It's an epic, eleven-film batch of reviews this time around, covering a huge range of topics, genres and themes. So many, in fact that every time I tried to write a sentence summarising the majority of what I watched, I failed every time because it kept getting too long.
As always, you can see why I had to sit through Borat here.
Ghost (1990)
If you mention Ghost to film buffs, they will immediately think of that pottery scene and Whoopi Goldberg. There are certain people out there who will also immediately think of Patrick Swayze (you know who you are). If you've been living under a rock and don't know the plot of this film, Swayze dies and then communicates through Whoopi Goldberg to Demi Moore. Which is a pity, because that's the dull bit of the film.
All the characters establish themselves as being unlikeable for one reason or another, and the film only really picks up when we get into the predictable (but still admittedly somewhat enjoyable) subplot about who was responsible for killing Swayze's character and why. But did that ending (in which all the established rules of what a ghost can do are conveniently broken) have to be so.... corny?
Jeremiah Johnson (1972)
Loosely based on the life of mountain hermit John Johnston during the 1860's, when he learnt how to survive in the mountains and eventually held a vendetta against the Crow tribe of native Americans. So yes, it's basically a Western, but it was directed by one of the greats: Sydney Pollack.
That being said, while the first and third acts of the film in which Johnson travels through various regions of the mountains are brilliant, the second act is pretty dull. The entire film is essentially "Some Stuff Johnson Did". While he's travelling, it makes sense to have these sorts of encounters with people and things, since they sort of advance the plot while adding spirit and atmosphere to the journey. During the second act, when he's built a home for himself and his "family", it just feels like a bunch of stuff that he decided to do that doesn't advance the plot.
Seabiscuit (2003)
Feel-good drama about the real-life horse that inspired America and helped them move on from the great depression. It's a pity it focused on the horse, actually. The film feels like it was made by two different directors. The bits in the first act about the cars and great depression was actually really interesting, and felt like it would have made a great film in itself. The bits in the first and second act about the horses feel like they were directed by an amateur who still hasn't quite shaken off using cheesy cliched shots. And then in the third act, I suppose they both got together, because its pretty much well directed cliches (that you almost don't notice).
Let me describe this film another way: Films like this are notorious for picking up nominations for (and occasionally winning) Academy Awards regardless of how good they are or how they do at the box office. Seabiscuit is no exception. Now you know what to expect, don't you?
Half Past Dead (2002)
You can read all about what I thought of this shamefully bad film here.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
Look, this isn't a bad film. Sure, it's not as good as the other three films, but for the most part it feels like an Indiana Jones film. There's over the top action, betrayals, more over the top action, and a plot rooted in mythology. I think most people have a problem with the paranormal aspects of the film (as opposed to the supernatural aspects that were present in the first three), and while I agree that at times they don't sit quite right in the world of Indiana Jones, they don't seem entirely out of place altogether. There's no rule that says this sort of thing can't exist in Indie's world.
Perhaps the problem is that we've been spoilt by more "realistic" action films of late, and anything even slightly over the top ruins our suspension of disbelief because we've become accustomed to expecting realism. Yes, the plot and action are ludicrously over the top, but that's the whole point. The film is meant to entertain you, not convince you that this sort of thing could happen in real life.
At least I know where the term "nuke the fridge" has come from, now. Although I'm puzzled as to why people won't accept that scene, but seem perfectly happy to let the thing with the three waterfalls slide by uncriticised.
Wait, hang on. Wasn't that whole fridge scene originally how Back to the Future was supposed to end?
The Looney Looney Looney Bugs Bunny Movie (1981)
The saving grace of this movie should have been that it was three separate cartoons linked together as three acts of a larger feature. This would have allowed for the set pieces and gags to be quick and witty without overstaying their welcome. Sadly, they're still too long (the first act is just Yosemite Sam chasing Bugs Bunny for about half an hour, which was preceded by a prologue cartoon in which Yosemite Sam chases Bugs Bunny for 5 minutes). The only ones that work are the even shorter stories in the third act. The interpretation of the Three Little Pigs in this act is probably the only highlight of the film.
If you're playing along at home, you'd know that in an earlier batch of reviews I established that Daffy Duck was really annoying. The good news is that he's not annoying in this film. The bad news is that instead of being annoying, he's just a dick.
Blazing Saddles (1974)
It's a Mel Brooks film. You know what to expect. While some of the humour seems to have become a little dated, it still has it's laugh-out-loud moments and is on the whole still pretty enjoyable over 35 years later.
Borat (2006)
You know how Homer Simpson's high school yearbook quote is "I can't believe I ate the whole thing"? Well, I can't believe I sat through this whole movie. It's one of the worst things I've ever seen, and does Hollywood comedies a disservice by existing. The only people who would find this funny probably aren't old enough to be allowed to legally see it. (Apologies to anyone older who actually did find this funny.)
Delicatessen (1991)
This is a very hard film to describe. This French film is set in a post apocalyptic world, but feels like it's also set 40 or 50 years ago, in which an ex-clown moves into one of the flats above a butcher who serves human flesh. It quickly becomes apparent the clown's going to be the next one to get carved up.
It's a comedy. I didn't find it that funny, but it's still somehow quite enjoyable in it's own charming way. It's probably the unique set of characters (such as the woman always trying to kill herself because the voices she keeps hearing demand it, but her devices always fail because they're complicated Rube Goldberg devices) that lure you in and makes you want to see how it all pans out.
The Truman Show (1998)
There are four reasons why you should watch this film again (assuming you've already seen it):
1) It still holds up as a great, unique film.
2) It predicted the rise of reality TV, which would become a massive part of the television landscape in the following decade.
3) It's the film that redefined Jim Carrey's career and established him as a serious actor (even though there are comedic elements in the film).
4) The world in which Truman lives is so well thought out that you can spot stuff that's not explained until the second or third acts from the beginning (such as the product placements), and things that aren't really explained at all but would actually make sense for that world (such as the way Truman's neighbour holds his bin in one scene to keep the hidden camera that's assumedly in it trained on Truman in his car).
Lady Chatterly (2006)
A French adaptation of the second version of D. H. Lawrence's story (which according to the IMDb is the lesser known version). The colour palette and soft grain of the film makes it look like it was made for TV in the 80's, which somehow works in its favour. Bizarrely, it also feels like it was made by two different people. At times it feels like a cinematic masterpiece, cleverly using the scenery, soundscape, and so on to establish tone, and when dialogue isn't needed to progress characterisation, the body language of the characters says it all. But at other times it feels downright amateurish, using title cards and monotone voiceovers to tell us what's happened between scenes that feel awfully out of place.
The irony of the film is that the controversial sex and nudity (which were a huge issue at the time of the release of the original story) are pretty much stock standard for French cinema, so really on another level its a stereotypical French film.
No comments:
Post a Comment