick's 'Barry Lyndon' as his two of his all time favorite films. With 'Hilarious' he did what others like Jonathan Demme (Stop Making Sense) and Robert Townsend (Eddie Murphy's Raw) did, which was take a simple show/concert/stand-up and turn it in to an enjoyable film. Its also nice to see a good stand-up movie play in the theater. Martin Lawrence's last comedy special is the last one i remember playing in the theater, and i wasn't to crazy about that one. Even though Pootie Tang has gone on to gain a small cult following, it would be nice to see Louis CK take another stab at directing a film (maybe even something outside of comedy). I haven't been a fan of his screenplays ('why did I get married' and 'the invention of lying'), but his new TV on FX and 'Hilarious' clearly show the he knows his way around a movie camera, and can do more than just tell jokes. Id love to see his style of directing shown on his tv show transfer to film.
May Claude Charbol rest in peace, but i wasn't a fan of his final film (which oddly enough was his first ever Collaboration with iconic french actor Gerard Depardieu). This could be due to the fact that I'm not the 'afficionado' of Charbol's work like i am with other directors that i follow. It almost seems like in order to enjoy 'Inspector Bellamy' you have to really understand Charbol's style. I mean, i wouldn't throw someone in headfirst into the world of David Lynch by showing them 'Inland Empire' or recommend 'Eyes Wide Shut' to someone as their first Kubrick film. To be honest, of his large body of work, the only films of his that's Ive seen are; The Bridesmaid (which i thought was great), A Comedy of power (which i wasn't crazy about) and La Ceramonie (which i enjoyed as well). Maybe after i see more of his stuff, i might revisit 'Inspector Bellamy' and my opinion on it may change. But as of now, I'm not that impressed.
While on vacation, infamous police detective and author; Paul Bellamy (played by Gerard Depardieu) is pulled in to a mysterious case of a man; Noel Gentil, who faked his own death in order to collect insurance money so that he could run off with his mistress. Intrigued by Gentil and his story, Bellamy takes on the case and forms somewhat of a bond with him. This part of the movie i didn't quite buy. I didn't understand why Bellamy would just randomly take such a liking to Gentil. In fact, the only explanation that Bellamy gives is; "he intrigues me". Granted the case is made up of murder, mistaken identity, femme fetales, infidelity and other elements that would peak anyone's interest, but i needed a little more than just; "he intrigues me" as Bellamy's reasoning as to why he becomes so attached to the case. I didn't see much a connection there.
Also, in the midst of working on this new case (while he should be on vacation) Bellamy and his wife are visited by his unstable, alcoholic half brother; Jacques. His arrival makes the Bellamy household very tense because its clear that not only do the two brothers have some serious past family issues that are still unresolved, but its also clear that Bellamy's wife is cheating with his brother. And much like the relationship between Bellamy and Gentil, i didn't understand how a world class police inspector (who's job revolves around searching for clues), couldn't figure out that his wife and brother are cheating with other right under his nose. I mean, early in the movie its clear that Bellamy kinda suspects something between the two. In fact, there's one scene in the movie where Bellamy does confront his wife, but she casually dismisses it and Bellamy then drops it. Either he knows his wife is being unfaithful and he's just repressing it or he really has no clue. Either way, i thought that part of the story was weak.
'Inspector Bellamy' is a chilled out, laid back mystery for intellectuals with shades of Hitchcock. I imagine fans of Agatha Christie would take a liking to this. I may have many criticisms of the film, but it still had a few good points. Depardieu's acting, along with the rest of the cast, was excellent and the film was shot well (in fact there are a few standout shots of great cinematography). And for a police mystery with virtually no action whatsoever, i never found myself getting bored or nodding off (although i imagine many people with a short attention span would).
Pretentious Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
Cliché a saying, expression, idea, or element of an artistic work which has been overused to the point of losing its original meaning or effect, rendering it a stereotype, especially when at some earlier time it was considered meaningful or novel.
