Imagine living in a post holocaust world where you are free to enjoy all the pleasures it offers. You don't have to worry about the sun or the rain, as your community is protected over head by a dome. However, there is a catch to living in such a place. You have implanted, in the palm of your hand, a life crystal. Once you reach the age of thirty, your life crystal blinks red, and for the reason of simply controlling the population and scarcity of resources, your life is over. Your death is witnessed by everyone in the city in a ceremony known only as "Carousel." If you so choose, you can run. As a runner, you risk being hunted by the "Sandmen" who's sole purpose is to track down runners and kill them. Made in 1976, directed by Michael Anderson, and written by the two authors of the novel by the same name, "Logan's Run" is a story of adventure, romance, betrayal, and is full of amazing special effects for the time.
Michael York stars as the title character. He is a sandman who, upon finding a symbol which controls the city's computer system, is given a special mission to find "Sanctuary" a city outside the dome where it's inhabitants have fled to avoid death. He is to pose as a runner, find Sanctuary and enact his duties as a sandman. However, in order to achieve this, four years are added to his life crystal, increasing his age to thirty. Now truly on the run, he and a beautiful young sidekick, known as Jessica-six, and with other sandmen on their tail, they escape from the dome and into an outside world. What they find there is very foreign to them, so naturally they have many questions. They end up in the ravaged city of Washington D.C, where they find an old holocaust survivor, who's only other interaction is to several feline friends. The three then begin their journey back, as part of a promise to the old man, who wants assurance that he's not the last man on earth.
There were many things that I enjoyed about this movie. The first were the special affects. Most people would consider them hokey and out of date by today's standards, which they are, but they were amazing for a film made in the early to mid years of the 1970s. Secondly, the story of a futuristic world is intriguing. This movie was made years after the first incarnation of "Star Trek" was seen. As in "Star Trek" this movie brought viewers into a futuristic world that fascinated and astounded them. It was different and cutting edge. This movie also garnered an Academy award for best special affects, which was very much deserved. Finally, the writing itself was excellent. York played a hit man of sorts. But he was a hit man with a conscience. All of the actors in the film played their roles with expertise.
Some comparable films have their moments of droll dialogue that may be superfluous to the main story line, thus making them hard to watch. This was certainly not one of them. I highly recommend this film to sci-fi and action fans alike.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Friday, April 9, 2010
"Bonnie and Clyde" is well acted, sloppily written
"Bonnie and Clyde" stars Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway and Gene Hackman, and is directed my Arthur Penn, one of the most visionary directors of the 1960s. With Penn's excellent pedigree, I was expecting more of this 1967 Oscar winning film. However, for me, it fell short.
The film tells the true story of Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker, two people from different worlds who are brought together during the depression era of the late 1920s. As the film opens, Clyde is newly released from prison, a life that is all too familiar to him. I believe that his intentions are noble. He's only trying to make times easier for himself during hard economic times. It's the way that he goes about it that is questionable, to say the least. While passing through a small town in the mid-west, he attempts to steal a car. During his attempted heist, a small town waitress named Bonnie is watching him through her bedroom window. What ensues is Bonnie is swept off her feet by Clyde's charm (something that paralleled Beatty's own notorious personal, some would say womanizing life of the time) and the promise of excitement away from her droll, sleepy town and life. So begins a life of excitement and unpredictability. This eventually leads to small bank robberies. While their crimes may not be grandiose by any means, it adds the unpredictability that both crave. On the run, they use their ill-gotten gains for hotels, groceries, and gas for the various cars that they steal, seemingly in conjunction with every robbery. As the film progresses, the duo turns into a trio with the addition of a small town gas attendant named C.W., and finally into a quintent with the addition of Clyde's brother Buck (Gene Hackman) and his wife Blanche, the daughter of a preacher. When robbery turns into murder after a botched get away, and ensuing outings cause the death of Buck and blinding of Blanche, the law is hot on Bonnie and Clyde's trail. This adaptation of the true story of Bonnie and Clyde may be one of the more personal, brutally honest, not to mention violent adaptations of their story ever made.
