mlevens1 Reviews

Zero in and Scream (1971)

One of the worst Films I've Ever Seen

[1/10 · 26 June 2008]

This is just horrible, really horrible trash. Yes, we've got beautiful naked women dancing and having sex. But while this may work in the mechanism of a porn movie – may have even been a hit as a porn movie – this tries to mask itself as a "film" with actual things to say, with real emotion and struggle. It isn't. It's an excuse to get some girls naked and have a fun time. I'm sure all of these women (and men) in this particular movie could have faired decently in the porn movie business of the 1970s . . . but not in the actual movie business.

The acting was hackneyed, so bad, I mean real terrible. The writing was even worse. I can't lay all blame on these actors – they had nothing to work with. The very broad structure or plot of the movie could possibly be done and done well with good writers and competent actors. The very broad structure or plot is that of a psychotic man who spends his time shooting people from afar, as a sniper. These shootings were motivated from men not respecting their women enough. If there was more writing - better writing, much better writing - and less gratuitous sexual imagery we might have something to work with.

This movie should have been shot, made and marketed a hardcore porn movie all along; it would have made more money. It practically is a hardcore porn film already, and it remains the only non-porn movie I've seen that shows a male erect penis.

Terror's Advocate (2007)

Could've Been Better

[6/10 · 12 June 2008]

This really hadn't any beginning, middle or end. It simply was a long conversation with various persons and Jaques Verges, the advocate of terror.

The idea is an intriguing one, that of a lawyer who defends the reprehensible because he believes in due-process and the law more than abstract ideas like morality and goodness.

But this isn't what it was, because Verges never believed his clients lacking in morality or goodness. He represented these clients because politically he felt he had to.

It'd been more interesting (I think) to understand the psyche of a lawyer who represents clients he himself (or she herself) detests and holds no political allegiance to.

The runtime is a bloated two-hours and seventeen minutes, and in that time holds very little focus. It's very interesting subject-matter, but it's presented in such a wandering manner that leaves us bored. Only two or three trials are explicitly discussed and played out for the viewers. The rest of this film is Verges political tendencies and how they have got him in hot water with the French government.

The Pawnbroker (1964)

Soundtrack Fits

[10/10 · 15 April 2008]

This is not a Holocaust movie. This is a movie about the Holocaust survivor, the one who is physiologically very much alive, but has socially has died years ago.

Sol Nazerman is our hero, and he is played by Rod Steiger in what may be his best performance. Steiger's played a good ol' boy Southern police chief, an angry and lecherous Russian in the middle of the Bolshevik Revolution, an English prison psychiatrist, muscle for the mafia, and, in this one, a German-Jewish Holocaust survivor. Steiger is simply one of the most versatile and component movie actors there ever was.

Quincy Jones does the score to this movie. Some, not many, feel the score is inappropriate for a movie about such serious matters. But I like the soundtrack. It fit the time period, the jazzy 60s. It contrasted Sol's inner pain with the joy and frivolity of normal life. Life didn't stop because he did. And this is such a vexing thing to Sol, psychologically. If he can't have joy, those having it are not worth his time.

Edward Lewis Wallant wrote the source material - the novel "The Pawnbroker" and would have been a very celebrated and sought after author today, but he died young, in his 30s from a heart attack, not even living to see his book put to film.

This is one of the best examples of Posttraumatic stress disorder adapted to film, which many Holocaust survivors suffered from, a so-called "survivor's guilt".

Short Cuts (1993)

Altman's Magnum Opus

[10/10 · 4 April 2008]

Despite its 187 minute runtime, this is my favorite Altman film. There are so many great actors in this movie, so many. From Jack Lemmon to Bruce Davison to Julianne Moore to Matthew Modine to Michael Beach to Fred Ward to Tim Robbins to Robert Downey Jr to Jennifer Jason Leigh and so many others. Chris Penn, Sean Penn's late brother, was also in this movie, in a fine role. His was one of the finest acting jobs I've seen in a movie. This was a three hour movie focusing on over a dozen characters living in or around Los Angeles whose lives tend to intersect at points. This was similar to 2005's CRASH which won the Best Picture Oscar. SHORT CUTS was less about racism and more about individuals and the social mores they project and the consequences of acting or not acting what you believe. Altman wrote the screenplay to this movie based on the writings of Raymond Carver. Great movie. Wonderful.