If people are gonna treat this like an actual movie, so will I (and I'm gonna criticize it accordingly just like I would any other movie or short film I don't like). Please keep in mind that I'm not commenting about the actual music in the video. I don't care enough about it to get in to it. There's a lot worse out there to criticize than Kanye West's music. Also, please be aware that I'm not nitpicking at this video just because it has Kanye West's name attached to it. I know that a lot of people out there love to hate Kanye West just for the sake of it. I'm not playing in to that, so please save the "hater" label which I'm sure some of you are gonna try to throw at me after reading this. Anyway...I planned to pay his short film/music video; 'Runaway' no attention, but when a movie by Kanye West draws comparison to Stanley Kubrick and Federico Fellini, I'm sorry but curiosity is gonna get the best of me. And look, I understand wanting to make an epic video in the style of Michael Jackson (in fact Kanye pays homage to Michael Jackson or his; 'nigga' as he likes to call the king of pop). But this was just too much.
Basically, this short film/music video is about West rescuing an 'Angel' (a half woman/half phoenix), and taking care of her on earth. Throughout the course of the film we follow the Angel as Kanye takes her under his wing as she becomes accustom to life on earth (similar to Milla Jovavich's character in 'The Fifth Element'). And I'm well aware that 'The Fifth Element' isn't the first to do what it did either. I'm just trying to reference something that everyone's seen. Anway, before the 5 minute mark, we already have the main character; running away from something through the woods in what's supposed to be a dream sequence that represents Kanye running from his fears or a mysterious, unknown element of danger (see the definition of Pretentious), carrying a woman in his arms while he walks away from an exploding car in the distance (see the definition of Cliché ), and nikki minaj's forced English accent voice-over narration (as if speaking in a British accents suddenly makes things more 'sophisticated'). Remember, that's just the first five minutes. Throughout the entire video, he have ballerina's, interpretive dance and other various art film clichés I could barely stomach
It's as if Kanye thinks by randomly throwing in; foreign languages/accents, ballerina's, loud pretty colors and people dressed in all white that he's making an 'art film'. And what's sad is that the average kanye fan (or average person in general for that matter) doesn't know about film like I do (don't get mad. its true), so they have nothing to reference. All they see are pretty images in slow-mo, with artsy shit thrown in here & there and because they have nothing compare it to, they think the its most amazing or unique thing they've ever seen. I'm almost certain the people who labeled 'Runway' an 'art film' don't know anything about that genre past the basic stuff you're supposed to know like; Bergman's 'The 7th Seal' or the work of Stanley Kubrick (which doesn't always deserve the 'Arthouse' label that it gets sometimes). It's funny, you ever notice how whenever a film is SLIGHTLY different from the norm, people compare it Stanley Kubrick, David Lynch or Fellini? I've seen enough work by those directors to know that there's not much of a (WORTHY) comparison outside of the loud, bright colors (which could be compared to some of Kubrick's work if you didn't wanna put much thought in to it), and the dinner party scene as well the scene were the angel is roaming through Kanye's garden (I guess that could be compared to not only Fellini's '8 1/2' but Alain Resnais' 'Last Year at Marienbad' as well).
What I'm really surprised about is how no one has called out West for totally ripping off the visual style of Mathew Barney. And I use the term; "ripping off" because I've heard so many people call 'Runaway' "original", that I'm pretty much forced to use a term that's the complete opposite. For anyone who's seen both; the work of Barney and West's latest video, anyone notice the "similarities" in the visual style? Not too original, huh? And there's nothing wrong with borrowing or paying homage to another film or filmmaker (some of my favorite directors do the same), but dont label what they do as "original" when its clearly not.
But like I said earlier, the average kanye west fan or even hip-hop fan (as sad as it may be) doesn't know who Matthew Barney or Alain Resnais are. They don't know what 'The Cremaster Cycle' is, so they label it 'original'. What's even more insulting is that I'm almost certain that the reason 'Runway' is getting so much praise is because this video came from a black hip-hop artist, and the average person doesn't relate 'black' or 'hip-hop' to 'art' that often. I mean the standards for black film are obviously low. Look at how much praise stuff like; 'Hustle & Flow', 'Precious' or the movies of Tyler Perry get. Seriously, let's be honest here. If Kanye West hired Martin Scorsese or even Spike Jonze to direct this video, and the final product was the same exact video we have right now, EVERYONE would call it pretentious or awful. But because the majority has such low expectations for not only hip-hop music, but black people in general, they give it praise simply because its outside of the "champagne and bitches in bikinis" or Hype Williams world of music videos that people are use to.
So yeah, in case you dont get it by now, I'm not a fan of the video, lol.
