1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die - Part II

782. A TIZEDES MEG A TÖBBIEK (1965)

2009-06-23T03:50:00.000-07:00

781. GHOST DOG (1999)

2009-06-23T03:38:00.000-07:00

Title: Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai
Year: 1999
Country: France, Germany, USA
Genre: Crime, Thriller, Drama
Running time: 116 min.
Directed by: Jim Jarmush
Starring: Forest Whitaker, John Tormey, Cliff Gorman, Henry Silva, Isaach De Bankolé, Tricia Vessey, Victor Argo
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0165798/

Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai illustrates that, in some bizarre way, artsy films can be subject to the same major flaws that often afflict Hollywood blockbusters. It's typical for a big budget motion picture to ignore logic and consistency in order to boost the level of adrenaline. Ghost Dog, the latest from iconoclast director Jim Jarmusch, commits the same sin, albeit for radically different reasons. Jarmusch is so infatuated with his subject matter and thematic content that he force-feeds his plot through a pair of totally incomprehensible twists (one near the beginning and one at the end) in order to make statements and get things moving in a particular direction. As a result, only the most ardent Jarmusch fan will be able to suspend disbelief, and the movie turns into an exercise in ideas rather than an excursion along a stable narrative route.
There's a lot to like about Ghost Dog. Jarmusch has an interesting idea - comparing and contrasting ancient Japanese culture with that of modern day American gangsters. By romanticizing the Mafia, Jarmusch emphasizes their code of respect. In that way, he is able to view them as an "ancient tribe" and the last of a dying breed. Despite centering on a hit man and being about his single-minded campaign against a crime family, Ghost Dog is more about honor than it is about killing or revenge, and that's where the film gets into trouble. Characters act irrationally just so that Jarmusch can get his point across. For example, near the beginning, a contract is put out on Ghost Dog's life, despite his impeccable record and obvious value to the mob. Why? No credible reason is given, but there wouldn't have been a movie otherwise. This is one of two key instances in the movie when Jarmusch expects us to ignore logic and accept something on faith. But, just as I won't do that for Armageddon, I won't do it for Ghost Dog, either.
Ghost Dog (Forest Whitaker) is a skilled and accomplished hit man who works for Louie (John Tormey), a middle ranking member of the local crime syndicate. The two communicate by the most unorthodox of means: carrier pigeons. When a hit goes wrong because of bad information given to Ghost Dog, the head of the mob, Vargo (Henry Silva), and his right-hand goon, Sonny Valerio (Cliff Gorman), put a contract out on Ghost Dog. Because Louie was ultimately responsible for the botched hit, he fears for his life. So, to protect him, Ghost Dog swings into action, and, wielding his gun like a sword, he begins to track down the men threatening him and Louie, one by one.
The juxtaposition of rules about samurai life (placed on screen through intertitles) with how Ghost Dog applies them is the movie's most successful conceit. Ghost Dog adheres religiously to the Way of the Samurai, as laid out in a book that has become his Bible. "The Way of the Samurai is the way of death," it states. "Meditation on inevitable death should be performed every day." Another lesson is that the samurai must devote his body and soul to his master, to the exclusion of all else. Ghost Dog lives by this creed. Because Louie once saved his life, he regards the gangster as his master, so everything he does during the course of the film is designed to protect Louie, not to save his own life.
The film is a little on the long side, but it's never dull. The revenge element - Ghost Dog hunting down and killing mobsters - forms the core of the story, but it is less compelling than similar situations in recent movies like The Limey and Payback. This is not a high-energy motion picture. In fact, in keeping with the cool, detached attitude one associates with samurai, Jarmusch allows Ghost Dog's tone to become aloof. And, as a means of contradicting the seeming seriousness of the underlying plot, Jarmusch introduces the comedic interplay between Ghost Dog and his good friend, Raymond (Isaach De Bankolé), an ice cream salesman. These two don't understand each other - Ghost Dog speaks only English and Raymond speaks only French, so their exchanges are often amusing, with each of them unwittingly echoing the other.
In the title role, Forest Whitaker underplays the part nicely. He's certainly more successful as a hit man here than he was in 1991's Diary of a Hit Man. The various actors essaying mob guys look like supporting players from "The Sopranos." They basically fill familiar cliches, with personalities just a shade above the level of a caricature. Isaach De Bankolé, who previously worked with Jarmusch in Night on Earth and later appeared in The Keeper, gives an effectively offbeat turn as the English challenged Raymond.
In many ways, Ghost Dog is typical Jarmusch. The director, while admittedly talented, is afflicted with an Oliver Stone-sized ego and his movies often come across as needlessly pretentious. His reputation also outstrips his ability. His last picture, for example, was the exceedingly wretched Year of the Horse, a Neil Young documentary that easily stands as the worst concert movie ever committed to celluloid. Ghost Dog is a huge improvement, but Jarmusch's need to emphasize his involvement through dispensable stylistic flourishes stands out like a sore thumb.
There's certainly a lot to chew on in Ghost Dog. The film is ripe with interesting ideas, social commentary (especially about how violence permeates every aspect of today's world, including cartoons), and other points worth mulling over. Had the plot been better anchored, this would have been a strong, well-rounded film. As it is, many critics will probably willingly overlook the plot holes and rave about the stylistic and thematic elements. I prefer a little more meat, so the best I can muster for this movie is a lukewarm response.

Cosmopapi rating: 81%

780. DIRTY DANCING (1987)

2009-06-23T03:31:00.000-07:00

Title: Dirty Dancing
Year: 1987
Country: USA
Genre: Drama, Romance, Music
Running time: 100 min.
Directed by: Emile Ardolino
Starring: Jennifer Grey, Patrick Swayze, Jerry Orbach, Cynthia Rhodes
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092890/

I'm embarrassed to say that if you had asked me in 1987 what my favorite movies of the year were, DIRTY DANCING would have been one of them. In fact, I paid to see it several times. Looking back on it, I can understand why a young girl would be so entranced with this story – ugly duckling becomes swan and gets to dance and make out with super sexy dance teacher. I watched it again recently to see how out-dated and silly the film had become. What I discovered through this experiment is films that touched you as a youngster will always hold magic for you – no matter how unbelievable and over-acted they truly are. Everything about this film is overdone, from the story to the acting, but it still managed to catch my heart. What young woman, or slightly older one, can escape the secret yearnings in her soul to be loved for her true self by such a hunky guy? To be turned into a "princess" or, in this case, a beautiful dancer while finding first love with your sexy, dangerous instructor? Of course, if this happened in real life, especially in the 50s, Mr. Swayze's character would have found himself in jail for having sex with a minor faster than you can say mambo, especially since he was one of the help. The story begins with Frances "Baby" Houseman trying to fit in with the cool, sexy dancers at the Catskill resort her parents drag her and her older sister to every summer. Only this year, Baby is old enough to start having sexual urges of her own and her yearnings are pinned on the lead dance instructor, Johnny Castle. (Can you believe it?) When Johnny's dance partner gets accidently knocked up, in order to save their jobs, Baby steps into her dancing shoes and becomes Johnny's de facto partner. She begins intense dance training trying very hard to learn all the steps, but it's not easy. Plus all their lessons must be done secretly because if the management found out what was going on everybody would be in a whole heap of trouble. The help was not supposed to socialize with the guests and if caught, Penny and Johnny would be fired. With very little time before their secret performance, Baby and Johnny spend every free moment rehearsing. Her ineptness infuriates him, but she stands up for herself and doesn't let him push her around. Of course, they fall for each other in the process.
"This is my dance space. This is your dance space. I don't go into yours, you don't go into mine. You gotta hold the frame."
The night of their performance finally arrives and all goes as well as can be expected. When they return to the hotel, they find Penny in excruciating pain from her visit with the abortion doctor. With no where else to turn, Baby gets her father, a doctor, to help Penny. Baby is forbidden to spend any more time with those people, but does she listen? Of course not. She does the one thing her father would hate more then anything else in the world...falls in love with and sleeps with Johnny. The film then descends into a pseudo class war subplot, which gets more than a little tiresome. I didn't pay for a lecture about why some people are better than others, I want to see dancing and love. It's no surprise that Johnny is fired for his affair with Baby. What is surprising is that she doesn't get punished as well. In fact, her losing her virginity is flaunted as a good thing, as a step on the road to independence and womanhood. You won't see that happen very often in the world of cinema. Yes, she gets in trouble with her father, but that was going to happen eventually anyway. At least it was over a tryst with a sexy older man instead of something silly like red nail polish or missing curfew. I can't see why anyone would sit through this movie in this day and age. It has it's funny, romantic and sweet moments, but overall it's extremely hokey. The acting is at times so earnest it's annoying. The soundtrack is one of the only things that is still pretty decent...mainly because the music used was already classic. DIRTY DANCING is a fun trip down memory lane, but I'm glad I don't have to stay there.

Cosmopapi rating: 71%

779. OHAYO (1959)

2009-06-23T03:19:00.000-07:00

Title: Ohayô (Good Morning)
Year: 1959
Country: Japan
Genre: Drama
Running time: 94 min.
Directed by: Yasujiro Ozu
Starring: Fujiki, Koji Shigaragi, Masahiko Shimazu, Keiji Sada
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053134/

Ohayo is a clever, humorous, and lighthearted glimpse into contemporary Japanese life, as seen through the eyes of the Hayashi brothers: Minoru (Koji Shidara) and Isamu (Masahiko Shimazu). In a close knit suburban village of 1950's Japan, there is only one television set in the neighborhood, and the children religiously make an after school pilgrimage, often at the expense of their English lessons, to catch their daily dose of sumo wrestling. Returning home, their dinner conversations inevitably turn to incessant pleas and temper tantrums for their parents to buy them a television. But their father (Chishu Ryu) is against buying one, believing that its presence in the Japanese home will spawn "100 million idiots." When the boys are ordered by their father to remain silent about their tireless campaign, they vow not to speak to anyone. However, their protest is mistaken for an intentional snub when a neighbor, Mrs. Haraguchi (Haruko Sugimura), assumes that their silence is associated with an earlier misunderstanding with Mrs. Hayashi (Kuniko Miyake) regarding payment of club dues. Soon, news of Mrs. Haraguchi's "pettiness" over personal grudges spreads through the village, and the neighbors collectively take turns to visit Mrs. Hayashi and return all their borrowed items. Meanwhile, things prove to be equally difficult at school, as Isamu's signal for permission to talk is construed by his teacher as a request to go to the bathroom, and Minoru is punished for refusing to read a passage aloud in class. When Minoru's teacher stops by the Hayashi home after school to inquire about the boys' refusal to talk, Minoru and Isamu decide to run away to avoid being scolded.Yasujiro Ozu takes a whimsical and comic, yet socially astute commentary on formality, etiquette, and consumerism in Ohayo. Through the children's perspective, polite conversation is a meaningless exercise in civility. Yet, through the course of the film, speech becomes an indispensable means for conveying thought, profound emotion, and resolving misunderstandings: the confusion over the misplaced club dues; the children's inability to ask for lunch money; the English teacher's affection for Aunt Setsuko (Yoshiki Kuga). Inevitably, communication proves to be the most effective means of social interaction - the indispensable, universal key to all human relationships.

