The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo(2011)
“Why? Has been the big question with the Hollywood remake of the Swedish film, and my first thought after seeing it was that I had just seen a very competent cover version of a great song, nothing had been lost or destroyed, but neither had anything been added. Rather like famously Gus Van Sant’s Psycho(1998) remake or Let Me In(2010), the Americanized Let the Right One In, it simply exists seemingly to feed the heartlands fear of subtitles and mistrust of foreign produce. Weirdly though, I would guess that the type of audience this seems designed for would be equally be put off by the double anal rape, sex scenes, swearing and almost continual images of rape and dismemberment of young women, not to add the fact that the majority of the cast is made up of sinister Brit actors doing funny accents. Putting aside the resounding “why” then, and allowing the film to breathe on it’s own merits, it is a fantastic piece of entertainment. Any faults with it are not to do with Fincher or the cast but the original story which I always felt was a lot of tease for very little payoff. After creating one of the most terrifying serial killers for a long time, this character is disposed of almost arbitrarily, and the much criticized changed ending, again, didn’t really add or subtract in my opinion, it was simply different. The film is also too long, squeezing in scenes from the beginning of the second Swedish movie and going on to less and less effect after the main plot has ended. It looks, as you would expect, amazing though, everyone in the cast is brilliant and some scenes are among the best Fincher has ever shot. Lisbeth of course is an amazing character and no wonder her character resonates so strongly with women, how she deals with her rapist is the kind of wish fulfillment normally, and unfairly, usually only dished out to men watching action movies. Interestingly though, a noticeable change I thought, for the character is that in the original Swedish movie she spurns more intimacy, whereas here, in the Hollywood version, it is still the man who turns his back on this very sexy and intelligent, but still too challenging other. The message would seem to be that any man would happily sleep with or work with Lisbeth, but would not want a real relationship over a more domesticated woman, with this the film doesn’t undo all it’s good work(James Bond as the damsel in distress), but it does soil it a little. 7/10

It's The Muppet Show.. Yeeeaahhh!!!

The Muppets (2011)
Strangely the film that this most reminded me of was Rocky Balboa(2006), another film about a hero lost in the mists of time who everybody thinks is way past his glory days, coming back for one last attempt to recapture the magic. It’s also, and this is no faint complement to say, The Muppets was even better, better than Rocky Balboa, better than anyone had any right to expect considering the recent downward spiral into dvd hell that The Muppets seemed to be suffering. This is easily the best Muppet movie since A Christmas Carol(1992), if not the original three ‘classic’ films. If you remember the Muppet Show this will reignite your childhood love, if you’ve never seen a Muppet movie before, this is a perfect place to start. Many have already said it but Jason Segal walks the fine line between reverence and self reflection perfectly, this is both absolutely nostalgic but also postmodern, thankfully not in the usual grindingly wearing way. None of the cameos outstay their welcome, indeed, I thought this was the best thing Jack Black has done in years, and Alan Arkin totally steals his scenes as expected. If there’s anything to fault, and it’s a very small if, perhaps it’s a bit too clever for it’s own good sometimes, but like South Park:The Movie(1997), before it, this is one of the greatest disguised musicals you’ll see, probably funnier than the so called top comedies of last year, and like Pixar, a kid’s film that is just as enjoyable for adults, if not more so- 80s robot= pure genius, and I did seem to have something in my eye several times during it. 10/10

2011 Movies worth Seeing at the Cinema

(preferably the Alamo Drafthouse, natch)

by Stephen Bohls

So I feel the strange need to inventory the films that I liked this year that I saw at the movie theater. I know no one else in the world does this, so I think it is my duty as a cinemaphile to let you know about these. Your results may vary. Stream of consciousness order follows:

Attack the Block - kick-ass south London hoodie kids vs. aliens. very reminiscent of early John Carpenter, which is high praise indeed in my book.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes - what every sci-fi franchise reboot should strive for. an arresting original story that ties into the ethos of the original series. fantastic!

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo - Fincher just nailed this to the wall and photographed it in exquisite detail. Letting the characters of Mikael and Lisbeth come to the front and everything revolve around them was genius. Better than the Swedish film and much like re-reading one of your favorite novels.

Red State - Why are you quitting filmmaking after you just made your best film every, Kevin Smith?! This film is surely not for everyone, but it was one of the most intense and satisfying and unexpected events I have ever experienced in a cinema. A dark religious satire / thriller / Waco-esque police standoff rollercoaster of a movie that never lets you go until it’s done with you.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 2 - Whew! Finally made it through to the finish. An utterly satisfying experience to the series. Saw this in 2D, along with all the other summer movies this year, including...