Psycho (1998)

Van Sant's Better than This

[6/10 · 4 April 2008]

As much as I like Gus Van Sant (Oscar-nominated director of GOOD WILL HUNTING), his 1998 attempt remake PSYCHO was doomed right from the start. If you want to replicate a Da Vinci painting, start with a lesser known one -- don't go right to the Mona Lisa. If Van Sant wanted remake a Hitchcock thriller, he could have tried SHADOW OF DOUBT or SPELLBOUND, two good films but not as widely popular.

Van Sant shot the entire film exactly the same as Hitchcock. Not one camera angel askew. Scene after scene was Xeroxed from the original. I think Van Sant added one small, quickly edited masturbation sequence (as Norman Bates spies on Marion Crane through the wall), which I do not remembering appearing in the 1960 classic. So Van Sant must have known that critics were going to compare him to Hitchcock, and to one of the greatest films in the annals of motion picture history. This is why the critics universally panned it. This is why Van Sant won a Razzie Award for "Worst Director" and "Worst Remake or Sequel" in 1999. This being said, I did NOT hate 1998's PSYCHO. I thought Vince Vaughn was incredibly creepy and effective, and there were several very good actors in this movie. This movie was not poorly acted. It was poorly executed and filmed. Van Sant should have either created a new vision for Robert Bloch's novel or passed on the project.

Charlie Bartlett (2007)

Downey Jr. and Davis are hard to Dislike

[6/10 · 21 March 2008]

Robert Downey Jr. and Hope Davis deliver the best of this movie. Aton Yelchin (as the title character), who I've liked in previous films, turns an annoying and aggravating performance here. To understand all that Anton Yelchin has to offer in terms of film acting, rent ALPHA DOG and skip this.

The character-development is achieved with clichés. You have the bully, his sidekick, the pretty cheerleader, the nonconformist condemning the school's security cameras, the suicidal student, the jock, and the pretty girl who sees something in the nerdy new kid, Charlie Bartlett.

The movie's not a total loss; there are some funny scenes, such as the idea of Mrs. Barlett (Hope Davis) having a psychiatrist on call. And the principal (Robert Downey Jr.) has a humorous exchange with Charlie, after informing him his shenanigans put someone in the hospital.

Mr. Brooks (2007)

Haunting, Menacing and Very Funny

[8/10 · 11 February 2008]

It's a terrific little film. The Oscar-nominated writing team of STAND BY ME put this out; it's a fabulous script, such a different script.

The successful Mr. Brooks (Costner) has a secret: every blue moon, he has to kill a stranger. He goes to a local AA chapter, pretending to be a substance abuser, to help him with what he contends is the "addiction" of thrill-killing.

There are several movies about serial killers, but none done like this. This has fun with its audience and presents Mr. Brooks (when he's not killing) as a pillar of the community, as a loving husband and father, and as a tortured soul. William Hurt as his tortured soul, Marshall, is haunting, menacing and very funny.

I Am Legend (2007)

Best Adaptation Yet

[9/10 · 11 February 2008]

This was spectacular. It's based on Richard Matheson's novel (Matheson wrote many classic "Twilight Zone" episodes in the early 1960s). It's a novel which has been adapted in film before, most famously with THE OMEGA MAN starring Charlton Heston as the last man alive. Will Smith is in this new one, as the last man alive, after a huge viral pandemic breaks out everywhere on the planet, arising from what was supposed to be a new state-of-the-art cancer vaccine. Will Smith has been Oscar nominated twice; he's a much better actor than Heston. Heston has more screen presence, has a louder voice, and such. But, as evidenced here and in other films such as "THE PURSUIT OF HAPPY...", Smith is subdued and articulate.

A very high recommendation here.

Rescue Dawn (2006)

Herzog is Terrific

[10/10 · 4 February 2008]

A brutal film about the German-American US Navy pilot who was shot down in Vietnam.

Werner Herzog is a unique director and one of my personal favorites. His approach to this story is refreshingly honest. Herzog, ten years ago, made the LITTLE DIETER NEEDS TO FLY - a documentary on Lt. Dieter Dengler's experiences in Vietnam. Now he is making a movie about the same guy; his thrill bleeds through the screen.