Cosmopapi rating: 79%

778. FEUX ROUGES (2004)

2009-03-12T11:02:00.000-07:00

Title: Feux rouges (Red Lights)
Year: 2004
Country: France
Genre: Drama, Thriller
Running time: 105 min.
Directed by: Cédric Khan
Starring: Jean-Pierre Darroussin, Carole Bouquet, Vincent Deniard, Carline Paul
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365190/

Red Lights consists of a lot of driving, but unlike those trips you took with your folks and their array of Air Supply and Anne Murray cassettes, it’s never boring. This movie is a riveting look at manhood and marriage. It’s also legitimately frightening.A Parisian couple in their 40s set off on a lengthy trip to pick up their kids from camp in Southern France. Hélène (Carole Bouquet) is a successful attorney who is a beloved, crucial part of her firm. Antoine (Jeane Pierre Darroussin) works for an insurance company, and it’s very apparent that this trip has a very different meaning for him. In the movie’s early moments, you see that he’s dissatisfied with his role in the relationship. He’s waiting on her to arrive; she’s the one with the demands. He leaves work without any notice.So, the tension is already in place before Antoine takes the wheel. And as he drives more aggressively and she voices her concern, we see Antoine’s attempt, misguided as it is, to establish his dominance. The constant stopping at taverns and drinking like Zelda Fitzgerald in her prime is another step in Antoine’s asinine program.Hélène, eventually, gets fed up and leaves Antoine to pick up the kids by train. Antoine pursues, and eventually gives up, deciding to finish what he started: Visiting another bar and striking up a conversation with a young man in the hopes of some male bonding. He winds up picking up the worst hitchhiker short of Carrot Top (Vincent Deniard, looking exactly like Ben Affleck in Chasing Amy), which leads to a horrible accident and a frantic search for the suddenly missing Hélène.Red Lights is so impressive because it’s able to condense years of machismo struggle into about an hour and 45 minutes. Director/writer Cédric Kahn shows how ridiculous the concept of being a man is, or rather shows the right definition of it. Antoine believes the young hitchhiker is the personification of that principle, but Antoine’s search for Hélène is much more accurate, though he’s too frazzled to realize it, as the price for this perk turns out to be much too high.Kahn does more than just present his answer on an age-old question; he convincingly builds unease better than most big-budget fright fests. He captures the mounting tension of a long car trip gone bad: the endless stretches of highway, the dying need to get to the destination, the endless monotony. By keeping the action inside four doors, Kahn highlights how a symbol of freedom can quickly become a prison on wheels, speeding us to a place you dread. With that knowledge, he keeps driving you down those dark roads, and you become increasingly aware that something will go wrong.Usually the sign of a director without a clue, Kahn mixes in different themes and styles in Red Lights. However, the maneuver pays off: You get more than a few cheap scares or a rambling parable on domestic contentedness, but a movie with intellectual and psychological oomph. Right in time for Halloween, too.

Cosmopapi rating: 77%

777. THE FALLEN IDOL (1948)

2009-03-12T10:49:00.000-07:00

Title: The Fallen Idol
Year: 1948
Country: UK
Genre: Drama, Mystery, Thriller
Running time: 95 min.
Directed by: Carol Reed
Starring: Ralph Richardson, Michèle Morgan, Sonia Dresdel
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040338/

From the opening shot of The Fallen Idol, we see the world through the eyes of a young boy on the verge of adolescence. Phillipe (Bobby Henrey, a non-actor in his screen debut) is the son of the French Ambassador to England and lives in the ambassadorial mansion in London. From the living quarters on the second floor, he can be found peering through the banister down into the grand entry room below, a space where public and private life converge and a stage where the adult world plays out for his not quite comprehending eyes and ears. The staff below bustles about to prepare for the ambassador’s absence over the weekend, oblivious to Phillipe above except for the efficient and thoroughly professional butler Baines (Ralph Richardson), who always makes time for a friendly wink and a conspiratorial glance up to Phillipe. The boy adores Baines, who regales him with grand adventure stories from his time in darkest Africa, and looks forward to his weekend with Baines while his parents are away. Baines dotes on the boy who is otherwise friendless in residence. Mrs. Baines (Sonia Dresdel) is another matter, an authoritarian housekeeper who acts like a strict, disciplinarian headmistress around Phillipe. He quite understandably keeps his pet snake, MacGregor, hidden from Mrs. Baines, and the warm, accepting Baines conspires to keep Phillipe’s secret and keep the harmless snake safe from his wife, with whom relations are visibly strained and formal.
In close collaboration with Reed, Greene expanded and reworked the original story. He turned the murder into an accidental death which the boy only sees in glimpses and fragments. Convinced he’s witnessed his best friend commit murder, he’s wracked with fear but beholden by loyalty, and he unwittingly imperils his friend as he lies to cover up the deed. Reed suggested turning the pre-war British mansion of the story into the residence of the French ambassador in London, which not only explains the opulence of a lavish household with servants in post-war England but also sets it apart from the outside world even more literally – it’s technically foreign soil. Phillipe is spelled in the French fashion but always pronounced as the British “Philip” by the butler Baines and the rest of the staff. Greene added the snake, MacGregor, which is a marvelous, boyish touch and suggests a touch of symbolism: there is a snake in the mansion that is this boy’s Eden, but it isn’t MacGregor. It was a happy collaboration and a fortuitous partnership for both of them: Greene found in Reed a sensitive and savvy collaborator who understood the essentials of a good story and the art of writing for the screen, and the two worked together on two subsequent occasions: Greene wrote The Third Man (1949) and adapted his comic thriller Our Man in Havana (1959) for Reed. The Fallen Idol remained his favorite of his films.

Cosmopapi rating: 72%

776. RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY (1962)

2009-03-10T10:53:00.000-07:00

Title: Ride the High Country
Year: 1962
Country: USA
Genre: Adventure, Drama, Western
Running time: 94 min.
Directed by: Sam Peckinpah
Starring: Joel McCrea, Randolph Scott, Mariette Hartley
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056412/

Before Sam Peckinpah reinvented the Western in 1969 with his bloody classic The Wild Bunch, he paid tribute to it with his second feature film, Ride the High Country in 1962.
Part of the homage is in casting the veteran actors Joel McCrea and Randolph Scott to the lead roles. McCrea and Scott appeared in nearly two hundred films between them -- this would be Scott's last. Neither was a major star along the lines of a Bogart, Gable or Grant, but they were pros in many forgettable Westerns. Those who followed the Western genre appreciated McCrea and Scott, but in the studio era of the 1940s and 50s, Westerns were about as common as teen sex comedies in the 1980's.
McCrea plays Steve Judd, an aging gunslinger who has been on both sides of the law. As he matured, he chose the righteous path and became a lawman. He has come to learn that violence is a necessary evil in the West, though he would prefer to avoid gunplay, if possible. His reputation for honesty runs so deep that a banker hires him -- sight unseen -- to safely escort gold from the mountains back to the bank.
When McCrea arrives in town, he is nearly run down at the finish line of a bizarre race between a horse and a camel. Escaping the animals, he is almost hit by a crazy new transportation mechanism known as a car. The automobile would become a recurring symbol of modernity in Peckinpah's films. The Old West is fading away and a New World, ushered in by the automobile, the airplane, the telephone and the radio, was arriving.
McCrea makes it to the banker's office and surprises the banker and his son with his age. After quelling their fears about his abilities, he signs a contract (which he reads with glasses) to haul the gold from the mountain. From there, he begins a search for a partner.
On the other side of town is Scott -- lampooning himself as a carnival sharpshooter known as "The Oregon Kid". Scott's character, Gil Westrum, has spent more time on the wrong side of the law than McCrea's. Inevitably, McCrea comes across Scott and asks him to be his partner in his new job as courier/protector of gold. Without reluctance, Scott accepts and he and his young sidekick, played by Ronald Starr, are off to the mountains the next day. Scott, of course, has no intention of returning the gold to the banker. This is to be just the latest in a litany of schemes. Herein lies the essence of the western in general and of this story in particular. One man's code of honor (McCrea) pitted against the criminal avarice of another (Scott).
Early in the journey, the threesome stop at the homestead of an edgy, religious widower. The landowner repeatedly recites scripture and McCrea happily joins him. However, where McCrea has come to terms with himself, the widower has not. He has buried his late wife -- who betrayed him for another -- on the land and brainwashed his daughter (Mariette Hartley), into sexless oppression. It comes as no surprise then that she is attracted to the youngest of the traveling threesome -- Starr. The next morning, Hartley sneaks away with Starr in the dark of night, much to the dismay of McCrea. This is no journey for a woman. In the frontier world, women are seen and heard, but stay out of the men's business.
Peckinpah beautifully photographs the climb to the mountain. He constructs gorgeous contrasts between the dull plains and the soaring mountains. Metaphorical? Probably. At the end of this journey either McCrea or Scott will stand tall and the other will be laid low.
When the group reaches the settlement on top of the mountain, they learn that Hartley is actually betrothed to another. The husband-to-be is the hooligan responsible for swiping the gold from prospectors and other folks with good intentions. The man also has four ghastly brothers who believe that what belongs to one belongs to the other -- and that includes women.
It becomes McCrea's burden, a duty in his mind; to not only make the mountain safe for the bank's prospectors, but to extricate Hartley from an abusive husband and to return Scott to the straight and narrow. Up and down the mountain, Scott plots and schemes with Starr about how they will swipe the gold from McCrea.
Who rides the high country, from a moral perspective? The great Westerns have always appealed to us because they strip a man down to the core of his character. One choice will determine a man's epitaph. That is the case here. One man seeks redemption (Scott) while the other (McCrea) provides it.
by Shawn Drury