SOCIETY This movie should be required viewing for ALL on Halloween, especially with a group of friends or at a Halloween party/get-together. If you took elements of Cronenberg, mixed it with the psychological thrillers of Roman Polanski (especially 'The Tenant' and 'Rosemary's Baby'), threw in a touch of Beverly Hills 90210 and bad acting...chances are you'd have this movie. 'Society' never stood much of chance upon its release due to the fact that it was shelved after its completion in 1989. When it was finally released almost 3 years later, the movie had a 'dated' feel to it, especially when compared to the other horror movies and the advancements in special effects in the early 90's. In this cheesy 'body horror'/gore-fest, Billy Warlock (the guy from Baywatch) stars as a confused, paranoid teen that's slowly discovering that his family as well as all of his rich elitist friends are not what they appear to be. All his life, he's been a bit suspicious about the people he's grown up around. He looks nothing like the rest of his family, he's not materialistic like his rich friends and although he's very popular in high school, he still feels like an outsider. After his best friend is mysteriously murdered for uncovering a disturbing secret about their rich society, he starts to do his own investigating and discovers that almost everyone around him is actually a body transforming monster part of an incestuous cult. The special effects in this movie, which are highlighted in the last 30 minutes of the movie, are bound to gross you out and make you laugh at the same time. Anyone in to movies like; 'videodrome', 'troll 2' or the re-animator series (in fact the director of 'Society'; brian yuzna, co-wrote & produced those movies) will love 'Society'. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Tommy Wiseau got some inspiration for his cult classic; 'The Room' from this movie. Fyi, this movie has been uploaded on youtube in 9 parts.
BUG After years of awful movies, William Freidken finally returned to his true form with 'Bug' (although it's still not as good as the exorcist or french connection). Friedken was one of those directors from the 'new hollywood' era, along with guys like; James Toback and Peter Bogdonovich, who didn't transfer well in to the 90's with the rest of his peers like; Scorsese and Coppolla. Aside from 'Blue Chips', Friedken fell of hard. It's almost painful to sit through a horror movie like 'The Guardian' knowing it comes from the man responsible for 'The Exorcist'. Like many others, 'Bug' was a late discovery for me. In fact, I think 'Bug' is one of the most underrated movies of the last decade. This psychological thriller/drama about the chance relationship between a disturbed drifter that thinks the government is out to kill him (Michael Shannon) and a lonely women that lost her son years ago, but still thinks he's alive (Ashley Judd) falls in the same category of movies like; 'Clean Shaven' and 'Keane' (both directed by Lodge Kerrigan), which are both great movies that you should you should check out if you haven't. Michael Shannon continues to grow on me as actor. 'Bug' was the first movie that made me take note of his talent. He even makes bad movies like; 'My Son, My Son...' (herzog) or 'Revolutionary Road' watchable just for his performance.
ALIEN 3 This one isn't a classic like the first two, but it's still a really solid movie and very underrated (I don't care what you guys think). Following up after a classic like 'Aliens' is pretty difficult. But when you compare Aliens 3 to every Aliens-related movie to come out since, it's not so bad is it? (although Alien 4 isn't THAT bad either. at least I don't think it is)? For a franchise that had a different director for each movie, id say every one managed to keep the spirit of Aliens while adding their own unique 'look' to each movie. In the third (and what should've been the final) Alien film, Ripley crash lands on a colony/prison full of nothing but men who happen to be religious nuts (who also haven't seen a woman in years, which makes things very tense and awkward for her and some of the prisoners). A facehugger managed to make it on to the ship that Ripley used to escape in the previous film, eventually turning in to an Alien and killing off everyone in the prison/colony. Like I said before, this should've been the final movie in the series. Everything got sewn up as far as I'm concerned. We learn the governments true intentions for the Aliens (to be used as weapons). We learn the story behind the android; 'Bishop'. And most importantly; Ripley, realizing she was impregnated with a queen alien, kills herself. All of the first three Alien films are some of the best examples of science fiction perfectly mixed with horror.