Werner Herzog is one of the world's very best directors. Now this isn't his greatest film, but it is still very interesting. Most Vietnam War movies - most war movies - take some political stance. There really is no political message here; its only message is survival, survival, survival.

The Good Shepherd (2006)

Under-rated spy flick

[9/10 · 21 December 2007]

It's a very good film. Matt Damon's performance here is one of his best. Many talented actors are in this picture, but only one is this picture. Damon shows real skill in his part; we are never bored, and we are always fascinated.

Besides Damon, Turturro played perfectly in the supporting role.

Some may be reluctant to see this movie because Robert De Niro, the great actor, directs and the running time is an epic 168 minutes.

Robert De Niro directs a fine movie. The running time is long, yes, but understand the end credits last almost 10 minutes.

If you liked this, rent Spielberg's MUNICH (2005) about Israel's Mossad.

No Country for Old Men (2007)

In the future: only original screenplays

[7/10 · 15 December 2007]

This is an observation of "evil" - not an examination. We are merely watching action without any knowledge of the characters.

We know nothing. We know Javier Bardem is a nasty killer. We know Josh Brolin will not part with a case of money he found. We know Tommy Lee Jones is a sheriff who has supposedly seen evil before.

In a Coen brothers film (usually) plot point A leads to plot point B which leads to plot point C, and by the end you revel in the genius of its script-writing. Think of BLOOD SIMPLE (1984) or FARGO (1996) - these were exceptionally tight and cleverly written scripts.

Although - it is suspenseful, it is expertly shot by Roger Deakins, and the dialogue is, as ever, brilliant.

Louisiana Story (1948)

78 minutes is all it takes...

[7/10 · 7 December 2007]

Robert J. Flaherty was known for his documentaries, but this - which seems to be his most revered - is fictional.

This movie was shot on location in Petit Anse Bayou, Louisiana - mostly in the swamps nearby. The three lead parts were played by locals. Steven Soderbergh did the same thing for his film BUBBLE (2005), which showcased mostly non-actors from the Wood County, West Virginia area - where it was shot.

This is film has its problems. The plot of the story, while easy enough to understand, is too thin - there isn't any conflict. Dialogue is scarce. Flaherty is very learned in the art of the documentary; the art of the drama is not the same.

This aside, I think this film is exquisitely shot. It's really very beautiful to look at. He and Leacock created the most beautiful alligator-ridden swamp in movie history.

I'm Not There (2007)

It's a decent film

[7/10 · 6 December 2007]

This was smartly written and acted with supreme dedication. This is not some artsy-fartsy junk; this is a complicated and tightly woven production.

It's not a hagiography of Bob Dylan or his music - this movie is better than that. Dylan is seen through the lives of 6 (or 7) characters, each to represent something in Dylan realistically. Every character has faults and very few characters are completely likable.

Cate Blanchett will receive acclaim for her role as "Jude Quinn". Apart from the fact that she really looks like Dylan, her performance was wonderful. It's a very complicated role, but she pulled it off. It's an Oscar-worthy performance.

Heath Ledger's "Robbie Clark" was also very well done. (Though his character seems more based on James Dean than it is on Bob Dylan.) I found his portrayal to be the most honest and authentic of the movie. A whole feature could be made simply on Ledger's character and the dissolving of his marriage.

Unfortunately many of the other characters and story lines don't work or are simply confusing. This makes the film longer than it has to be, and not as good as it should be.

The picture was directed and co-written by Todd Haynes. He was Oscar-nominated for writing FAR FROM HEAVEN (2002), which is a stunning character study about social mores in 1950s suburbia.

Co-writing with Haynes was Oren Moverman, who has only written two features before this.

Seven Samurai (1954)

If you only see one Kurosawa movie...

[9/10 · 4 December 2007]

This is a masterpiece of Japanese cinema; one of the greatest films ever produced.

The seven samurai here battle with great honor and greater humility. One exception: "Kikuchiyo" who was loud, boisterous and brazen. But he died a hero and was mourned just the same.

We feel for these characters - the seven, as well as the villagers (such as "Manzo") because the acting and directing allow us to. The use of the camera and its superb acting has made this movie fondly remembered for over fifty years.