As I was watching this film, I couldn't help but make comparisons to one of my new favorite films, James Cagney's 1949 "White Heat". In this film, the women (Virginia Mayo and Margaret Wycherley as Cagney's wife and mother, respectively) were strong willed, and I got the feeling that they could take care of themselves, and hold their own against their male counterparts. While Bonnie did her share of brutal slayings, she had her moments of absolute helplessness. Blanche was probably my least favorite characters in the film. Bonnie characterized her as a shrill angry shrew of a woman, something that I would certainly agree with. I couldn't help feeling that with every scene, I got stuck in a loop of deja-vu. Each scene began with a robbery, a moment of euphoria, then there would be the inevitable depression, and finally, nearly getting caught by the law close on their heels.
I went into this film with high expectations, only to finish disappointed. While the acting in the film was excellent (ironically the only Oscar win for an actor in the film went to Estelle Parsons, who played Blanche), the writing could have been more substantial. Instead, each scene was seemingly duplicated from its predecessor, only having slight details changed. This was a good film, not great.
The film tells the true story of Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker, two people from different worlds who are brought together during the depression era of the late 1920s. As the film opens, Clyde is newly released from prison, a life that is all too familiar to him. I believe that his intentions are noble. He's only trying to make times easier for himself during hard economic times. It's the way that he goes about it that is questionable, to say the least. While passing through a small town in the mid-west, he attempts to steal a car. During his attempted heist, a small town waitress named Bonnie is watching him through her bedroom window. What ensues is Bonnie is swept off her feet by Clyde's charm (something that paralleled Beatty's own notorious personal, some would say womanizing life of the time) and the promise of excitement away from her droll, sleepy town and life. So begins a life of excitement and unpredictability. This eventually leads to small bank robberies. While their crimes may not be grandiose by any means, it adds the unpredictability that both crave. On the run, they use their ill-gotten gains for hotels, groceries, and gas for the various cars that they steal, seemingly in conjunction with every robbery. As the film progresses, the duo turns into a trio with the addition of a small town gas attendant named C.W., and finally into a quintent with the addition of Clyde's brother Buck (Gene Hackman) and his wife Blanche, the daughter of a preacher. When robbery turns into murder after a botched get away, and ensuing outings cause the death of Buck and blinding of Blanche, the law is hot on Bonnie and Clyde's trail. This adaptation of the true story of Bonnie and Clyde may be one of the more personal, brutally honest, not to mention violent adaptations of their story ever made.
As I was watching this film, I couldn't help but make comparisons to one of my new favorite films, James Cagney's 1949 "White Heat". In this film, the women (Virginia Mayo and Margaret Wycherley as Cagney's wife and mother, respectively) were strong willed, and I got the feeling that they could take care of themselves, and hold their own against their male counterparts. While Bonnie did her share of brutal slayings, she had her moments of absolute helplessness. Blanche was probably my least favorite characters in the film. Bonnie characterized her as a shrill angry shrew of a woman, something that I would certainly agree with. I couldn't help feeling that with every scene, I got stuck in a loop of deja-vu. Each scene began with a robbery, a moment of euphoria, then there would be the inevitable depression, and finally, nearly getting caught by the law close on their heels.
I went into this film with high expectations, only to finish disappointed. While the acting in the film was excellent (ironically the only Oscar win for an actor in the film went to Estelle Parsons, who played Blanche), the writing could have been more substantial. Instead, each scene was seemingly duplicated from its predecessor, only having slight details changed. This was a good film, not great.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
"White Heat" is a Masterful Gangster Film
As you stand at the local video store, staring at the pleathora of old and new films, do you ever pick up a film, read the back of the case, and then decide to rent it? How many times have you come away sorely disappointed? When I found this film, I was skeptical. I had never seen a James Cagney film. I'd heard of his masterful work in the crime dramas of the 1930s and 40s, and then his academy award winning role as George M. Cohan in 1942's "Yankee Doodle Dandy", ironically, a huge departure from his most famous persona. 1949's "White Heat" is an excellent story of a group of gangsters who are looking for the ultimate pay off.