THE KEEP Along with the Halloween-themed movies I've been watching these days, I've also been revisiting all of Michael Mann's films (miami vice, public enemies, thief, the insider, etc). And as it just so happens, his 2nd feature; 'The Keep' (something I hadn't seen before until a few nights ago) happens to fit in with the Halloween-themed movies as well. In the film a group of Nazi soldiers set up camp at an old castle in Romania. As it turns out, this castle is 'haunted'. Its controlled by a spirit that gets its power from the souls of the people that it kills, and doesn't take kindly to Nazi's. Eventually, all the soldiers die leaving the head Nazi officer (played by Jorgen Purchnow of course) and a jewish doctor (Ian Mcklelen) to try and figure out what's causing these deaths. Even though this movie bombed when it came out, to this day it still has the notoriety of being Michael Mann's most "different" or "oddball film out of all of his work. Nazis being killed off in a haunted castle is quite different from his usual subjects of; criminals, police shootouts and biographies (john dillinger and Ali). The soundtrack, composed by Tangerine Dream (who did the soundtrack to Mann's previous film; Thief), is awesome in some parts, and totally out of place in others.
IMPRINT This was the infamous episode of 'Masters of Horror' that was apparently so graphic and disturbing that it was cut from the show. I personally don't think it was THAT disturbing overall, but there are a few scenes that are very twisted and hard to stomach. I mean, what else would you except from Takashi Miike. The director responsible for stuff like; 'Audition' and 'Ichi the Killer'. If you aren't familiar with Miike or his films, try to imagine a movie directed by a talented yet sadistic 11 year old who's therapy or outlet is making fucked up movies. I'm not a big fan of his (with the exception of 'Audition'), but I did find 'Imprint' to be the most interesting and non-traditional of all the movies in the 'Masters Of Horror' Series. In 'Imprint', an American Tourist travels back to Japan to find a prostitute that he fell in love with years ago. In order to find her, the american enlists the help of a disfigured prostitute who claims to have a connection with dead souls. We later discover that this disfigured prostitute (and by 'disfigured' I mean she has a parasitic twin in the form of a third hand growing out of the side of her head, due to inbreeding) not only knew the woman that the american tourist is looking for, but also had something to do with her death
WHITE DOG This movie may not be scary to all of you, but if you're black and happen to love dogs, this may fuck with your head a bit. Sam Fuller's notorious 'White Dog' is about a racist, orphaned dog, and the black animal trainer, played by Paul Winfield, who tries to break the dog's racist teachings. I know this is gonna sound bad, but depending on what mood imp in, this movie can be either very funny or very good. I'm sorry, but that the way I feel. I dunno, but seeing animals jump out nowhere, and attack people is funny to me sometimes. Trust me, I realize this movie is supposed to be taken seriously as a symbol for racism in society. Although Sam Fuller is one of the greatest directors ever, I DO have one serious issue with this movie (and no it's not the plot, and it has nothing to do with race). To those people who have seen this movie; am I the only person to question why this dog was allowed to live without being put down? Let's be honest...during the course of the movie, the dog (BRUTALLY) attacked four people, KILLED one guy, and was still allowed to live. Really? It took that long for people to realize this damn dog needed to die? And more importantly, what kind of people don't press charges on a dog that attacks the shit out them? But, with all that being said, this is still required viewing.
TWILIGHT ZONE: THE MOVIE In the twilight zone movie, 4 different directors (john landis, spielberg and two other directors) remake 4 different stories, which I believe are based on classic twilight zone episodes from the original tv show (I'm not a twilight zone guy, so I'm not sure). The first story is about an angry/racist white guy who is transported in to different time periods, each time as a different race (a jewish person during WW2, a black person in the 1950's south, and a vietnamese civilian caught by the US military during the vietnam war. The second story is about an old, mysterious, magical negro (played by scatman crothers) with the power to turn old people back in children. The third and fourth stories are the funniest, and what had me laughing. The third story is about a little boy (anthony) who can do whatever he wants whenever he wishes something. He uses his powers to kidnap random people, in order to make them his pretend family. The fourth story is about a paranoid man on a plane who sees a gremlin/monster on the wing of the plane, yet no one else can see it, so everyone thinks he's crazy. It would be nice to see another twilight zone movie like this made today. The opening scene in this movie one of the best openings ever.