Cosmopapi rating: 76%

775. THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THE COLD (1965)

2009-03-10T10:41:00.000-07:00

Title: The Spy Who Came in from the Cold
Year: 1965
Country: UK
Genre: Drama, Thriller
Running time: 112 min.
Directed by: Martin Ritt
Starring: Richard Burton, Claire Bloom, Oskar Werner
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059749/

The grim, dangerous work that makes up the core of spying is displayed in exquisite and fascinating detail, in this excellent adaptation of John Le Carre's novel. With the cold rain pouring down on the murky streets of Berlin, Checkpoint Charlie doesn't seem to have much to recommend it. Yet this symbol of the Cold War represents hope and freedom to those oppressed in the East and, conversely, the malignant presence of Communism to the West. In this transition zone stands Alec Leamas (Richard Burton), a British agent waiting for the defection of one of his spies. The man in question appears over the border and looks set to make his escape when, suddenly, he is cut down in a hail of gunfire. Leamas is recalled to London by his boss, Control (Cyril Cusack), expecting to be fired. Instead Control decides to keep Leamas "out in the cold" a while longer. However, Leamas is soon looking for work and ends up with a menial librarian job. With his only friend, whisky, for company, Leamas stews in his own thoughts, building up resentment against the British Secret Service. Nothing seems able to penetrate his shell (built up over the years as a spy) although his fellow librarian, Nan Perry (Claire Bloom), takes a liking to him. Unfortunately, Leamas assaults a shopkeeper and ands up in jail.
Nan must like him though, and vice versa, since she meets him on his release from prison. Interestingly, there is another there to see his return to society and he approaches him in the park. Claiming to be from a charity which helps ex-convicts, Carlton (Robert Hardy) takes Leamas to an expensive lunch. This is all double-talk of course -- in reality it's an approach from the enemy, checking out a disgruntled ex-spy and finding out if he'll defect. Leamas seems to feel that he doesn't owe Britain anything and, somewhat grumpily, seems to accept (purely for the money). Then Leamas circuitously makes his way to Smiley's (Rupert Davies) house, for a meeting with Control. Everything becomes clear Control outlines the plan, a devious and cunning attempt to discredit the top East German spy, Hans-Dieter Mundt (Peter Van Eyck). With haste, Leamas is flown to Holland for de-briefing by Fiedler (Oskar Werner), the second in command to Mundt. The crux of the plan is that Fiedler detests Mundt and would do anything to destroy him.
By dropping subtle hints during his conversations with Fiedler, Leamas allows the agent to draw his own conclusions without injudicious prompting. The incredible skill that Leamas has for espionage, and his years of experience, hold him in good stead as he weaves a convincing tale for Fiedler. Realising the "truth", Fiedler bundles Leamas back to East Germany, where he hopes to bring down Mundt in a closed trial. Leamas is an added complication though since he insists that Mundt couldn't have been a double-agent (he was head of East German operations and would have known). Fiedler still manages to force a trial though, absolutely convinced that Mundt is betraying his country, and the closed session begins. It seems as though the tribunal will rule against Mundt, resulting in his execution, until his defense lawyer presents an unexpected witness. This pastes a whole new complexion on the proceedings and the fate of everyone involved.
As the flip-side to the cartoonish antics of James Bond, this movie is both a welcome antidote and a snapshot of the now departed Cold War era. The script itself is tremendous, combining believable dialogue (most of the time the characters talk in metaphors, never actually voicing the real meaning) with a slow, deliberate pacing which reflects the nature of spying. However, Richard Burton's acting as the burnt-out, disillusioned, semi-alcoholic, shambling agent is nothing short of incredible. He full deserved his Oscar nomination and, in my opinion, should easily have triumphed. The supporting actors are really quite good, but their performances pale in comparison. The technical aspects, such as the cinematography, are noteworthy, working together to create an atmosphere where human lives are somehow worthless, where scraps of information are all that matter. In summary, a cracking story with superb acting which reflects on a thankfully-passed period.
by Damian Cannon

Cosmopapi rating: 80%

774. LAMERICA (1994)

2009-03-10T10:30:00.000-07:00

Title: Lamerica
Year: 1994
Country: Italy, France, Germany
Genre: Drama
Running time: 120 min.
Directed by: Gianni Amelio
Starring: Enrico Lo Verso, Michele Placido, Carmelo Di Mazzarelli, Piro Milkani, Elida Janushi, Sefer Pema
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110299/

Having come to Austin screens sporting an impressive pedigree of critical acclaim, the award-winning Lamerica certainly holds quite a bit of promise for foreign cinema buffs, and thankfully, for the most part it lives up to its stellar reputation. Gino (Lo Verso) is an ambitious young entrepreneur who has come to the impoverished countryside of Albania from his native Italy with dreams of getting rich quick, only to find his life changed forever as he becomes stripped of his material possessions and is forced to bond with the country's poor and oppressed peoples, and with one man in particular, a 70-year-old derelict named Spiro (Di Mazzarelli, who turns in a truly mesmerizing performance despite having no acting experience whatsoever). While lesser films might have used Gino as a kind of surrogate in order to keep the audience safely distanced from the onscreen events, Lamerica boldly avoids such potentially embarrassing melodramatics by, instead, using the character as a means of commenting on the increasingly materialistic nature of modern Italian society as it grows more and more infatuated with capitalism. With this in mind, Lamerica is ultimately less about the day-to-day struggles of contemporary Albanians than a critical examination of a new generation of young Italians, who have, in the eyes of co-writer-director Amelio, lost touch with their history. The fact that the film almost never needs to preach in order to get its point across is a glowing testament to the talents of Amelio -- the acclaimed Italian filmmaker also responsible for the widely praised Stolen Children and Open Doors -- who not only draws strong, natural performances from a cast made up almost entirely of non-professional performers, but also exhibits a keen eye for crafting haunting, poetic imagery. In the latter department, he is aided by the spectacular cinematography of Luca Bigazzi, who makes the most of Albania's desolate but beautiful landscape and helps Amelio to create a motion picture that is both intimate and epic. That seemingly contradictory description more or less sums up the content of Lamerica: a complex, intelligent study of cultural identity told with great dignity and humanity.
by Joey O'Bryan

Cosmopapi rating: 71%

773. THE LAST OF SHEILA (1973)

2009-03-09T10:54:00.000-07:00

Title: The Last of Sheila
Year: 1973
Country: USA
Genre: Crime, Mystery, Thriller
Running time: 120 min.
Directed by: Herbert Ross
Starring: Richard Benjamin, Dyan Cannon, James Coburn, Joan Hackett, James Mason, Ian McShane, Raquel Welch
imdb: h http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070291/

As cinematic mysteries go, THE LAST OF SHEILA ($20) is about as difficult to solve as a Rubik’s Cube. While the solution is logical, makes perfect sense and all of the clues are laid out for the audience to discover, one isn’t likely to connect all the dots on the first viewing of the film. Featuring a screenplay by actor Anthony Perkins and composer Stephen Sondheim (who were supposedly consummate gamesters and puzzle-masters), THE LAST OF SHEILA contains all of the requisite Hollywood bitchiness and backbiting to make the film fun to watch, in addition to offering the audience a genuine mystery to solve. The plot of THE LAST OF SHEILA concerns Hollywood movie producer, whose wife Sheila was killed by a hit and run driver after leaving one of his parties. A year after Sheila’s death, the producer decides to through a party on his yacht, complete with a series of party games to reveal dirty little secrets about each of the suspects, as well as rooting out the killer. The cast of THE LAST OF SHEILA features Richard Benjamin, Dyan Cannon, James Coburn, Joan Hackett, James Mason, Ian McShane and Raquel Welch.
Warner Home Video has made THE LAST OF SHEILA available on DVD in a 1.78:1 wide screen presentation that has been enhanced for playback on 16:9 displays. This is a very nice looking transfer that makes the most of the film’s beautiful location scenery from the south of France. The image is generally sharp and nicely defined, although there are some softer looking shots spread throughout the course of the movie; something attributable to the original production and not a flaw in the transfer. While the hues show that decidedly early seventies look, through a combination of film stock and production design, colors reproduction is still pretty good- with respectable saturation, very nice flesh tones and minimal fuzziness. Blacks appear solid, whites are clean and contrast is good. Shadow detail has its limitations, but isn’t bad. The film element used for the transfer is reasonably clean, showing few blemishes and little appreciable grain. Digital compression artifacts keep a low profile throughout.
thecinemalaser.com

Cosmopapi rating: 78%

772. SHALL WE DANSU? (1996)

2009-03-09T10:47:00.000-07:00

Title: Shall we dansu? (Shall We Dance?)
Year: 1996
Country: Japan
Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance
Running time: 136 min.
Directed by: Masayuki Suo
Starring: Koji Yakusyo, Tamiyo Kusakari, Naoto Takenaka, Eriko Watanabe, Akira Emoto, Yu Tokui
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117615/