In the film, Cagney plays Arthur "Cody" Jarrett, a sadistic psychopathic gang leader who suffers from blinding headaches and an Oedipus complex. In order to escape the death penalty for a killing spree on a train robbery, he confesses to another crime in another state which happened simultaneously. While in prison, he comes up with a plan to rob a chemical plant on pay day. He also escapes attempts on his life by someone who was once one of his closest allies, one of his fellow gangsters working with a man on the inside. When he gets news that his beloved mother has been killed, he vows to break out of prison and kill her killer and take with him his closest friend in prison, who is, unknowingly to Jarrett, undercover police detective Hank Fallon. Fallon has been sent in to infiltrate Jarrett's gang, gain his trust, and bring an end to Jarrett's massive crime and killing spree. Along with Cagney, many great actors contribute to the film, including Virginia Mayo as Jarrett's wife Verna, Margaret Wycherly as "Ma" Jarrett and Edmond O'Brien as his closest friend in prison, Vic Pardo, aka Hank Fallon.
Along with Cagney's spine-tinglingly diabolical performance, the two women playing his wife and mother are equally strong willed, something rarely seen in films of the time. I've noticed some films that have won critical acclaim, while excellent, suffer from too much acting. By this, I mean that the actors try so hard to play their part well, that when it viewed by the public, it comes off as unbelievable and contrived. As I said earlier, I had never fully seen a Cagney film before, but in this film, his portrayal of Jarrett comes off as very natural. He plays a terrible man, but, as cliche as it is to say, he's a gangster that you love to hate.
If you want to see a gangster film, look up Cagney. I'm sure that our modern day gangster films took a page from Cagney's films. Just from seeing this one film out of the many crime-drama films he made, Cagney was the epitome of an actor portraying a gangster. This is, to put it simply, a brilliant film.
In the film, Cagney plays Arthur "Cody" Jarrett, a sadistic psychopathic gang leader who suffers from blinding headaches and an Oedipus complex. In order to escape the death penalty for a killing spree on a train robbery, he confesses to another crime in another state which happened simultaneously. While in prison, he comes up with a plan to rob a chemical plant on pay day. He also escapes attempts on his life by someone who was once one of his closest allies, one of his fellow gangsters working with a man on the inside. When he gets news that his beloved mother has been killed, he vows to break out of prison and kill her killer and take with him his closest friend in prison, who is, unknowingly to Jarrett, undercover police detective Hank Fallon. Fallon has been sent in to infiltrate Jarrett's gang, gain his trust, and bring an end to Jarrett's massive crime and killing spree. Along with Cagney, many great actors contribute to the film, including Virginia Mayo as Jarrett's wife Verna, Margaret Wycherly as "Ma" Jarrett and Edmond O'Brien as his closest friend in prison, Vic Pardo, aka Hank Fallon.
Along with Cagney's spine-tinglingly diabolical performance, the two women playing his wife and mother are equally strong willed, something rarely seen in films of the time. I've noticed some films that have won critical acclaim, while excellent, suffer from too much acting. By this, I mean that the actors try so hard to play their part well, that when it viewed by the public, it comes off as unbelievable and contrived. As I said earlier, I had never fully seen a Cagney film before, but in this film, his portrayal of Jarrett comes off as very natural. He plays a terrible man, but, as cliche as it is to say, he's a gangster that you love to hate.
If you want to see a gangster film, look up Cagney. I'm sure that our modern day gangster films took a page from Cagney's films. Just from seeing this one film out of the many crime-drama films he made, Cagney was the epitome of an actor portraying a gangster. This is, to put it simply, a brilliant film.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
"Law Abiding Citizen" Does Not Disappoint
If you love a great, nail-biting film, "Law Abiding Citizen" is an excellent choice. Directed by F. Gary Gray, and starring Academy Award winning actor Jamie Foxx and Gerard Butler, it's a story of corruption and revenge.