208 minutes may sound like a lot of time to spend on a film, but it merits a complete viewing.

Akira Kurosawa is a genius filmmaker; and if you only see one Kurosawa film, you cannot go wrong here.

If you liked this: Rent FIRES ON THE PLAIN (1959). This is a film about a soldier in the Japanese Imperial Army in 1945, when prospects of Japan's success look all too bleak. It was directed by Kon Ichikawa. It's now on DVD.

The Front Page (1931)

A great, fun time - needs a better DVD though

[8/10 · 1 December 2007]

This is the first film adaptation of the famous Hecht-MacArthur play about Chicago newspapermen in the late 1920s.

A death-row inmate, thought to be insane, is, through inept policing and quack doctoring able to escape.

The character of "Professor Max J. Engelhoffer" is a funny parody of Dr. Freud and others like him. The fact that he wants to reenact the crime with an actual, loaded pistol is hilarious, even more hilarious is his surprise at being shot. Gustav von Seyffertitz went un-credited in his role but he is one of the more memorable performers in this farce.

And Adolphe Menjou as the newspaper company owner is terrific. His relationship with Pat O'Brien is not simply an angry boss bullying his reporter; these men are friends and have been through a lot. This is reflected in their performances, especially in Menjou's.

The only DVD of this movie is from Madacy Entertainment's "Hollywood Classics Collection". This film transfer is horrible and has no more quality than a poor videotape. The picture is bad, but the sound is really a problem. Hearing what a character says is crucial in the understanding of any movie. This could have easily been cleaned up, like so many other movies of the 1930s and earlier are when they are put on DVD.

Madacy's DVD does have a few interesting extras, such as some newsreels (not from the 1930s, however) from Pathe News, Inc.

I call for a new DVD of this great classic with a pristine transfer of both picture and sound. More people would watch this movie and enjoy this movie if they could hear what the actor's are saying.

In any event, I really did like this film a lot. Please see it.

Quelques jours en septembre (2006)

"Look AT ME!"

[3/10 · 24 November 2007]

In short: This is a very arrogant and unsuccessful attempt to be another Jean-Luc Godard, Ingmar Bergman, or Hector Babenco.

This movie was terrible. And, I do not dislike this movie solely because of the rampant anti-Americanism.

I also dislike this movie on its movie qualities.

Let's start with acting. Tom Riley as "David" was so completely ridiculous in his role. Here is a young man who goes to Paris to meet his father, is confronted by two people he doesn't know, has two guns drawn at him ready to fire, is subsequently told his father had a secret family in France and Sara Forestier ("Orlando") is his half-sister he never knew about. He sees a dead body, dripping of fresh blood, of the concierge while exiting the Paris hotel, and is now in fear for his life. Or he should be. How many 25-30 year olds (I'm guessing that's the character's age bracket) have seen a murdered body, especially in his demographics as a middle class white male? I mean how many of us have seen a murdered body ever? Or have had loaded guns in our faces? Or told about their dear father's second secret family that you never knew about? And this all happened within hours.

But how does Riley's "David" react? Like he stepped out of a shampoo-commercial - he's cooking fine cuisines, making jokes about cell phones and wanting to visit the Eiffel Tower? Either Amigorena thinks American characters cannot practice deep retrospection and emotion or Riley is really one of the most horrible movie actor's I've seen in a while.

The Direction . . . So self-indulgent. So "look at me". So "I can be so deep". It really was pathetic. The most pathetic, self-indulgent scene was one of the last where Juliette Binoche and John Turturro or "Irene Montan" and "William Pound" have the last gun-fight. In slow-motion with the sound turned off, the camera pans outside where we only see blasts of light every second and a half. Give me a break. That was such a ridiculous scene that the other people in the theater were laughing out loud.

The Writing . . . Is this a caper film? Is this a spy film? Or is this - a French romance? The brother and sister (well sort of) begin a romantic interlude because deep films have love scenes -- right? This guy is so deeped out, man. Such a ridiculous attempt to be better than anything ever filmed. Such arrogance in his film-making.

There was one part of the film which had humor and kind of worked. After Turturro ("Pound") would kill someone or come close he'd immediately get his psychiatrist on the phone. That was a little funny, and possibly more should have been done with this area.