Captain America: The First Avenger - Marvel finally comes through with a few winners this summer. Loved the tone and aesthetic of a hero whose tone can easily get jingoistic or Pollyanah-ish. Looking forward to The Avengers now.

Thor - speaking of, the Avenger set up flick before Cap was pretty great, too. Who knew Kenneth Branaugh could direct a super hero movie?

The Green Hornet - almost forgot this was in 2011 before I consulted the wikipedia list. Michel Gondry is my favorite working director, and his mis-fires are more interesting and entertaining than most people’s best efforts. ‘Nuff said.

Midnight in Paris - Woody had a box office hit again! Is there anything more romantic than Paris in the 20s with Dali, Man Ray, Hemmingway, and Gertrude Stein? Maybe fin de siecle Paris in the 1800s? Loved this to death.

Source Code - a taught and ingenious sci-fi thriller that I thought was quite clever.

The Beaver - how do you even describe this film? Simon Day’s review does it pretty well: http://filmreviewsatmaddogsandenglishmen.blogspot.com/2011/12/mels-waterloo.html?spref=fb

The Guard - a wonderful UK import about a small town cop in northern Scotland who gets involved in a smuggling plot. Brilliant, just brilliant!

The Trip - another wonderful UK traveloge / mockumentary about Steve Coogan and his acting “friend” Rob. You will never watch Michael Caine the same way again after their impressions of him.

The Thing - still need to watch this, then immediately follow it with John Carpenter’s original. Bloody loved this flick, which is a prequel of what happened at the Norweigen ice station.

Rango - only one I missed at the theater, but really should have seen. Loved the whole loony thing. Leaping lizards, indeed.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows - better than Guy Ritchie’s first movie, not as good as the BBC version, but still a fun romp in the theater.

The Muppets - Oh, how I have longed for this movie. Saw this TWICE at the Alamo, and had trouble (along with Magnus) not singing along out loud with all the great Bret McCenzie songs. A truly wonderful update to one of the most creative groups of characters ever. Jim Henson is laughing on a cloud somewhere.

BEST DOUBLE FEATURE of THE YEAR: Cowboys and Aliens, followed directly by Attack the Block. Don’t know how well Cowboys will bear on repeat viewing, but this was the most kick ass double feature of the year and an extraordinary pairing of alien invasion films old and new. Bliss.

Hugo 3D - OK, so for the end of the year we switched back to 3D glasses. When Scorcese does a kids movie in 3D, I watch it in 3D. And boy was I glad I did. I have never experienced anyone using the increased illusion of depth of field in such a masterful way. Such a beautiful film it makes me ache to think of it. Such an exquisite story, wonderful characterizations and all this wrapped up in a mystery about the tragic pioneer of cinema, Georges Melies. I cannot recommend highly enough that you go out and see this film NOW while it is still in the theater, with 3D glasses on.

The Adventures of Tintin 3D - and finally, a childhood favorite of mine given a wonderful treatment by Mr. Speilberg and Mr. Jackson. AND we got to see The Hobbit trailer (in 3D!) beforehand, TWICE! :)

I know I forgot a few in here somewhere, but that was something like my year at the movies. I hope you had a good one, too.

Mission Accomplished

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol(2011)