Jamie Foxx plays cocky Philadelphia prosecutor Nick Rice. The film spans a period of ten years. As the film opens, Nick is spending time with his pregnant wife. Cut to a nice house in the suburbs. A loving father (Gerard Butler) is in his basement with his young daughter. He plays Clyde Shelton, a brilliant inventor who has made millions of dollars on his inventions and patents. He is a loving father and husband, who, as he and his family are settling in for the night, are victims of a brutal random act of violence. Within a matter of minutes, Clyde's life is turned upside down. Both his wife and young daughter are killed, and he's left alive. The two men who have committed these horrific crimes are eventually arrested. As a young prosecutor, Rice is given this case, and, thanks to his corroboration, one of the men are condemned to die (the wrong one, as it turns out) and the other, the one who actually committed the atrocities, is set free on a plea bargain. It's now ten years later, and Clyde has spent years plotting to get justice for the death of his family. A series of events ensue, and Clyde catches up with the man who committed the crime. Needless to say, it does not end well. Clyde goes to jail, but takes out hits on everyone involved in freedom of his family's murder. Rice is brought on to prosecute him, but ends up doing a vengeful man's errands. If he refuses, Clyde systematically kills everyone, one by one, involved in the decade long case.
On one hand, this film is somewhat predictable. I can only imagine how watching someone you love, especially a child and a wife become victims of somebody's act of random violence. If the film had ended with Clyde going to jail because of his vengeance, then I would say that it would be a VERY predictable film. The thing that sets this film apart is that he exacts his crimes while he's locked away. As with any other thriller novel or film, this film has peaks and valleys. During the lulls in the film (and there are several) I found my mind wandering to other things, but all of the sudden, it was yanked back into the film by a surprising, and often brutal twist. Foxx's role as the prosecutor, and ultimately the hero, is a safe role for him. His Oscar winning role as 1950s rock and roll legend Ray Charles was exceptional, as was his role as a cab driver with an unusual fare in "Collateral Damage". Gerard Butler shines in his role as Clyde. Lately, he's been in the romantic comedy "The Ugly Truth" and as King Leonidas in "300". But this was the first film that I've seen him in which his performance has given me goosebumps. I think one of the true measures of a good actor is how they portray the antagonist. Granted, Clyde did not start out as the antagonist, but various events in his life has led him to it. And the manners in which he carries out his various plans are truly maniacal.
You will be entertained, horrified, and at times, bored. But in the end, you will not be disappointed.
Jamie Foxx plays cocky Philadelphia prosecutor Nick Rice. The film spans a period of ten years. As the film opens, Nick is spending time with his pregnant wife. Cut to a nice house in the suburbs. A loving father (Gerard Butler) is in his basement with his young daughter. He plays Clyde Shelton, a brilliant inventor who has made millions of dollars on his inventions and patents. He is a loving father and husband, who, as he and his family are settling in for the night, are victims of a brutal random act of violence. Within a matter of minutes, Clyde's life is turned upside down. Both his wife and young daughter are killed, and he's left alive. The two men who have committed these horrific crimes are eventually arrested. As a young prosecutor, Rice is given this case, and, thanks to his corroboration, one of the men are condemned to die (the wrong one, as it turns out) and the other, the one who actually committed the atrocities, is set free on a plea bargain. It's now ten years later, and Clyde has spent years plotting to get justice for the death of his family. A series of events ensue, and Clyde catches up with the man who committed the crime. Needless to say, it does not end well. Clyde goes to jail, but takes out hits on everyone involved in freedom of his family's murder. Rice is brought on to prosecute him, but ends up doing a vengeful man's errands. If he refuses, Clyde systematically kills everyone, one by one, involved in the decade long case.