Shall We Dance? proves that Japanese film makers can fashion charming, feel-good movies every bit as effective as their Hollywood counterparts. Unlike the Australian comedy, Strictly Ballroom, which used ballroom dancing competitions as arenas for romance and satire, Shall We Dance? uses them to explore one man's struggle for freedom from the suffocating repression that characterizes Japanese society. This is a film for anyone who prefers to leave the theater smiling.
In Japan, where public displays of affection between a husband and a wife is considered scandalous behavior, the concept of two unmarried people holding each other close in a dance is "beyond embarrassing." For that reason, ballroom dancing is not popular, and anyone caught engaging in it risks being labeled as depraved and lecherous. Nevertheless, for some men and women trapped in such a restrictive culture, dancing offers the seductive, forbidden allure of slipping the confining boundaries of what is socially acceptable and finding a measure of liberty.
Shohei Sugiyama (Koji Yakusyo) is a forty-two year old Japanese businessman who lives in a comfortable house with a loving wife and an adolescent daughter. But all is not right in his world. Now that he has attained his goals (a home, a family, and a successful career), his life feels empty. His wife notices his growing depression, commenting that "he really should get out and enjoy himself more often." One day, while riding the train home from work, Sugiyama spies the figure of a sad, beautiful woman (Tamiyo Kusakari) gazing out a dance school window. Day after day passes, with Sugiyama watching for this mysterious woman on each trip home. Eventually, he summons all his courage, exits the train at the stop nearest to the dance school, and enrolls for lessons. However, what begins as an attempt to get to know a pretty woman turns into the cure for Sugiyama's soul-sickness.
The parts of Shall We Dance? that are done well, are done very well, muting the negative impact of certain less successful elements. One of the most interesting aspects of the film for a Western viewer is that we're offered an opportunity to peer through an open window into Japanese society, especially as it addresses issues of intimacy. For those of us who are used to the idea that dancing is an integral part of the cultural fabric, understanding how the Japanese view this activity can cause a shift in perspective.
Sugiyama is developed as a low-key, likable character who fills the role of the Japanese "everyman." His relationship with Mai proceeds along a natural path, shunning romantic hyperbole in favor of a refreshingly believable tangle of feelings. Watching both Sugiyama and Mai grow as a result of each others' influence is one of Shall We Dance?'s subtle pleasures. Ultimately, the results of all the dance competitions pale in comparison to understanding the unique relationship that develops between these two.
Shall We Dance? is not without its share of flaws, however. Several subplots are largely ineffective, due in part to the director's unfortunate tendency to use caricatures to generate both sentiment and comedy. Several supporting characters (especially an overweight dance student named Tanaka and a wild Latin dancer named Aoki) are poorly-developed types whose primary purpose appears to be to act as foils for some of the film's more elaborate jokes. And, while this humor does generate laughs, it results in ill-defined individuals whose dramatic effectiveness is diluted.
Nevertheless, subplots excepted, Shall We Dance? navigates the tricky waters of the dramatic comedy with surprising ease. Writer/director Masayuki Suo, who has designed the film primarily as a heartfelt tale of one man's solution to a mid-life crisis, keeps Shall We Dance? fresh and free of heavy melodrama by leavening the script with universal humor. And the ending satisfies in part because it doesn't conform to all the expected clichés.
Miramax Films will almost certainly back Shall We Dance? with a sizable advertising campaign -- of all the distributor's late-spring releases, this has the most potential to be a crowd pleaser. The pleasant emotional aftereffects are a testimony to Suo's ability to fashion a story whose appeal reaches far beyond the shores of his native country. Shall We Dance? promises a convivial evening at the movies, and a rare chance to mix culture with pleasure.
by James Berardinelli

Cosmopapi rating: 75%

771. ERIN BROCKOVICH (2000)

2009-03-09T10:38:00.001-07:00

Title: Erin Brockovich
Year: 2000
Country: USA
Genre: Biography, Drama, Romance
Running time: 130 min.
Directed by: Steven Soderbergh
Starring: Aaron Eckhart, Julia Roberts, Albert Finney, Conchata Ferrell, Jamie Harrold
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0195685/

Roberts' Brockovich is trashy without being trash, sexy without being particularly sexual. You at least expect to catch this creature sipping on a Coors or sitting around with a 120-millimeter cigarette hanging out of her mouth. But the only vestiges of her maverick sexual history are her three children, with different daddies, and the Harley-riding boyfriend (Aaron Eckhart) who baby-sits them while she's out bringing justice (and a huge settlement) to the people of a small California town whose water supply was polluted by the Pacific Gas & Electric Company.
This is all well within the realm of possibility. But Soderbergh chooses to flash a "based on a true story" disclaimer before we see Roberts for the first time. Always a cop-out, this device is the wimpy equivalent of saying, "Hey, you wouldn't hit a guy with glasses
'Erin': Julia Roberts is sassy, brassy
(or in this case, a girl in a Wonderbra) would you?" It opens a floodgate of confusion: based on which story? Sure, there's the tale of Erin Brockovich herself, the scantily clad legal secretary who uncovers some files that suggest PG&E was aware that it was making an entire town sick.
The film is not as stylistically propulsive as Soderbergh's "The Limey" or "Out of Sight," but it doesn't look all glossy and compromised the way a big Hollywood movie made by an inscrutable director usually does. This is still a Steven Soderbergh joint - loose and funny with verve.
Susannah Grant's script gets to the engrossing bare bones of Erin's search for justice, throwing in some good sparring with her crusty boss Ed (Albert Finney) and her co-workers, and avoids the courtroom completely. Grant has given Erin an incredible memory that's lacerating, and the dignity for witty, enraged speeches that made me want to testify.
But what about the shambles of Erin's domestic travail? Her ramshackle life is a matter of fact into which Roberts pours a great deal of sadness and reflection. "God. I don't know what happened," she mewls to Eckhart's George. "I was Miss Wichita, for Chrissake." It takes that teary breakdown for the two to consummate their otherwise platonic relationship.
Thematically, Roberts' Erin Brockovich is, simultaneously,
every woman, no one woman in particular, and a woman only Roberts could get away with playing. It's the last of these that makes the film more than watchable. But the woman in this film is compromised by the message. We are supposed to believe that the rigors of this case put her on the path for redemption, but for what is she being redeemed? Leaving her kids in Eckhart's benevolent care while she throws herself into the first respectable job she's ever had? She's an ideal woman whose single flaw is that she comes to work dressed in Roberts' "Pretty Woman" wardrobe.
Both the movie and the woman are a tease. Erin winds up putting her life at risk, Karen Silkwood-style, but like all Soderbergh's work, the film only flirts with being a thriller. While she is out using her rack to get incriminating records from the guy (fine Jamie
Harrold) at the county water department, Soderbergh and Grant make us think this film is going to transcend being "Pretty Woman Saves a Town." Still, if you're going to be taunted by a saint in whore's clothing, better Roberts than some other actress.
If in the script, Brockovich is a conceptual mistake - Norma Rae in heels - in the flesh, she's a volcano of furious self-doubt and haplessness. Despite its problems, this is the most assured and unapologetic of Roberts' greatish performances - great-ish because you can't spackle the holes in as many problem characters as Roberts has without seeming more like a fantastic handywoman than an actress for the ages. Conversely, this also makes her the best movie star around.
Erin also affords Roberts the privilege of saying things like "Goddamn, that's a heavy door!" and "As long as I have one ass instead of two, I'll wear what I like." That's a tame sample from an actress whose dexterity here with the word "f- - -" would've guaranteed her a spot on HBO's "Def Comedy Jam." I haven't enjoyed hearing anyone cuss up this much of a storm since Richard Pryor's "Live on the Sunset Strip."
But the character is also a wounded, plaintive creature, sprung to life from a Loretta Lynn record or from the pages of Dorothy Allison's fiction. And some of Grant's dialogue is that good, too.
Most of the scenes between Roberts and the effortless, gentle Eckhart (miles away from "In the Company of Men") are shot through with a spontaneity abetted by Ed Lachman's hand-held camerawork, which seems to undulate for most of the film.
Her ostentatious tumbleweed is drawn to the hairy out-of-work Zen biker in him: They're two shockingly decent people whose exteriors all but say "judge me." The plot just sneaks into the film and into the relationship and threatens to ruin both. Soderbergh seems more at ease in scenes be
tween the two of them than in the ensuing legal matters.
As it becomes increasingly clear that Erin sees George as a glorified baby sitter, the movie grows ordinary and deflated as she tries to bring down PG&E. Eckhart is relegated to special appearances, while Roberts spars with Finney, who hasn't been this alive since "Annie." The knowledge of this evokes Daddy Warbucks, which evokes lots of money, which brings us back to "Pretty Woman," which is what Erin and Ed's tit-for-tat relationship is like. Only there are no shopping sprees and the sexual favors are only lewdly joked about. But, alas, Erin's equally obscene paycheck is definitely real.
by Wesley Morris

Cosmopapi rating: 76%

770. NEVER CRY WOLF (1983)

2009-03-09T10:29:00.000-07:00

Title: Never Cry Wolf
Year: 1983
Country: USA
Genre: Adventure, Drama
Running time: 105 min.
Directed by: Carroll Ballard
Starring: Charles Martin Smith, Brian Dennehy, Zachary Ittimangnaq
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086005/

The bond between people and animals is one of the more fascinating aspects of human psychology, although, more often than not, portraying that bond on a movie screen has proved to be a daunting task that falls short of success. Filmmaker Carroll Ballard (Black Stallion, Fly Away Home) uses subtle imagery and gorgeous cinematography to make Never Cry Wolf a marginally successful tale of a man who discovers his soul through his connection with nature. We are able to identify with Tyler (Charles Martin Smith) right from the start because he has no past. A brave, naďve man, he embarks on a journey known as the Lupine Project. He will travel to a remote section of the Arctic to study wolf habitat and discover whether the wild wolves are killing off the highly valued caribou. If they are, then the Canadian government will have all the reason it needs to exterminate the species. From the start, Never Cry Wolf seems as if it might become a study of Murphy’s Law in sub-zero temperatures. During Tyler’s first few months in seclusion, anything and everything goes wrong – wrong enough to make him begin the most disgusting rodent-eating habit this side of the television program, Survivor. Through all his adversity, however, Tyler bonds with a wolf pack, and comes to admire the subtlety and cleverness of their behavior. But Tyler is not as alone as he believes, and soon a group of hunters threatens to disrupt the wolves’ peaceful habitat. Tyler is forced to make a choice between going home and standing up for this new world that has become his own. Never Cry Wolf is based on a book written by Farley Mowat, and one gets the feeling that the story was more effectively told on the printed page. This is often a beautiful film to look at, and some of Tyler’s narration borders on the profound, but the truth is that there isn’t much going on for a large portion of the movie’s105 minutes. Those accustomed to fast-paced filmmaking are advised to stay away. According to Martin Smith, the one-and-a-half year shoot was a grueling experience. The movie was filmed in difficult conditions, including freezing temperatures and remote locations. Curtis Hanson, who went on to direct L.A. Confidential and Wonder Boys, co-wrote the screenplay, but large portions of the movie were filmed without scripted dialogue. It shows. But if you can get past the lack of significant dialogue then you will find a touching tale of one man’s journey – a journey that can teach us all a little bit about ourselves.
by Akiva Gottlieb