The Good German (2006)

Criminally Underrated

[10/10 · 24 November 2007]

I thoroughly enjoyed this greatly ambitious picture from Steven Soderbergh.

This is an enthralling and thrilling film right from the start. The use of 1940s-era motion picture equipment -- cameras, incandescent lights, boom mikes, etc. has you feel as if you are actually watching a movie from just after World War II. The only concession was the use of crass language, some nudity and a few bloody fisticuffs.

This isn't a parody of 1940s film-noirs; it homage to them. It's very akin to Spielberg's direction of the "Indiana Jones" features, homage to 1940s serial films.

When you have an all-star cast, as in this movie and one of the best film directors in the country, you cannot and will not go wrong.

Rent some of the classics which this pays tribute to, such as: THE THIRD MAN (1949); JUDGMENT AT NUREMBERG (1961); DECISION BEFORE DAWN (1951); THE 39 STEPS (1935), and -- CASABLANCA (1942).

A very enthusiastic recommendation here.

The Informer (1935)

A remarkably wonderful classic ...

[10/10 · 24 November 2007]

Victor McLaglen's performance is one of the finest in film history.

I think we can all feel for "Gypo" because we've all struggled with what is right and what isn't and been wrong. This was one of the first art-house pictures to be released by a major American movie studio (RKO Radio Pictures).

Joseph H. August's cinematography is at its very best here. However, August's stunning portion was mostly overlooked; he didn't receive the Oscar nomination he rightly deserved.

This is a psychological drama, with thought, philosophy, sadness, all conveyed with as little words as possible.

Into the Wild (2007)

Lives up to all its hype

[8/10 · 24 November 2007]

A very good picture; an impassioned job by Sean Penn. Emile Hirsch is achieving better roles now with such movies as ALPHA DOG (2006) and this. Hirsch has all the ability to become one of the top actor's of his generation. While this is not what you'd call an ensemble cast movie – there are many talented actors: William Hurt (a favorite of mine), Marcia Gay Harden, Catherine Keener, Vince Vaughn, Hal Holbrook – and the great but unknown Brian Dierker.

The actual story of Christopher J. McCandless is a heart-wrenching one – or to be more specific, the story of his demise in Stampede Trail, Alaska at age 24. McCandless was not an idiot or a moron for starving to death 20 miles from a highway – I believe, at least from this adaptation (I haven't read the book) that he must have been struggling with a undiagnosed mental illness. His giving $24,000 to charity – all but $500 of his money, his burning the other $500 (literally) later on, his changing his name to "Alexander Supertramp", his immense activity accomplished with little food and sleep – only seems to suggest mania, meaning it is possible McCandless was suffering from bi-polar disorder.

This reminded of a book which I read some time ago, called ZEN AND THE ART OF MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE: AN INQUIRY INTO VALUES. They haven't made Pirsig's book into a movie yet – this would be a challenging undertaking. Pirsig travels from Minnesota to California on a motorcycle with his son, all the while having philosophical discussions in his head. This was an excellent, excellent book. Anyone who liked this movie would like Pirsig's magnum-opus.

But this was a very good movie. See it, please.

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

Maybe three is too many

[6/10 · 13 May 2007]

I saw Spider-Man 3 just a couple hours ago. And I was disappointed, most definitely. While I love the character the two proceeding movies, this one suffered from the great third syndrome.

Two things: Firstly, this movie splayed out at one end a romantic melodrama, on the other end, a serious metaphorical discussion of free will and good and evil, and yet on another a raucous slapstick comedy. And a runtime of 140 minutes, or 2 hours and 20 minutes is far too long for this movie. The scenes with the aunt, in my thinking, could have been all cut. She provided absolutely nothing to the movie, except cliché after idiotic cliché. It was half tedium to see her on the screen and half unintentional humor. When I was ten years old I bought the first six Venom Comics "guest-starring Spider-Man" and I thoroughly enjoyed that little series (Feb 1992 – Jul 1992).