On one hand, this film is somewhat predictable. I can only imagine how watching someone you love, especially a child and a wife become victims of somebody's act of random violence. If the film had ended with Clyde going to jail because of his vengeance, then I would say that it would be a VERY predictable film. The thing that sets this film apart is that he exacts his crimes while he's locked away. As with any other thriller novel or film, this film has peaks and valleys. During the lulls in the film (and there are several) I found my mind wandering to other things, but all of the sudden, it was yanked back into the film by a surprising, and often brutal twist. Foxx's role as the prosecutor, and ultimately the hero, is a safe role for him. His Oscar winning role as 1950s rock and roll legend Ray Charles was exceptional, as was his role as a cab driver with an unusual fare in "Collateral Damage". Gerard Butler shines in his role as Clyde. Lately, he's been in the romantic comedy "The Ugly Truth" and as King Leonidas in "300". But this was the first film that I've seen him in which his performance has given me goosebumps. I think one of the true measures of a good actor is how they portray the antagonist. Granted, Clyde did not start out as the antagonist, but various events in his life has led him to it. And the manners in which he carries out his various plans are truly maniacal.
You will be entertained, horrified, and at times, bored. But in the end, you will not be disappointed.
Friday, February 12, 2010
"Zombieland" is a Pleasant Surprise
Typically, I'm not a fan of the horror genre. In fact, I usually avoid it like a plague. However, this was one film that was highly tauted. Having seen many previews, I was intrigued. Still, I approached the film with caution. I was highly entertained by Simon Pegg in 2004's zombie spoof "Shaun of the Dead". Although its follow-up, "Hot Fuzz" was not of the same genre, it brought back the same cast and director, and kept much of the same dry British humor. In "Zombieland", directed by relative film newcomer Ruben Fleischer, I found the humor to be similar to these two films.
In the film, Jesse Eisenberg plays "Columbus" a somewhat eccentric, paranoid young man who is trying to get home to Columbus, Ohio to see his estranged parents. Along the way, he meets Woody Harrelson's "Tallahasse". He turns out to be somewhat of a zombie head hunter who wants to get revenge for the death of somebody close to him. The two men form a strange friendship based on a mutual hatred of a world-wide pandemic which has turned everyone into flesh eating zombies. One thing that brings the two men together, besides survival, is their strange habits and yearnings. While Columbus lives by a list of rules, and has a rather embarassing medical problem, Tallahasse only wants one thing; a Twinkie. This certainly makes for a hilarious series of events. During one of their shopping/zombie killing sprees, they encounter a two-woman sister con team whose only goal is to get to a supposedly zombie-free amusement park in California, one that they both visited when they were younger. The four of them then bond an equally strange friendship.
As I mentioned, I was skeptical. Films like this one don't usually intrigue me. But there was something about this one that piqued my curiosity. One thing that drew me to this film was Woody Harrelson. We've seen him in off the wall comedic films such as the bowling comedy "Kingpin" and in dramatic films, such as his Academy Award-nominated role as bigger than life magazine editor Larry Flynt in "The People vs. Larry Flynt". Secondly, I was intrigued by the dry comedic wit. Harrelson is great at delivering his comedic lines with a dead-pan expression, which almost makes his lines exponentially funnier.
If you are a zombie skeptic, see this movie. It's not so much a story about zombies, but a story of four friends who have a singular goal; survival. It's a story of survival of the fittest, opposites attract, and so on. This is an excellent, well-made film, and one that will be added to my personal collection soon.
In the film, Jesse Eisenberg plays "Columbus" a somewhat eccentric, paranoid young man who is trying to get home to Columbus, Ohio to see his estranged parents. Along the way, he meets Woody Harrelson's "Tallahasse". He turns out to be somewhat of a zombie head hunter who wants to get revenge for the death of somebody close to him. The two men form a strange friendship based on a mutual hatred of a world-wide pandemic which has turned everyone into flesh eating zombies. One thing that brings the two men together, besides survival, is their strange habits and yearnings. While Columbus lives by a list of rules, and has a rather embarassing medical problem, Tallahasse only wants one thing; a Twinkie. This certainly makes for a hilarious series of events. During one of their shopping/zombie killing sprees, they encounter a two-woman sister con team whose only goal is to get to a supposedly zombie-free amusement park in California, one that they both visited when they were younger. The four of them then bond an equally strange friendship.