Cosmopapi rating: 77%

769. L' ARMEE DES OMBRES (1969)

2009-03-01T09:57:00.000-08:00

Title: Armée des ombres, L' (Army of Shadows)
Year: 1969
Country: France, Italy
Genre: Drama, War
Running time: 145 min.
Directed by: Jean-Pierre Melville
Starring: Lino Ventura, Simone Signoret, Paul Meurisse, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Claude Mann, Paul Crauchet
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064040/

With each film that becomes available, the stature of French filmmaker Jean-Pierre Melville (1917-73) increases. Until recently, he was largely unknown outside France, which is ironic in that his work is very much in the American vein. He made well-plotted genre movies, but he made them like no one else: sober in tone, meticulous in their observation, methodical in their presentation and philosophical in their assessment of the human condition. His scenes of violence are always effective and never frivolous, rife with an understanding of the consequences for all concerned.
"Army of Shadows" deals with the French resistance during World War II, but it's nothing like any other French resistance film ever made. There's no romance and no thrilling escapes, and not a single character experiences a flicker of satisfaction at pursuing a just cause. Instead, life is grim and ugly, a succession of ambiguous victories, moral compromises and the constant threat of capture. If anything, the resistance members act as if they've all sold their souls to the devil and can't get them back.
A telling moment comes early in the film, when Philippe (Lino Ventura), a resistance captain, and his associates capture a former member who has turned informant. They bring him back to an apartment to kill him, but there are too many people within earshot. So they gag him and proceed to discuss how to go about killing him silently. There's no doubt they'll go through with it, but there's equally no doubt that, in carrying out this order, they are killing a part of themselves -- and they know it. It's a scene even more effective and morally complicated than the killing of the Dutch spy in "Munich."
Further indication of Melville's specific and unique point of emphasis comes in yet another early scene, in which the hero escapes from Nazi headquarters. A typical filmmaker would have turned that into a moment of adventure, but Melville cuts off the scene early. His idea of drama has nothing to do with action as mere titillation. Thus, he focuses more on the scene that follows, a seemingly low-key interaction in which Philippe hopes to hide by going into a barbershop for a shave. Is the barber a collaborator? Will he turn him in? And what's the meaning of the political sign on the wall? Everything Melville shows us, he shows us for a reason, and these reasons are never obscure but are rather pertinent to the action and to the moral movement of the world and the characters.
Perhaps in Melville's own time, his pictures were considered both too much like American films (crime films, thrillers, noirs) and yet not enough like them to please American audiences. But a generation later, there's no mistaking that he was a master.
by Mick LaSalle

Cosmopapi rating: 80%

768. SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE (2008)

2009-03-01T09:50:00.000-08:00

Title: Slumdog Millionaire
Year: 2008
Country: UK, France
Genre: Crime, Drama, Romance
Running time: 115 min.
Directed by: Danny Boyle
Starring: Dev Patel, Irrfan Khan,Anil Kapoor, Madhur Mittal, Freida Pinto
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1010048/

Deep down inside, I personally believe some game shows are rigged to a certain degree. After all, organizers do try to profile you through a questionnaire which also contain clauses such as telling-nothing-but-the-truth-or-you-risk-forfeiting-any-prizes-won. So you're presenting yourself on a silver platter for opportunities to exploit both your strengths, if they choose to make you a hero, or your weaknesses, should you so be deemed as being there for entertainment value. This of course does not apply to some situations where obvious hints are provided so that you're given an idiot-proof situation to make away with some cash, should the sponsors be generous.Game shows are mathematical and probability at its best, and of course one that can be programmed such that the house can win all, or choose to let you go for a little bit of laughter at the side. You can be asked questions that you know or to do something that you're comfortable with, from the profile you built, or when the stakes are too high and the house's appetite for risk is somehow subdued, in comes the real challenge to see if you'd buckle under pressure, or can overcome your fears. For Jamal, (Dev Patel), he's one question away in India's Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, hosted by Prem Kumar (played by Anil Kapoor, and in real life hosted by Amitabh Bachchan who gets some mention here), to winning 20,000,000 (count the zeroes, man) rupees, given that he's answered seemingly random questions correctly, but on the show's logical break, get arrested on suspicion of fraud and tortured during interrogation to spill the beans.Based on the novel "Q&A" by Vikas Swarup, this Danny Boyle-Loveleen Tandan co-directed film brings us on an incredible journey through the chapters in Jamal's life, where each episode of his tremendously rich tale of survival had Destiny place every nugget of required information toward those million dollar rupees. Hailing from the slums of Mumbai, we see how Jamal and his brother Salim carve a living out of exploiting their street smarts, even at one point being little artful dodgers themselves in a Charles Dickens tale. It boggles everyone that someone without a formal education could nab those random questions correctly, a tea boy working in a call centre, beating participants like lawyers and doctors. He captured the imagination of the entire nation, that sometimes the wildest of dreams can come true.You'll find yourself rooting for Jamal, because here's a character crafted so earnestly by the storytellers that it's hard not to root for the underdog. And his story as told to the police inspector (played by Irrfan Khan), especially in his early life, set the stage thanks to the two adorable boys playing Jamal (Ayush Mahesh Khedekar) and Salim (Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail) who arrest your attention in a solid tale of two brothers growing up who eventually set foot on very different paths - one unassuming, while the other ambitious. And nothing better to drive the wedge between them than a girl Latika (Rubiana Ali) they knew by chance, and grew up with.One of my favourite films of Danny Boyle's was Millions, where a cute little boy with tremendous imagination, held court when a bag full of cash come literally crashing down on his play house. Boyle seems to hold court again with a tale of the little ones overcoming impossible odds of survival through the honing of their street-smarts and instincts, and again shows his eclecticism in direction with some dizzying cinematography by Anthony Dod Mantle. And providing the score and music to punctuate the movie is none other than the Mozart of Mumbai A.R. Rahman, whom I hope gets his due recognition with non-Indian film fans, and even though I felt that his work here might not have been the best I've heard, it's still a great introductory platform to everyone caught up in the buzz for this movie.For a story with events firmly written in the stars, and had plenty of coincidence and luck playing a part, it never for one moment felt forced nor contrived. Everything seemed possible, which makes it magical with Destiny having a big say, but one primary fact here is that Jamal had entered the gameshow not to win money beyond his wildest dreams, but to try and reconnect and search for a love that is lost, through a media platform. It's not that far fetched an idea, because I do know from personal experience that this type of scenarios do happen, with differing success results of course.Slumdog Millionaire is up against very strong contenders for the Best Picture Oscar, but it firmly has my support as one of the best this year so far, and I'm rooting for it to take home the statuette. It's a magical film with Destiny playing a huge part in changing the lives of underdogs, where hope and belief are made chic themes again.
by Nutshell

Cosmopapi rating: 83%

767. EL ABUELO (1998)

2009-03-01T09:41:00.000-08:00

Title: Abuelo, El (The Grandfather)
Year: 1998
Country: Spain
Genre: Drama
Running time: 151 min.
Directed by: José Luis Garci
Starring: Fernando Fernán Gómez, Cayetana Guillén Cuervo, Rafael Alonso
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0176415/

It's frustrating that the foreign-language films nominated for Oscars rarely become widely available to the movie-going public. It's doubly frustrating, then, when a nominated film gets picked up for American distribution only to be dropped off in a few select theaters much later. José Luis Garci's 1998 film El Abuelo—helpfully translated to The Grandfather by the folks at Miramax—was unfortunate enough to be Spain's Oscar entry the same year Life Is Beautiful contended, meaning his movie never stood a chance. An extremely leisurely story about aging and honor, The Grandfather's two-and-a-half-hour running time handicaps what could have been a particularly good parable. When an aging, bitter, turn-of-the-century Spanish aristocrat (Fernando Fernán-Gómez) learns that his son has died, he travels back to his family estate in Spain to confront his detested daughter-in-law (Cayetana Guillén Cuervo), whom he suspects of bearing him an illegitimate granddaughter. But which one is it? Which granddaughter will gain his blessing, and which his curse? If the story sounds Shakespearean, it's probably intentional: The Grandfather is peppered with references to Macbeth, Hamlet, and especially King Lear. Yet while scheming characters plot to imprison the volatile Fernán-Gómez, or characterize him as insane, the vicious curmudgeon remains sharply intent on his task. Fernán-Gómez is memorably mean, and the scenery is gorgeous, but The Grandfather ultimately succumbs to sentimentality laced with shallow philosophizing. It doesn't help that the political subtext concerning the fall of Spain's privileged class is only intermittently addressed. Add to that a tendency toward exaggerated acting that's better suited for the stage, as well as an overbearingly maudlin score, and The Grandfather falls short of its potential.
by Joshua Klein

Cosmopapi rating: 72%

766. THE RAILWAY CHILDREN (1970)

2009-02-28T10:39:00.000-08:00

Title: The Railway Children
Year: 1970
Country: UK
Genre: Drama, Family
Running time: 109 min.
Directed by: Lionel Jeffries
Starring: Jenny Agutter, Dinah Sheridan, Bernard Cribbins, Sally Thomsett, Gary Warren
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066279/