The second thing: the special effects will most likely get an Oscar nomination (even though it is very far from that time). The Sandman special effects were awesome, some of the best shots in the movie. However, to me, I thought most of these special effects while most likely supremely expensive and meticulously crafted were too video-game like. Almost everything looked slightly animated, just ever-so-slightly but enough that any average viewer would notice this. My favorite comic book superhero of all time is Superman, and always has been. If anyone has the DVD to the first two movies in 1978 & 1980 with Christopher Reeve (shot as one continuous movie), you can see what great special effects are like. This was before digital photography, and all of these special effects in the first two Superman movies were done optically with so much planning, designing and practicing. It proposed they could make you believe a man could fly and they did do that. The effects in Superman & Superman II have not dulled with time. Effects of this magnitude cannot really be seen these days, and it is probably mostly a budgetary and time issue. Superman paved the way for creating an Oscar category for special visual effects, because in its time it didn't exist. The Superman special effects artists were awarded with a special achievement Oscar instead. Now this is a serious category every year at the Academy Award ceremony.

Now I didn't hate Spider-Man 3, but it was nowhere near as great as Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2. It suffered kind of like Superman III suffered. In Superman III there was a mix of comedy and "serious issues", which reviewers didn't like. And Superman turned evil for a little while as well. Batman Begins was not afraid to take a beloved superhero and explore his dark side with a fictionalized version Bob Kane's origin story of the Bat-Man. That is one of best superhero movies made in a long while.

To Sir, with Love (1967)

Mr. Poitier is Better Actor Than This Movie Allows Him To Become

[6/10 · 26 June 2006]

I felt this was one of Sidney Poitier's lesser films.

One may argue that since it was a British film, that's why it did not get recognition at the Academy Awards. That's a very loose argument, as many directors, actors, and writers from the UK and elsewhere work for the Hollywood machine and have either won or been nominated for Oscars. And one also may point out that the BAFTA awards also did not recognize this film for anything.

I have not seen many of Sidney Poitier's films. But I have seen a few great ones. These are: 1) "In the Heat of the Night" (1967); 2) "Lilies of the Field" (1963); 3) "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" (1967); 4) "Uptown Saturday Night" (1974); 5) "Sneakers" (1992)... I intend to see, sometime in the future, "A Patch of Blue" (1965) and "The Defiant Ones" (1958)..."To Sir, With Love" was not a great choice on part.

22 years later, a film was made that fed off the basic formula of "To Sir, With Love" - a teacher who must encourage compassion, empathy, and will to survive and thrive. This film was "Dead Poets Society" with Robin Williams. He was Oscar nominated for his role. Tom Schulman won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. To this day, this is my favorite "classroom film" or "professor/teacher film".

5 years after this, Danny Devito stared in "Renaissance Man" about a man forced to teach dimwitted Army recruits. Teaching them Shakespeare, no less. This movie was in the category of "To Sir, With Love" - it was fine for some tastes, but usually cheap genre movies.

If you are a fan of Sidney Poitier, don't be upset that he did receive recognition for this role. Be upset that he didn't receive recognition (at least in the Academy Awards) for a great film like, "In the Heat of the Night". This was not only an important film for the time (and today), but an incredibly well acted film. This film received 5 Academy Award wins out of 7 nominations! I really think that is the greatest Oscar snub in history.

"They Call Me MISTER Tibbs!" Yep.

Superman (1978)

An under-appreciated masterpiece of American pop-culture

[10/10 · 21 June 2006]

This is the best super-hero movie ever made.

When was the last time a super-hero flick was penned by Oscar-caliber screenwriters? Puzo won an Oscar for THE GODFATHER (1972). Newman was nominated for an Oscar for BONNIE AND CLYDE (1967). Benton has won several Oscars for his writing and directing, most notably for KRAMER VS. KRAMER (1979).

And a great many of the actors were Oscar winners, most notably Marlon Brando as Jor-El, Superman's father.

Playing Superman/Clark Kent/Kal-El is Christopher Reeve. His dedication to the role is outstanding (in this and three sequels, mind you). But in 1977 Reeve started a serious exercise regimen. His goal: to look like the Superman in the comic books, the one we all grew up with and love. George Reeves and Kirk Alyn, the two previous live-action "Superman" actors looked no more like Superman than a child at Halloween. Reeve took the idea of the live-action super-hero drama a big step forward.

This movie also exhibits state-of-the-art special effects, (Oscar-winning effects). You watch this film and you really do believe a man can fly. This was done in an age before computer and digital images.