As I mentioned, I was skeptical. Films like this one don't usually intrigue me. But there was something about this one that piqued my curiosity. One thing that drew me to this film was Woody Harrelson. We've seen him in off the wall comedic films such as the bowling comedy "Kingpin" and in dramatic films, such as his Academy Award-nominated role as bigger than life magazine editor Larry Flynt in "The People vs. Larry Flynt". Secondly, I was intrigued by the dry comedic wit. Harrelson is great at delivering his comedic lines with a dead-pan expression, which almost makes his lines exponentially funnier.
If you are a zombie skeptic, see this movie. It's not so much a story about zombies, but a story of four friends who have a singular goal; survival. It's a story of survival of the fittest, opposites attract, and so on. This is an excellent, well-made film, and one that will be added to my personal collection soon.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Clint Eastwood has played many different roles. He started out in westerns, arguably his most famous role in this genre being his role of Inspector Harry Callahan in 1971's "Dirty Harry". He's done comedic roles, such as his role as astronaut Frank Corvin in 2000's "Space Cowboys", a film in which he both starred and directed. He's even done a musical, 1969's "Paint Your Wagon". Of late, he has been known more for his work behind the camera. He has been at the helm of some very excellent award winning films, such as "Million Dollar Baby" and "Mystic River". He has also directed several great actors to academy award wins, Morgan Freeman and Hilary Swank for their roles in "Million Dollar Baby" and Sean Penn and Tim Robbins for their roles in "Mystic River". His latest film, "Invictus", is a story about an apartheid ravaged South Africa in the early 1990s. More so, it's a story about South Africa's rugby team and their quest to win the sport's highest honor. Along the way, they gain the support of many, but most prominently, the country's president, Nelson Mandela.
Morgan Freeman plays the role of Mandela, with stunning accuracy. It's no wonder that Eastwood often calls upon him. Matt Damon plays the role of rugby captain Francois Pienaar, who takes a team that is, at first, thought of as a joke, to eventually becoming a serious contender for the prestigious world cup. Mandela, having just been released after serving nearly thirty years in prison, befriends the young rugby captain, and while attending to his commitments as president, he also becomes committed to the team and their cause. Francois and president Mandela, in a poignant scene in the film share a spot of tea. They share conversation and talk politics. Eventually, the conversation turns more inspiring, more specifically, the president asks Francois how he has inspired his team. His answer is simple. Music. After their meeting, Mandela writes down an inspiring poem entitled "Invictus". Later in the film, we discover that this poem was Mandela's inspiration while he spent all those years in a prison cell, one barely long enough to stand in with outstreched arms.
While the acting, directing and cinematography were excellent, the story seemed a little lacking. Like many sports themed films, this film is inspiring, undoubtedly, the underlying feature of this film. The scenery in and around South Africa is gorgeous. Eastwood certainly has a talented eye. Some of the dialogue gets lost among the thick language and accents of the South African actors. Naturally, the actors were excellent. As I mentioned earlier, Freeman's role as Mandela was excellent. He's an actor who does not merely impersonate his subjects. He becomes completely entrenched with them. Matt Damon is excellent as well. He speaks seemlessly with a South African accent. However, I can't get past Damon's role as the young Bean Town thug in "Good Will Hunting". He's an excellent actor, no doubt about that, but because of his roles in that film and "The Departed", I couldn't quite wrap my head around Damon being cast in this role.
This was a good film, and while most of it was enjoyable, there was definitely a feeling of disappointment. I can't help but get caught up in the hype of some films. This was no exception. The film was highly tauted and praised. Don't expect to go into this film and watch greatness. It was a good film, not great.