E. Nesbit’s beloved tale of three children shipped off to live in the country beside a railway line with their mother after their father is arrested on mysterious spying charges and they are left penniless. Yet, it proves the making of them, as they discover a way of helping their father from afar.
A comfortable, prettified adaptation of one of E. Nesbit’s less showy books, i.e. it’s free of fantasy elements but still set amongst the petticoats and tidy manners of Edwardian England. A charming if glassy setting that keeps the film a perennial Christmas favourite. The actor-comedian Lionel Jeffries stays behind the camera, gilding sensitive performances out the three children — interestingly Jenny Agutter’s serious Bobbie was two years younger than “younger” sister Sally Thomset, and, soberingly, both would grow up to be sex symbols — and portraying the healing effect such an idyllic community can have on a troubled family.
The contrast between the Waterbury’s well-heeled London life and the cottagey existence they are forced into following their father’s calamity is, by today’s notions of hardship, not quite the lurch it aims for. Yet, there is the sense of something undone — the children, especially Bobbie, have adulthood and responsibility thrust upon them as their mother sickens and life unravels. Their adventures along the railway sidings (not the beset message to send out to watching kids) skids into heroics as they rescue a schoolboy who breaks his leg on the track, and eventually through an unlikely communication with an old man on a London bound train, find the solution to all their troubles — papa, free again!
It is all a bit a bit far-fetched and sentimental, but delivered with such calm grace by Jeffries with the assistance of cinematographer Arthur Ibbetson, the exaggerations don’t seem to matter. It just looks the piece, an England, green and pleasant, a forgotten realm of pleasantries where total strangers turn into friends rather than threats, and stationmasters are loveable locals. Which, when you think about it, is a whole lot more fantastical than anything Harry Potter dabbles in.
by Ian Nathan

Cosmopapi rating: 67%

765. WHITE DOG (1982)

2009-02-28T10:32:00.000-08:00

Title: White Dog
Year: 1982
Country: USA
Genre: Drama, Horror, Thriller
Running time: 90 min.
Directed by: Samuel Fuller
Starring: Kristy McNichol, Christa Lang, Vernon Weddle
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084899/

It begins with a black screen and the sound of a dog yelping in pain--a noise sure to set any animal lover’s teeth on edge. As the screen comes to life, we see Julie Sawyer (Kristy McNichol) on a dark and empty road. She’s just struck a white german shepherd, who lies motionless on the highway. Soon that very dog is a major part of her life. When a man breaks into her house and attempts to rape Julie, the dog defends her, refusing to let the attacker go until the police arrive. Julie’s told that she’s lucky to have such a guardian.Unfortunately for Julie, it turns out that this particular dog is a “white dog,” an attack dog raised and trained by a racist to viciously assault and even kill people with black skin. Julie, understandably, is reluctant to put down the dog that saved her. Her only hope is a black animal trainer named Keys (Paul Winfield), a man driven to deprogram the white dog in what he sees is a direct conflict with white racism. But can anyone undo the damage that’s been done to the poor dog’s mind? And how many have to be put at risk before the white dog should be put down?
Samuel Fuller’s White Dog kind of looks like a TV movie, and is more-or-less acted like one. Still, it’s not without its charms. While the main focus of the film is certainly racism, another, just as important theme is man’s cruelty towards animals. The white dog is an innocent, in a sense; we learn that, since it was a puppy, it has been programmed to attack black men, and the process was probably something like this: a black bum or junkie, having been paid by the dog’s owner, repeatedly beats the animal, until it learns to fear and hate black men on sight. As Keys explained, to the white dog, black men are only that--men with black skin. It’s merely a colour that the dog recognizes and attacks, without all the ideology of human racism. No matter how evil the dog may seem, it is only acting out human evil. One can’t help but sympathize with the dog.But the violence against animals doesn’t end with the dog. Keys works with a man named Carruthers, and together they operate a business that trains wild animals for use in show business. The film doesn’t pussyfoot around exactly what this entails; the violence that is required to turn wild animals into trained, docile beings is displayed in full. Deprogramming the white dog (which never receives a name, oddly enough) is a violent affair as well, though in this instance it’s mostly a case of the dog attacking Keys until exhaustion again and again.
Certainly there are no A-list actors in the cast, but at least the principle actors acquit themselves well--most of the time. Paul Winfield (best known to fans of The Simpsons as the voice of Luscious Sweet) plays Keys (an otherwise underdeveloped character) as a man single-mindedly driven to “save” the white dog. To put the dog down, he believes, is to let the racists win, to let them destroy something else. Certainly it stretches believability when he is willing to circumvent the law in serious (and questionable) ways to give himself more time with the dog, but he’s convincing enough in his determination that we can almost buy it. Kristy McNichol, at least, plays a dog-lover well.The real star, though, is the white dog itself, played by five different stunt dogs. They are really beautiful dogs, and even when the white dog is charging someone, intent on ripping that person’s throat out, you can’t help but notice what a stunning animal it is. It’s easy to empathize with a dog, too--a racist human, of course, would be far less sympathetic.
moviefeast.blogspot.com

Cosmopapi rating: 70%

764. OPERATSIYA Y I DRUGIYE PRIKLYUCHENIYA SHURIKA (1965)

2009-02-28T10:23:00.000-08:00

Title: Operatsiya Y i drugiye priklyucheniya Shurika (Operation Y and Other Shurik's Adventures )
Year: 1965
Country: Soviet Union
Genre: Comedy
Running time: 95 min.
Directed by: Leonid Gaidai
Starring: Aleksandr Demyanenko, Natalya Varley, Ruslan Akhmetov, Yuri Nikulin
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059550/

As the title says, this is a collection of three short films, each about an adventure involving the indomitable bespectacled student Shurik (Aleksandr Demyanenko) who would go on to earn more glory as the intrepid bespectacled student Shurik foiling the evil designs of the rather incompetent trio of criminals that makes its appearance in the third film of this collection.
The first is Naparnik (Partner) and tells how Shurik, a student part-time construction worker gets into a bus brawl with a bully named Fedya (Aleksei Smirnov) when the latter refuses to offer his seat to a pregnant young lady. Fedya is sentenced to 15 days of community work and just happens to get posted to the same construction place where Shurik works. Of course, he tries to exact his revenge but little does he know how inventive (and plain lucky) Shurik can be. Some excellent acting on both sides, and some particularly funny moments (e.g. Fedya chasing Shurik who has just stolen his clothes around the construction site...
The second adventure is Navazhdenie (Suggestion) --- the word really implies something like extrasensory suggestion or telepathy --- is about Shurik freaking out on the day of an important exam. Everyone is either cramming, or finding creative ways to cheat, or, in Shurik's case, simply finding someone who has actually attended lectures and taken notes. He finally stumbles across the beautiful Lida (Naralya Seleznyova) but never notices either her or where he actually is or happens to be going. She is deeply engrossed in studying from the notes herself and when her girl friend falls asleep, she never notices that Shurik is following her around reading along with her. After the exam, a common friend introduces them to each other, and they, completely unaware of having spent the entire afternoon studying together go to Lida's apartment where Shurik experiences deja-vu and Lida manages to do test his supposed telepathy with a fairly unconventional suggestion.
The third adventure introduces the famous bumbling trio of the Dimwit (Yuri Nikulin), the Chicken (Georgi Vitsin), and the Old Hand (Yevgeni Morgunov). The three are hired by a corrupt depot director (Vladimir Vladislavsky) who is facing an financial inspection. Of course, in good socialist tradition, most of the goods that are supposedly stored in his depot have already been stolen, so he needs someone to rig a break-in and to make it appear as if the goods have all disappeared in that burglary. This plan gives the title to this epoisode: Operatsiya Y (Operation Y). The nightwatch on the night of the action is just an old lady whom they plan to chloroform. Unfortunately (for them), on that fateful night Shurik trades places with the old lady and finds himself in the midst of some hot and incredibly funny action.
As with all other of Gaidai's comedies, this one is not to be missed. Some really great humor, both of the slapstick and the verbal variety. Demyanenko's performance as Shurik put him on a comedic trajectory that really managed to typecast him for a very long time, leading many directors to neglect his rather versatile talents. The attraction of the nerdy student who always manages to foil the bad guys, get the girl, and study, while at the same time being mostly clueless (although quite inventive) and depending on luck, has been consistently strong.
Unlike the rather preachy American films like Revenge of the Nerds, this is no sermon about how "cool" it is to be nerdy. It is not. Shurik is just the way he is because... well, he's just that type of guy. There is really no "uncoolness" to overcome, just his own absent-mindedness among other things.
Don't miss Vitsin's performance in the third film, especially as he staggers in search for the can while still heavily sedated. I also enjoyed Nikulin's acting, but then who doesn't?
by Branislav L. Slantchev

Cosmopapi rating: 65%

763. LEAVE HER TO HEAVEN (1945)

2009-02-25T09:53:00.000-08:00

Title: Leave Her to Heaven
Year: 1945
Country: USA
Genre: Drama, Film-noir, Thriller
Running time: 110 min.
Directed by: John M. Stahl
Starring: Gene Tierney, Cornel Wilde, Jeanne Crain, Vincent Price, Mary Phillips
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0037865/

Gene Tierney proved how wicked a woman consumed by jealousy can be long before films like FATAL ATTRACTION came on the scene. While there's nothing particularly deep or complicated about this tale of marital devotion gone awry, Tierney makes it a rollercoaster ride of emotional devastation you can't stop watching. Cornel Wilde plays the writer of her dreams, a man she loves way too much. Her seductive, mysterious beauty draws him into her web of lies and deception from which there is no way out. He initially finds her desperate need to have him all to herself adorable, but when this exclusion includes members of their immediate family, he begins to feel the noose tighten. On the surface her actions appear to be loving and decent, but they conceal a cold, bitter heart and a mind constantly working any angle to keep them together. Those that don't go along with her plans are taken out of the game for good. When she realizes her husband is in love with her adopted sister (Crain), she sets her final plan in motion. She'd rather die than lose him and she'll be damned if they're going to live happily ever after. Once you've committed several murders, a little perjury isn't going to weigh too heavily on your soul. This is a ridiculous romance wrapped in a taut thriller that works like gangbusters because of the stunning performances of Tierney and Crain. Both are intelligent, beautiful and strong women. The former just turns her passion into an all-encompassing stranglehold of obsession. Crain is the only one who stands up to Tierney and you can feel the sparks of hatred when they share a scene together. This may not be high class filmmaking, but it makes for great entertainment. That is if you like your leading ladies lean, luscious and lethal.
crazy4cinema.com