HALLOWEENIE (Pete & Pete) Ever since season two came out, i always make it a point to watch this episode (which is one of my all time top 5 Pete & Pete episodes ever) during the Halloween season. It brings back so many memories. Aside from the tv show being a major part of my childhood, this specific episode brings back Halloween memories of all the stupid shit me and friends use to do during Halloween once we got to old to dress up and knock on doors for candy, which is basically what this episode is about. In 'Halloweenie', big Pete realizes he's getting too old for Halloween which causes a problem for little Pete. Little Pete wants to break the record for getting the most candy, but he cant do it alone and needs his older brothers help. At the same time, a gang of highschoolers called; The Pumpkin Eaters (led by recurring character; Endless Mike), plan to not only destroy Halloween for all the little kids in town, but hey also try to recruit big Pete in to their gang. Now big Pete is torn between weather or not he should help his little brother on Halloween or grow up and say goodbye to trick or treating. Any Pete & Pete episode with Endless Mike is gold. He's one of the shows best characters (even more than Artie as far as I'm concerned). If you ever wanted to turn anyone on to 'Pete & Pete', THIS would be the episode for sure. This one really highlights the shows unique sense of humor, which i like to call 'G-rated dark humor'.
PARENTS This is one of my all time favorite movies, and one of my greatest late night cable tv discoveries as a little kid. In 'Parents' (directed by Bob Balaban), a little boy suspects that his parents are serial killing cannibals. His suspicions arise due to his parent's love of eating only meat and the horrific nightmares/visions hes has that show his parents in a disturbing light. This is one of the most original (and underrated) movies of the 80's. 'Parents' has the spirit of; 'Pete & Pete', 'blue velvet', 'heathers' and 'are you afraid of the dark' all rolled up in to one movie. The acting in the movie is really great. In fact, Randy Quaid was nominated for an independent spirit award for his performance in this. The lead kid in this movie never went on to act in anything else, which is a shame because he did a really good job. Also, Bob Balaban has never directed or written anything quite like this ever since. In fact, this seems more like a David Lynch movie. As underrated and forgotten about as this movie may be, it has a small cult audience, and is slowly getting rediscovered thanks to the hulu and the youtube movie channel. Also, even though you cant see any traces of 'Parents' in any of his work, this is one of Darren Aronofsky's favorite movies.
THE REFLECTING SKIN This movie would make an amazing double feature with 'Parents'. 'The Reflecting Skin' shares the same basic plot as 'Parents'; the disturbing imagination of a child who suspects the adults around him are evil. This movie, like 'Parents' is also VERY underrated. 'The Reflecting Skin' tells the story of 'Seth' and the creepy Midwestern town he lives in. He comes from a dysfunctional home (his father is not only a drunk but has been labeled the town pedophile due to a misunderstanding that took place many years ago and his mother is overly religious and physically abusive). His brother (Played by Viggo Mortensen in one of his earliest roles), has come back from WW2 with a disease that's making him weaker and weaker. He's absolutely convinced that the British woman who lives next door to him is a vampire (she eventually becomes his older brothers girlfriend). And all of his friends are being killed off by a group a serial killers that pray on the young boys in the neighborhood (this aspect of the movie is actually very open to interpretation in that the serial killers might be a split personality of 'Seth' himself, who in reality may be the one killing his friends). This movie has its share of funny scenes, but at the end of the day its a serious film. Like some of the other movies on my Halloween movie lists, this isn't so much a horror movie as it is a psychological thriller/drama. The soundtrack to this movie is great, btw.
HOUSE This cult Japanese film from the late 70's has regained a new cult following due its recent midnight screenings at IFC and its addition to the criterion collection. If it weren't for criterion/janus films, most people (myself included) wouldn't be exposed to a lot the great Japanese films outside of Kurosawa and Ozu. Even though 'House' is more of a satirical and somewhat cheesy movie, it still falls in to the same category of films like; kwadain or jigoku (which have also been released by criterion), just a lot less serious. This surreal horror/comedy/musical will probably leave you laughing more than frightened, but it still possesses the spirit of Halloween. In 'House', main character; 'Gorgeous' takes her six friends (each with an equally peculiar nickname; 'kung-fu', 'fantasy', 'mac', 'melody', 'sweet' and 'prof') to her aunts house (whom she hasn't seen for years) for the summer, to get away from her father and new stepmother. What they don't know is that not only is Gorgeous's aunt a ghost, but the house they're staying in is haunted. In fact, the actual house itself starts to take on a life of its own and one by one, each of the girls is killed during their stay at the haunted house, each in a different hilarious way (one is killed by a piano that comes to life, one is beheaded, etc etc). The 'House' criterion dvd comes out at the perfect time for the Halloween season (October 26th). This is a great movie to watch with a group of friends.