Name Your Link
Morgan Freeman plays the role of Mandela, with stunning accuracy. It's no wonder that Eastwood often calls upon him. Matt Damon plays the role of rugby captain Francois Pienaar, who takes a team that is, at first, thought of as a joke, to eventually becoming a serious contender for the prestigious world cup. Mandela, having just been released after serving nearly thirty years in prison, befriends the young rugby captain, and while attending to his commitments as president, he also becomes committed to the team and their cause. Francois and president Mandela, in a poignant scene in the film share a spot of tea. They share conversation and talk politics. Eventually, the conversation turns more inspiring, more specifically, the president asks Francois how he has inspired his team. His answer is simple. Music. After their meeting, Mandela writes down an inspiring poem entitled "Invictus". Later in the film, we discover that this poem was Mandela's inspiration while he spent all those years in a prison cell, one barely long enough to stand in with outstreched arms.
While the acting, directing and cinematography were excellent, the story seemed a little lacking. Like many sports themed films, this film is inspiring, undoubtedly, the underlying feature of this film. The scenery in and around South Africa is gorgeous. Eastwood certainly has a talented eye. Some of the dialogue gets lost among the thick language and accents of the South African actors. Naturally, the actors were excellent. As I mentioned earlier, Freeman's role as Mandela was excellent. He's an actor who does not merely impersonate his subjects. He becomes completely entrenched with them. Matt Damon is excellent as well. He speaks seemlessly with a South African accent. However, I can't get past Damon's role as the young Bean Town thug in "Good Will Hunting". He's an excellent actor, no doubt about that, but because of his roles in that film and "The Departed", I couldn't quite wrap my head around Damon being cast in this role.
This was a good film, and while most of it was enjoyable, there was definitely a feeling of disappointment. I can't help but get caught up in the hype of some films. This was no exception. The film was highly tauted and praised. Don't expect to go into this film and watch greatness. It was a good film, not great.
Name Your Link
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Quentin Tarantino's newest film, "Inglorious Basterds" is a film for those who love to read. Much of the film is either in French or German with English subtitles. We were introduced to Tarantino in 1992 with "Reservoir Dogs", and then followed that film's success with an Academy Award win in 1994 with the extraordinary "Pulp Fiction". Different directors are known for their different styles of filmmaking. Tarantino often applies the use of chapters, which breaks the film into its different scenes and stories. Some people may argue that this style robs the film of any flow or continuity, but I think that it does the opposite. This way, the person watching the film doesn't get too settled on one story of a multiple story film, much like reading a multi-layered mystery novel. In the end, the filmmaker (or author) can take those multiple story lines and tie them up neatly into one. Sometimes, this is not done as effectively as the director intends. This is not the case with this film, as Tarantino has proven several times, he is a master filmmaker with a unique vision.
In the film, Brad Pitt stars as Lieutenant Aldo Raine, an American soldier who leads a special team through World War two era France, known as "The Basterds". They all have one task; striking fear into the hearts of Hitler's Third Reich by systematically killing and brutally scalping Nazis. The film progresses through France and Germany with Tarantino's signature use of brutal, sometimes cartoon-ish violence. However, much of the violence in this film is inferred. We'll hear a gunshot in the background, but the camera will be focused on a large crowd or a closed door. Many films can be derailed by their lack of intelligent dialogue. One thing that can be said for Tarantino's films is, while they may contain violence and lascivious language, they also contain intelligent dialogue. Some people may find these films dull, as most of Tarantino's films are dominated by dialogue, with only splashes of action. This often leads to an action filled climax. But more importantly, the excellent dialogue is paramount to these films' success.