Cosmopapi rating: 71%

762. TOTO LE HEROS (1991)

2009-02-25T09:45:00.000-08:00

Title: Toto le héros (Totò the Hero)
Year: 1991
Country: France, Belgium
Genre: Drama
Running time: 91 min.
Directed by: Jaco van Dormael
Starring: Michel Bouquet, Jo De Backer, Thomas Godet, Gisela Uhlen, Mireille Perrier
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103105/

Here’s a riddle? What kind of movie would you have if a circus clown became a film director? Answer: Toto the Hero. O.K. It’s not funny, but it just happens to be true. Since there are sad clowns and happy clowns, you get a movie that is both tragic and funny. You get a film about the human condition that is also a thriller. You get a magnificent collage of fantasy and imagination that was all the rage at the Cannes Film Festival in 1991, winning the Prix de la Caméra d’Or. You get a genuine three-ring circus with candied apple that is one of the best kept secrets in cinema. Historical Background: Jaco van Dormael was born February 9th, 1957 in Brussels, Belgium. He grew up in Germany before studying film in Brussels and Paris. In 1975-6, he worked as a circus clown with the Big Flying Circus in Belgium. He then became a producer of children’s entertainments for three different European theatres. In 1980, he began writing and directing short films for children, documentaries, and promotional films. Toto le Heros (“Toto the Hero”) was his debut feature film, made in 1991. It is a masterful film by any standard, but truly amazing for a first film. Van Dormael produced a second highly regarded feature in 1995, called Le Huitieme Jour (“The Eighth Day”). The Story: The story covers the full lifespan of its protagonist, Thomas van Hasbroeck. Thomas is played by three different actors. Michel Bouquet plays Thomas as an old man, Jo de Backer plays him as a young adult, and Thomas Godet plays him as a child. As the story unfolds, Thomas is already an old man in a nursing home, chafing at the pain and lost opportunities of a largely unfulfilled life. We learn about his younger years through his trips down memory lane and his dreams, presented as a series of fluid flashbacks. Although the following plot outline presents the events linearly, the film presents the three life stages concurrently through montage editing. Thomas has been convinced since childhood that he was switched at birth, during a chaotic fire in the pediatric clinic, and is really the child of the rich family that lives next door. Their son Alfred (played as a child by Hugo Harold Harrison) was indeed born on the same day as Thomas, but nothing in the story supports Thomas’s claim other than his own memory, which can hardly be held reliable at day one. Thomas feels that his life was stolen from him by Alfred. To add insult to injury, Alfred is also a bully, both physically and verbally, calling Thomas “Van Chicken-Soup.” Thomas’s own childhood begins happily enough. His mother (Fabienne Loriaux) is loving and his father (Klaus Schindler) is bigger than life in Thomas’s eyes. He does magic tricks, flies an airplane, disappears mysteriously when he goes to work or hides in a closet, and sings a joyful chanson about love, called “Boom!” (“Boom! When your heart goes boom! It’s love, love, love!”) Thomas believes that his father landed by parachute in his mother’s garden. Thomas has two siblings – a pretty and clever older sister named Alice (Sandrine Blancke), whom he admires intently, and a retarded younger brother, of whom he is protective. Thomas’s idyllic youth is plundered by a series of tragedies. His father is reported missing after a plane crash during inclement weather and is ultimately found dead. The father had been hired for the fateful flight by Alfred’s father, Mr. Kant, a prosperous businessman, to pick up some overdue goods (marmalade) from England. Thomas and Alice blame Mr. Kant for the loss of their father and vow to burn down the Kant’s house. The mother becomes distraught and struggles to support the children, leading to further humiliations. The mother is caught shop-lifting a piece of meat, which she had concealed under her cap, from a grocery store, when blood starts to drip down her face. The mother is called away for awhile to settle business relating to her husband's death and arranges for the two older children to spend time at a camp. The children, however, intentionally miss the bus, deciding to stay at home and fend for themselves. At about this time, Alice is in the early stages of thelarche and, rising out of a bubble bath, asks the innocent Thomas to pass her a towel. His eyes widen noticeably and he asks, “Why didn’t you tell me you had breasts?” She replies smoothly, “I thought you’d read about them in the newspapers.” Still mystified, Thomas replies, “It was in the papers?” That night, the pair sleep side by side in bed. Alice asks, “Do you like my nose?” “Do you think my legs are too skinny?” “Do you think my hands are pretty?” “Which hand do you prefer?” He, of course, prefers them both as well as every other square inch of her lovely blossoming body. He stares raptly at the profile of her face and places his little hand on one of her small breasts. She lets it rest there. After a few moments, Thomas asks if Alice knows that Nephritides was Egyptian? “In Egypt, you can marry your sister,” says he. Under normal circumstances, this understandable infatuation would have melted harmlessly into nothing more than fond nostalgia, but Thomas is deprived of that opportunity. Alice acquires the attentions of Alfred as well, causing Thomas pained jealousy. He bitterly reminds Alice of her promise to burn down the Kant’s house and locks himself in his room. Alice, wanting to please her little brother, hauls a tank full of petrol into the Kant’s garage, but it explodes, destroying both the garage and lovely little Alice. Thomas is scarred forever and even Alfred, to a lesser extent. Thomas daydreams of becoming an heroic secret agent named “Toto” and avenging himself on the Kants. Thomas progresses into young adulthood and becomes some kind of pencil-pushing clerk. His life is drab and dissatisfying – not hardly the secret agent scenario he had envisioned. One day, he spots a young woman in yellow, Evelyne (Mireille Perrier), at a soccer match who reminds him distinctly of Alice, whose loss still haunts him. He chases after the woman and manages to overhear her providing her address to a clerk in a store. Tracking her down, he initially frightens her with his intense interest in learning about her, but she ultimately humors him with a meeting. Gradually the pair falls hopelessly in love, despite the fact that Evelyne is already (unhappily) married. In one bedroom scene, Evelyne asks Thomas if he like her hands and which one he prefers, which dredges up painful memories for him. Nevertheless, the two make plans to run off together. Just before their rendezvous, Thomas pays a visit to Alfred (now played by Didier Ferney) and discovers, to his amazement, that Evelyne is his wife. Apparently Alfred had also been moved by the same resemblance between Evelyne and Alice. Thomas runs away, leaves town, and fails to keep his meeting with Evelyne. Now, as an old man, Thomas has much to regret. He gave up the love of his life in adulthood after a series of childhood tragedies. His one solace lies in fantasizing about killing Alfred (played by Peter Böhlke as an old man) who he still believes stole his real life. Alfred’s life, however, has been no less unhappy. Evelyne left him anyway, despite Thomas’s disappearance. The Kant fortune had grown into an industrial conglomerate, but had collapsed in financial ruin. Terrorists are determined to assassinate Alfred. Thomas is determined that it is his right to kill Alfred and no one else’s! Thomas escapes from the nursing home, complete with stolen pistol, and the stage is set for a dramatic conclusion. I won’t give the finale away except to say that it is utterly fantastic: shocking, magical, transcendent, and sublime. Themes: Despite the arson, bullying, gunplay, tragedies, obsessions, and incipient incest, this film is more up-lifting than downbeat. The film argues, first of all, that it is love that makes life worthwhile. It adds, further, that happiness in life need not be attributed to the luck of the draw – which family we were born into, what tragedies do or do not befall us, or meeting or not meeting our soul mate, for example. Thomas wasted a lifetime imagining that he would have been happy had he been Alfred, only to discover that his life, troubled as it was, was freer and happier overall than Alfred’s. Yet even with both good luck and concerted personal efforts to achieve happy circumstances, there will be times in many, if not most, lives when one is alone and love has perished. This film then argues that, at such times, there is still happiness in learning to celebrate the memory of love that has passed. There is always, as well, the joy in the small glories of life: a flower, a sunny day, or the taste of cherry. Each individual’s life may be miniscule in the context of eternity and the firmament, but that life is simultaneously everything that is important. Van Dormael treats us to a kind of pantheistic finale, demonstrating that the individual after death remains incarnate in the universe when their ashes merge with the fields. Production Values: The script for this film is very tightly constructed. It flows smoothly across time without being confusing. The thriller element – whether Thomas will act on his obsession to murder Alfred – is always kept in the forefront by the script’s design. It’s superlative story telling, filled with revelations, twists, and drama. The images are visually rich with respect to both color and surrealism. Michel Bouquet was very effective as the elderly Thomas. His previous work included La Femme Infidele (1969), Mississippi Mermaid (1969), and Just Before Nightfall (1971). Gisela Uhlen, who played the elderly Evelyne, was also in The Marriage of Maria Braun (1978). Mireille Perrier, who was the younger Evelyne, had worked in Bad Blood (1986). Bottom-Line: Alive with wit, magic, romance, and intrigue, Toto the Hero is a charming film. It’s original in both structure and style. Although this film is not a whole lot like any other, its fanciful quality gives it something of the same luster as films like Amélie, The King of Hearts, and Ma Vie en Rose. Check out this film and I guarantee you’ll come back and thank me for it.
by metalluk

Cosmopapi rating: 78%

761. ENEMY OF THE STATE (1998)

2009-02-25T09:38:00.000-08:00

Title: Enemy of the State
Year: 1998
Country: USA
Genre: Action, Drama, Thriller
Running time: 132 min.
Directed by: Tony Scott
Starring: With Will Smith, Gene Hackman, Jon Voight
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/