COMMUNION 'Fire in the sky' might have one of the best alien abduction scenes ever, but the entire movie overall is pretty average. Communion on the other hand is a great movie all around (weather the events are true or not), that kinda got forgotten about over time. The movie, based on the true story of an alien abduction just like 'Fire in the Sky', stars Christopher Walken in the lead role as a man recovering from an alien abduction and the toll it takes on him and his family. This is probably one of Christopher Walken's last performances where actually ACTS instead of playing a character of himself which is pretty much what he's been for the last 15 years or so. In fact, Walken's performance is just as creepy as the aliens in the movie (christopher walken actually kinda looks like an alien to be honest). Speaking of the aliens in the film, that might be the one aspect of the movie that falls short (which is probably due to the budget, judging by how cheap the aliens look). In 'Communion' Walken is visited by two different kinds of Alien race. The first kind are reminiscent of the aliens at the end of close encounters (skinny bodies, big heads and big eyes). While the second group of aliens Walken comes in contact with are little black troll-like aliens. Some people may be turned off by the cheapness of the alien suits and special effects, while some might not mind. If can put that aspect of the movie aside, you'll be able to enjoy 'Communion' for the 1/2 science fiction, 1/2 psychological drama that it is.
ANGST Any movie that Gaspar Noe counts as one of inspirations is going to intrigue me. Thanks to a multi-region dvd, I was finally able to see this after years and years of only youtube clips. When you finally see 'Angst', and then think back on Noe's work, it'll all make sense as to why this is one of the favorite movies of the guy responsible for 'Irreversible'. In 'Angst', we follow a psychopath who's just been released from prison and the difficult time he has adjusting to life on the outside. It's clear that he should've never been released, and he turns to killing again. A lot of people will look at 'Angst' as nothing more than a slasher film that's just violent for the sake of being violent. But what sets 'Angst' apart from typical slasher movies is its cinematography, which makes me even more sense that it would be one of Gaspar Noe's favorite movies (the cinematography in 'Enter The Void' is especially reminiscent of 'Angst'). In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the cinematography in 'La Haine' was partially inspired by 'Angst'. Similar to how movies like; Bladerunner & Element of Crime, Vertigo & Lost Highway, Parent & The Reflecting Skin and Barton Fink & Eraserhead go together, 'Angst' has a similar relationship with 'Henry: Portrait of Serial Killer'. This movie isn't for everyone.
LET THE RIGHT ONE IN Vampires seem to be 'in' these days, so I thought id mention at least one of the few good vampire movies out there (i still have yet to see 'Thirst'). Seeing the remake to this movie last night, made me go back and watch the original when I got home. Even though I found the remake surprisingly good (which takes a lot for me to say, because I went in to the remake wanting it to be bad), it made me appreciate the original much more. The remake still retains the spirit of the original version. The story of a lonely boy that becomes friends with a child vampire and the "complicated" relationship between the vampire girl and her 'father'. But the remake is more of a horror movie, whereas the original Swedish version is pretty much an art house drama with a few isolated scenes of gore & violence here & there. The American remake has more of a traditional horror movie soundtrack (tense, dramatic strings that build up to an obvious vampire attack), way more blood, and (like most remakes) there are some parts of the original that were left out in the remake. The biggest contrast between the original and the remake is how its shot. Specifically the lighting of each film. Because the remake is made to be more of a traditional horror movie, the look of the movie is very "dark". It seemed like most of the scenes took place at night. This is a HUGE contrast to the original which is very bright and makes great use of the snowy landscape. The bright white look of the original accentuates the violent and bloody scenes. 'Let The Right One In' is easily one of the best vampire movies to come out in years.
THE DESCENT I had the pleasure of seeing this for the first time at IFC a few months ago. Like many movies, especially movies that involve attractive women stuck in a cave being chased by mutant creatures (which is the story of the descent), I judged this movie without giving it a chance. I gotta learn to stop doing that. Over the last few years, quite a few movies that I've pre-judged have made me put my foot in my mouth. These include; gone baby gone, the assination of jesse james, hot tub time machine (fuck you, it was funny) and me and orson welles. Anyway back to the Descent...In the film, 6 women go exploring in a cave, but one of the girls leads them to where they aren't supposed to go, and they end up getting stuck. What's worse is that they are way out of the boundaries of the campground, so no one will be able to find them. What's EVEN worse is that these 6 women aren't alone. As it turns out, there's a gang of vampire/nosferatu/bat looking people that inhabit the cave they're in and don't take kindly to humans. The 6 women soon discover bones, artifacts and other clues that lead them to believe that not only have these mutant creatures been down in these caves for a very long time, but no human has ever made it out. I'd be lying to you if I said a few horror movies clichés didn't take place, but even the classic horror films have plenty of clichés, so I'm not to hung up on that. This isn't a movie to really nitpick at. There's plenty of startles and scenes that'll make you jump. I have yet to see the sequel to the Descent, but from what I hear it's not that great.