Much of the time, a film is made successful by, not only employing a stellar main cast, but also choosing an excellent supporting cast. Any of Tarantino's films, but especially this one, is certainly no exception. The first supporting player is played by Diane Kruger. She plays Bridget von Hammersmark, a German born actress who has been recruited by the Americans has a spy. Her fame as an actress makes her transition between drinking buddy of the Third Reich and American spy seemless. She's gorgeous, but at the same time, she's just one of the guys that could easily drink anyone under the table. Secondly, in the beginning of the film, we are introduced to our other two supporting characters. The first, played by Austrian actor Christoph Waltz, is a colnel in Hitler's Third Reich. He is responsible for traveling around the country, interviewing the men of the households, and ultimately, making sure that they are not housing Jewish refugees from capture and almost certain death. There has been a lot of buzz around Waltz's performance as Col. Hans Landa. Many people are predicting an Academy Award for supporting actor. If I could vote, I would certainly give him my vote. His portrayal was eerie, diabolical and hilarious all at once. Finally, we are introduced to one of our Jewish refugees, a young French girl, Shosanna, who narrowly escapes death when, during one of Col. Landa's visits, she and her family are discovered. Her entire family is killed. Years later, Shosanna, played by French actress Melanie Laurent, is running a movie theater in Paris which has recently been passed down to her by a recently deceased Aunt. Upon being discovered again by Col. Landa, she hatches a plot with her assistant to lure Hitler himself and his top men into the theater, only to lock them in and set the theater ablaze, no doubt to get revenge for the brutal slaying of her family years earlier. Laurent could be a contender for the Academy Award as well. Her performance was excellent.
While moving slow at times, this film over all was vintage Tarantino. Excellent writing and character development were highlights. I did not expect so many subtitles in the film, but that was easily ignored, and I was able to enjoy this film. It's certainly worthy to add to any collection.
Inglourious Basterds (2-Disc Special Edition with Soundtrack CD)
In the film, Brad Pitt stars as Lieutenant Aldo Raine, an American soldier who leads a special team through World War two era France, known as "The Basterds". They all have one task; striking fear into the hearts of Hitler's Third Reich by systematically killing and brutally scalping Nazis. The film progresses through France and Germany with Tarantino's signature use of brutal, sometimes cartoon-ish violence. However, much of the violence in this film is inferred. We'll hear a gunshot in the background, but the camera will be focused on a large crowd or a closed door. Many films can be derailed by their lack of intelligent dialogue. One thing that can be said for Tarantino's films is, while they may contain violence and lascivious language, they also contain intelligent dialogue. Some people may find these films dull, as most of Tarantino's films are dominated by dialogue, with only splashes of action. This often leads to an action filled climax. But more importantly, the excellent dialogue is paramount to these films' success.
Much of the time, a film is made successful by, not only employing a stellar main cast, but also choosing an excellent supporting cast. Any of Tarantino's films, but especially this one, is certainly no exception. The first supporting player is played by Diane Kruger. She plays Bridget von Hammersmark, a German born actress who has been recruited by the Americans has a spy. Her fame as an actress makes her transition between drinking buddy of the Third Reich and American spy seemless. She's gorgeous, but at the same time, she's just one of the guys that could easily drink anyone under the table. Secondly, in the beginning of the film, we are introduced to our other two supporting characters. The first, played by Austrian actor Christoph Waltz, is a colnel in Hitler's Third Reich. He is responsible for traveling around the country, interviewing the men of the households, and ultimately, making sure that they are not housing Jewish refugees from capture and almost certain death. There has been a lot of buzz around Waltz's performance as Col. Hans Landa. Many people are predicting an Academy Award for supporting actor. If I could vote, I would certainly give him my vote. His portrayal was eerie, diabolical and hilarious all at once. Finally, we are introduced to one of our Jewish refugees, a young French girl, Shosanna, who narrowly escapes death when, during one of Col. Landa's visits, she and her family are discovered. Her entire family is killed. Years later, Shosanna, played by French actress Melanie Laurent, is running a movie theater in Paris which has recently been passed down to her by a recently deceased Aunt. Upon being discovered again by Col. Landa, she hatches a plot with her assistant to lure Hitler himself and his top men into the theater, only to lock them in and set the theater ablaze, no doubt to get revenge for the brutal slaying of her family years earlier. Laurent could be a contender for the Academy Award as well. Her performance was excellent.
While moving slow at times, this film over all was vintage Tarantino. Excellent writing and character development were highlights. I did not expect so many subtitles in the film, but that was easily ignored, and I was able to enjoy this film. It's certainly worthy to add to any collection.
Inglourious Basterds (2-Disc Special Edition with Soundtrack CD)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