Will Smith does it again. Another great movie. How does he do it? He is very good at picking movie scripts. Enemy Of The State highlights Smith as the main character, the one through whom we experience this movie. Smith is, perhaps, the actor with whom I am able to identify most with on screen, which is another topic of discussion in and of itself. The movie also shows off Smith's fast and sarcastic mouth in the fun-filled way that we are used to seeing. However, this movie gets much more intense that Smith's other movies and weaves an intricate plot into the works.
The basic theme of the movie is that the NSA, in an attempt to provide America with security from terrorists, gets a little megalomaniacal and tries to invade America's privacy and strip away our civil liberties. And Will Smith finds himself caught between the NSA and a hard place.
The adrenaline of this movie never seems to stop. And the chase scenes are some of the best that I have seen. Watching someone run from the NSA is almost like watching a mouse run through a maze trying to get away from the cat watching over it. By the time Gene Hackman arrives on the scene, I had already felt like I had received my money's worth. Hackman's part in the movie as Brill, a former NSA agent turned underground information broker, was very entertaining. A question: Is Will Smith establishing a pattern of teaming up with old white men?
I had to laugh though at the software used in this movie. As I am a software developer, I found it funny that the NSA's software was so graphical. For instance, when doing a social security number search, a set of numbers in a large, red, 3-D font go scrolling across the screen. Ha ha! Also, from a computer perspective, I found it funny that all computers were SUN workstations. Can somebody say, "Commercial Endorsement?"
What perhaps could have been done better would be to delve into the lives and the decisions of the "bad guys". Jonathan Voight is a particularly good actor and played his part well, even though he didn't have much to work with. I feel that the movie would have been much more interesting to see him struggle with his evil motives or to see him evolve into the ruthless person that he embodies throughout the movie. On the other hand, this may have taken away from the man-against-the-system feel of the movie and given way to more of a man-against-the-man-who-became-corrupted-by-power aura.
What I truly LOVED about this movie was the ending. I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't seen it, but I truly enjoyed strategic heroism rather than the overdone physical heroism.
the-reel-mccoy.com

Cosmopapi rating: 76%

760. ROOM AT THE TOP (1959)

2009-02-24T09:56:00.000-08:00

Title: Room at the Top
Year: 1959
Country: UK
Genre: Drama
Running time: 115 min.
Directed by: Jack Clayton
Starring: Laurence Harvey, Simone Signoret, Heather Sears, Donald Houston
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053226/

Room at the Top was adapted from John Braine's first novel, about an ambitious young man in a local government office in a large and bleak northern town who makes a set for a wealthy industrialist's daughter, and when thwarted turns to in older married woman. Eventually he is forced into marriage with the girl, the older woman meeting her death after a drinking orgy.
The character of Joe Lampton is ambivalent, bitter, his social animus perhaps deriving from a slum childhood and a war spent mostly in a prison camp, but driven forward by a kind of confident, day-dreaming quality, a refusal to admit the impossible. His eventual translation from the cobblestones of the lower end of the town to the tudorized gables at the top is meant to show his sublimation of life's values to ambition. He has destroyed one life and knowingly goes into a loveless marriage accompanied by the material comforts for which he has always hankered. It is, in his terms, not a bad jail sentence.
In retrospect, Braine's book is hardly as startling as it may have seemed at the time. The stance is a traditional, stolid one of disapproval. In the film the tight-lipped and rather frigid performance of Laurence Harvey does not explain the character's motivation. Donald Wolfit, as the industrialist, delivers an impressively theatrical portrait of a nineteenth-century mill-owner, although the performance hardly fits this particular film. Simone Signoret, as the older woman, is not too happily cast, either, volatile Gallic temperament not mixing well with Yorkshire reticence.
But the critics' admiration was mainly on account of the love scenes between Harvey and Heather Sears; at last someone in a British film actually admitted that the sex act was enjoyable and for the first time such dialogue was passed by the British Board of Film Censors. What seemed startling in 1959 had later become banal, but Room at the Top was at least a turning point in this sense.
britmovie.co.uk

Cosmopapi rating: 73%

759. BANG BOOM BANG (1999)

2009-02-23T09:55:00.000-08:00

Title: Bang Boom Bang - Ein todsicheres Ding
Year: 1999
Country: Germany
Genre: Action, Comedy
Running time: 110 min.
Directed by: Peter Thorwarth
Starring: Oliver Korittke, Markus Knüfken, Ralf Richter, Diether Krebs, Martin Semmelrogge, Heinrich Giskes
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0135790/

In his debut feature film, Peter Thorwarth managed to prove that Thomas Jahn's Knockin' On Heaven's Door (1997) wasn't some lucky fluke, but that Germany, the land supposedly lacking all humor, is also fully capable of producing some of the most blackly humorous, quickly paced postmodern crime films around. (Well, OK, it did so twice — the pickings have been pretty dry since then.)Displaying a light touch that reveals both a deep knowledge of film and technique, with Bang Boom Bang – Ein todsicheres Ding Thorwarth made a film that continuously entertains and never bores, successfully combining numerous characters, narrative twists and story-threads into a satisfying whole. The seemingly loose script ties up tightly in the end, the good dialogue and clear characterization underscored by some excellent "type" casting, the visuals a constant treat of sight gags and surprises, not to mention some excellent directorial flourishes. Combine all that with good editing, fine cinematography and some excellent music, and you got one good fucking film.Not that one would expect Bang Boom Bang to be any good if one doesn't make it past the first scene, in which the obnoxious jailbird Kalle (Ralf Richter) gives an aggravating tirade about wanting his dream car and girlfriend (in pumps) waiting outside of the jail when he gets released in two years. The guy is disgusting, and though the scene gets nervous laughs, one doesn't laugh with him or actually find him funny. Kalle is doing time for a bank robbery, the deal with his partner Keek (Oliver Korittke) being that Kralle does the time and then, once released, gets 90% of the take remaining. Unknown to Kralle, Keek, a video junkie whose brains have gone to mush from too much hash and too many crappy videos, has lost the money on horse races and is in no way capable of either buying the car Kralle has arranged or ever even paying him what he is owed. When Keek unwittingly gives Kralle a hardcore porno video featuring Kralle's slut girlfriend as the bonking babe, Kralle blows a fuse and escapes, forcing Keek to take more desperate measures to get the cash needed.Teaming up with his friend Andy (Markus Knüfken), a hot-headed local soccer player and mechanic, they get involved with the local loser Schlucke (Martin Semmelrogge) in a plan they think is to rob the crooked businessman Werner Kampmann (Diether Krebs). Propelled by greed, desire, stupidity, bad luck, revenge and chance, people die, a thumb gets locked in a safe, porno shoots get disrupted and everything dawdles out of control, much to the viewer's delight.Filmed in North Rhine Westphalia, Germany's central industry area commonly called the "Ruhrgebiet," Thorwarth makes good use of the area's overall grayness to underscore the bleak lives of his characters, all the men of which are too dense or brainless to realize the innate pointlessness and stupidity of their actions. (Don't be mistaken, though — this film is no "message film," and its last scene purposely takes the piss out of the little message Bang Boom Bang might have.)
by Bryin Abraham

Cosmopapi rating: 81%

758. MILANO CALIBRO 9 (1972)

2009-02-23T09:49:00.000-08:00

Title: Milano calibro 9
Year: 1972
Country: Italy
Genre: Action, Crime
Running time: 100 min.
Directed by: Fernando Di Leo
Starring: Gastone Moschin, Barbara Bouchet, Mario Adorf, Frank Wolff, Luigi Pistilli, Ivo Garrani, Philippe Leroy, Lionel Stander, Mario Novelli
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067429/

Milano Calibro 9/Milan Calibre 9(1972) contains a fast paced tightly edited prologue that is done with brilliance. The opening five minutes are both brutal and sadistic. Rocco played by Mario Adorf is introduced in the prologue as a psychotic mafia hood. The prologue is an example of setting up mood and story for the film.Mario Adorf gives a performance that brings to mind Joe Pesce in Goodfellas(1990) and Casino(1995), Takeshi Kitano in Boiling Point(1990), and Lee Marvin in The Big Heat(1953). He is excellent as the mafia hood with a sadistic streak. Mario Adorf plays his character with unbelievable and vicious conviction. His performance is one of the best acting jobs from the film.This movie along with La Mala Ordina/Hired to Kill(1973) and Il Boss/The Boss(1973) makes Fernando Di Leo the Italian eqivulent of Jean Pierre Melville. Fernando Di Leo is influenced by Melville in many aspects. Milan Calibre 9(1972) reminds me of Le Doulos(1961) with their use of anti heroes. One of many films that Jean Pierre Melville made an impression on.Has a double plot twist which is utilized in cleaver and unpredictable fashion. I was surprised by the first plot revealing twist. I was convincing stunned by the second plot revealing twist which was much more unexpected. The double plot twist is one characteristic that makes the film special.Fernando Di Leo stands out in the gangster craze of Italian cinema in the same way that Sergio Leone stood out as a master of Italian Westerns, Dario Argento as a master of Giallos, and Lucio Fulci as a master of Italian Zombie pics. He brings out a direction full of passion and spunk. The director films the violent scenes with panache and piazzazz. An underrated filmmaker in Italian cinema.Soundtrack of Milan Calibre Nine is awesome and cool. Luis Enriquez Bacalov is excellent at performing music for Italian Crime and Western motion pictures. The Police are depicted in a cynical and unsympathetic light. The only Police officer who comes out in a sympathetic tone is Fonzino who's only in the movie for a few minutes.The major action sequence in Milan Calibre 9(1972) prefigures John Woo. What's so twisted about the end of the motion picture is its Rocco whose the most trust worthy person in the entire story. Gastone Moschin gives a gripping performance as a man who cannot escape his tragic fate. Some wonderful performances are handed out by Barbara Bouchet, Philippe Leroy, and Lionel Stander.The scene where Nelly Bordon played by Barbara Bouchet is doing an erotic dance is filmed with multiple camera angles. An sensual introduction to the character of Barbara Bouchet. The editing in this one scene is good and imaginative. Barbara Bouchet is definitely one of the beautiful women from the 1970s when one sees Milan Calibre 9(1972).An example of the growing popularity of the gangster movie in Italy. Milan Calibre 9(1972) is in my opinion belongs among the top ten of Italian gangster pictures. The Godfather(1972) may have influenced the gangster film in Italy during the 1970s, but Milano Calibro 9(1972) takes on a life of its own. I've was very impressed by Milano Calibro 9(1972) that I've taken an interest in other films from this genre and decade in Italian cinema.Provided many influences and inspirations for filmography of Quentin Tarantino. His portrayal of tough guys in his films takes a page out of Milan Calibre 9 as well as other mafia features by Fernando Di Leo. The sadistic violence and unpredictable plot twists can be seen in Resevoir Dogs(1992) and Pulp Fiction(1994). No one filmmaker has influenced Tarantino more frequently besides Jean Pierre Melville than Fernando Di Leo.
by marquis de cinema

Cosmopapi rating: 70%