CIGARETTE BURNS To make up for still not writing about John Carpenter as promised, I figured I'd put one of his films on the list. I mean, John Carpenter and Halloween pretty much go hand-in-hand. His recent short feature, Cigarette Burns, is another late discovery of mine (along with the entire Masters of Horror series that the film belongs to). So far, I've seen most of the episodes in the cancelled Showtime series. The episodes in the two season range from awful (we all scream for ice cream and homecoming) to great (the fair haired child and the damned thing). Cigarette Burns happens to be one of my favorite episodes. Ironically, John Carpenter directed another episode in the series (Pro Life) which was really bad. It stars Ron Perlman as a gun-toting Evangelist who storms in to an abortion clinic to stop his teen daughter from terminating what eventually turns out to be a demon baby. Its heavy handed symbolism mixed with a bad rehashing of Rosemary's Baby. Anyway, in Cigarette Burns, Norman Reedus (one half of the Boondock Saints) plays a man who makes a living collecting and selling rare films. His latest conquest is a movie (La Fin Absolue du Monde), that's so disturbing, that it turns people who come near it either; suicidal or psychotic (or both). The closer Reedus's character gets to finding the film, the more dangerous things become. I look at these masters of horror films as r-rated episodes of nickelodeon's Are You Afraid of The Dark. The acting is over the top at times (sometimes it's bad), the quality of some (mainly the special effects) leave a lot to be desired. What's great about Cigarette Burns is that you don't have to love the horror genre to enjoy the movie. The angle about tracking down rare films should attract any cinephile. Another great thing about this episode is that not only is the dvd sold separately from the entire series, but you can watch it right here...
RUBBER JOHNNY I thought I'd throw in a short film to change things up a bit. Chris Cunningham is known for his music videos (specifically his work for Bjork and Aphex Twin). In fact, his video for Aphex Twin's Come To Daddy is considered one of the best music videos ever made. Cunningham is one of the few popular MTV music video directors that hasn't graduated to feature length films like his peers; Michel Gondry, Spike Jonze, Mark Romanek and Anton Corbjin. He briefly worked in film years ago. When Stanley Kubrick was in the early development stages of A.I., he had Cunningham develop models for the robots in the film. Things slowly fizzled out, and Kubrick obviously never completed his version of A.I. and went on to make Eyes Wide Shut. Cunningham worked on Alien 3 (directed by another former music video director; David Fincher) as well as Judge Dread. Given the few films he's worked on combined with the imagery from his music videos, i think he'd make a great sci-fi or horror director (god nows we need some original thinkers in the realm of horror these days). For some time now, Cunningham has stuck strictly to music videos (with a few commercials here and there). If you've read the review for Cigarette Burns (above), you'd see that I mentioned one of the features from the masters of horror series; The Fair Haired Child. Rubber Johnny and Fair Haired Child pretty much share the basic plot. A freakish, big-headed, alien-looking child is kept locked away in a room by his parents. Cunningham's Rubber Johnny came out before Fair Haired child, so I can't help but think one influenced the other. Cunningham's short is set to music (Aphex Twin's Afx237 V7) and is shot from the perspective of a video camera in the dark. It definitely has that documentary/blair witch feel (although much more disturbing), mixed the eraserhead baby. In fact I imagine this is what the eraserhead baby would look like if it had arms and legs.
INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS This is one of the best remakes EVER (in my opinion). This is also a nice a little artifact in that its one of the few memorable movies that star Leonard Nimoy outside of the star trek series (at least from the movies I can recall). With a few exceptions, like the location and the obvious advancements in special effects since the 1950's version, the remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers remains true to the first one (there's even a cameo from Kevin McCarthy, who starred in the original). After an Alien race crash lands on planet earth (san francisco to be exact), they leave behind a lethal poison that's spreads in to the flowers and plants. Anyone who comes in contact with these plants has their body taken over by an alien (or 'replica'). These replicas look exactly like the humans they've replaced, with the exception that they're emotionless. Slowly, these replicas take over in an effort to eliminate humans, and create a new society free of war, crime, hatred and all the evil things these aliens believe are brought on by human emotion. A group of scientists (Donald Sutherland, Jeff Goldblum, Veronica Cartwright and Brooke Adams), uncover what's going on and try to stop it, but their efforts becomes more and more difficult due to the fact that everyone around them (including the police) have been turned in to aliens (lead by Leonard Nimoy) and are trying to stop them. The standout performance in Invasion of the Body Snatcher is Veronica Cartwright who plays damn near the same exact role that she played in Alien. Most people who've seen this would agree that the best part of the movie is the ending. For those of you interested, this movie is available on youtube (broken up in 11 parts).
LITTLE OTIK After a couple discover that they can't have children, they go in to a deep depression. In an effort to take their minds off of the bad news, they go on a vacation to their cabin in the woods. While they're out in the woods, the husband see's that nothing is working and his wife is still depressed so he tries to cheer her up by carving a tree stump in to the shape of a baby as a joke. The problem is, the wife is so delusional, she sees the tree stump as an actual baby (whenever the movies shows the mothers perspective we see the tree stump as an actual baby). The husband goes along with it, and they treat this treat stump like an actual living baby. They feed it, put diapers on it, even push it around in a carriage (although when out in public they keep it wrapped up in blankets so no one can see). Things go wrong when the tree stump/baby comes to life and starts to murder some of the local residents. The movie leaves this aspect of the film up to interpretation (as far as I'm concerned). Did the tree actually come to life and kill people, or has the couple gone crazy due to the fact that they can't have children and turned in to serial killers. Half of the movie is told from the perspective of the little girl who lives next door to the couple, who suspects that something's going on (but due to the fact that she's a child, no one listens to her). Even though this little girl is essentially the "hero" of the film, even she has a dark side, and at one point in the film uses the tree monster to kill an old pervert that lives in her apartment building. This is a unique movie, that's very underrated, and has yet to be discovered by many Americans, I imagine almost anyone can enjoy this.
TWIN PEAKS: FIRE WALK WITH ME
David Lynch's prequel to the popular TV show, might not be a horror film in the traditional sense, but there's plenty of scary scenes that'll freak you out. David Lynch has never directed a straight up horror film, but he's no stranger to directing scenes that creep someone out. Eraserhead (which is commonly categorized as a horror film although I disagree), lost highway (robert blakes character), mulholland drive (the man behind the dumpster) and Inland Empire are all full of scenes and characters that tread close to horror. I didn't like Fire Walk With Me at first. I never thought it connected with the show like it should have. The TV show was more quirky and humours (even though it did have its share of serious and dark scenes). The movie (fire walk with me) is MUCH more serious and more dark. This movie tells the story of Laura Palmer and all of the events that lead up to the television show. We learn that not only did Laura Palmer has have a dark side, but the entire town of Twin Peaks isn't the perfect town that it pretends to be (although if you're familiar with the show, this shouldn't be new to you). This is actually another in flaw in the film in that a lot of the discoveries in Fire Walk With Me are nothing new. Even with its flaws, Fire Walk With Me introduces us to new characters (just as quirky and funny as the characters in the TV show). And no matter how much darker the movie is from the TV show, at its core it still maintains the same spirit as the TV show. Most importantly, Sheryl Lee gives one of the best (and underrated) performance of the 90's (in my opinion). In fact, you can kinda see bits and pieces of performances come through in Naomi Watt's performance in Mulholland Drive. I'm surprised Sheryl Lee never became a bigger actress. At the end of the day, this is a nice change of pace for people looking for something other than the typical horror movies we're often drawn to during this time of the year.
If there's people out there who still have a hard time accepting the fact that Sofia Coppola isn't like here father, and has no interest in making movies like her father, they're going to hate her latest film; 'somewhere'. now, if you're a fan of her work, chances are you're going to love this. As far as I'm concerned, 'Somewhere' is the best thing she's done since 'Virgin Suicides'. That might not be saying much because many people considered 'Lost In Translation' to be both; boring & overrated (i personally think its a good movie...just not great) and 'Marie Antionette', although ambitious, was kind of a disaster. But nevertheless, 'Somewhere' is a great film. It represents Sofia Coppola saying; "this is my style, and I'm not compromising anything".