Like Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford, Tom Cruise, once a Titan of the 80s box office, and along with Tom Hanks, for a very long time, the only sure bet for bofo box office in Hollywood, has hit a rough patch since the mid 2000s. Rather unfairly in my opinion, this wasn’t so much because his films have not been as good, indeed last year’s Night and Day(2010) seemed precision engineered to exploit all and every demographic, and I thought it was ridiculously entertaining, but more because he started going a little weird publically in a Michael Jackson type way. Suddenly audiences who’d loved him for decades went anti-Cruise seemingly overnight. It must have been a very humbling lesson in fame for the man. Wisely, after all else, war movies, action comedies, etc have failed, Cruise had pulled out the biggest chip he has left, and cashed it in. His last $100 million hit was Mission Impossible 3 in 2006, so unsurprisingly dusting off his franchise seemed a no brainer. Of course straight away rumors abounded about Cruise being eased out of the franchise by younger stars etc, but I’m happy to report that the new film is a mix of business as usual but also an improvement over the expected. Probably the saddest thing about MI3 was that it was a great Mission Impossible film that a lot of people missed, partly because the anti-Cruise feelings were mounting, and partly because Part 2 had been rubbish. Ghost Protocol takes all the good work of Part 3, unsurprisingly as the director of 3, JJ Abrams, is back as producer here and pushes it even further away from the worst excesses of the series. The franchise also weirdly seems to echo the ages of man that Cruise himself is going through, If the original 1996 movie had the usual arrogant, unstoppable Cruise with his spiky 80s buzz-cut, the slightly smarmy, constantly grinning and flicking his lovely hair superman of the 2000, style over substance, sequel showing a star at his box office apex, then part 3 started to show vunerability and the character worried more about his family than career. Ghost Protocol gave me a very strange feeling watching it, because even though he still looks amazing, Tom Cruise is starting to look old, he also gets hurt in this( if in Part 3 he managed to do his usual 100 meter dash with a bomb stuck up his nose- not as funny as it sounds), then in this, he, horror of horrors, has a nasty limp at one point and actually looks nackered and unsure quite often. He also asks quite reasonably to go to the hospital at the end. I love the scene where he has to scale the building and answers back “we?” when Simon Pegg says that this is all he has to do. This is a man in touch with his own personal, and his box office mortality. Sounds depressing, well it isn’t. This is an excellent action movie, probably the best since The Bourne Ultimatum in 2007. Infact, after feeling lightweight in the past, the Mission Impossible franchise is now giving as good as it gets to the Bonds and Bournes. The setpieces are amazing but still not too ridiculous(unlike Part 2), I loved how the team is out on it’s own with malfunctioning equipment and making mistakes, and this is the first time all members of the team have been necessary and memorable, each has a personality with Pegg a welcome source of humor but not at the film’s expense. It’s probably a bit too long and the villain could have been stronger, indeed the blonde assassin is more memorable, and while I applaud director Brad Bird not giving the audience what they expect, I personally could have done with a bit more of the theme tune during action scenes as it never fails to get my blood pumping. There’s also a coda that even fans of Part 3 won’t really care about but it does have a nice sense of cyclicality about it, and they even crowbar Ving Rhames in with seconds to spare. Brilliant, treat yourself and reconnect with your inner Cruise, you’ll remember why you loved him. 10/10

The Boys are Back in Town

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows(2011)

“We’re back, your black and I’m mad.” Well, not quite, but probably the fact that a youthful joy of the buddy cop movie structure is more in keeping with Guy Richie’s Sherlock films than the twisting mystery of the source materials, has Holmes purists exclaiming that they’d have to be dragged to the theatre first, or if they saw the first movie two years ago, for the sequel, like The Who, “ they won’t get fooled again.” This is a shame, as A Game of Shadows is several steps up from the fun but clunky original. For a start, the plot is a lot better( no more bad Doctor Who episode feeling about supernatural happenings)- this time it’s Moriarty trying to start the First World War, also, thankfully someone gave Mark Strong the day off as having to be the villain in every film(also, he was killed in the first one), so we get the refreshingly underplaying(but then wouldn’t anyone have to underplay opposite Downey Jr’s histrionics) of Jared Harris as the scheming Professor. Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. have genuine chemistry and capture their bromance perfectly while Stephen Fry and his butler add further comedy about those daft English, to some already snappy lines from the main players. Brits will chuckle at Downey Jr. saying “ponce” among other things. It’s pithy, funny, action packed, really doesn’t pause for breath and links up nicely again with the books at it’s conclusion. Against it, Noomi Rapace is of course totally squandered by Hollywood as a pretty Gypsy, the slow motion can get a little wearing and how much more powerful would an open teaser of an ending have been, although it does make sense of an early plot setup. Indeed, everything slots together like a well oiled machine but like the nasty scene where Holmes is put on a hook, a few more of these unsignposted moments would have gone a long way. Great fun though, and for a change, not just for the cast. 9/10

Mel's Waterloo

The Beaver(2010)
“I took a long, hard look at Jodie Foster’s Beaver, and I liked it,” or “I saw Jodie Foster’s Beaver close up and….” These jokes will run and run, as indeed they already have, possibly giving an intelligent film it’s only real talking point. Postponed from last year due to Mel Gibson’s domestic and personal problems, The Beaver is one of those films that seems to eerily imitate what is happening in life. Whether Gibson was attracted to the script because it reflected a similar inner turmoil or just because it provided a great acting opportunity, who can say? Either way though, can you actually like The Beaver? Playing like a less audience friendly American Beauty(1999). Mel certainly shows his acting chops and reminds us of how good he can be outside of action movies. Infact, with this and last year’s Edge of Darkness, ironically, like so many before him, now that his box office is slipping, he is producing some of his best work. If you don’t appreciate Gibson, just imagine what horrible things Robin Williams would have done with the same material. The rest of the performances are uniformly great and Foster has a sure hand as a director. Sadly, at least in Austin, The Beaver lasted a week at one theatre, albeit on two screens, showing that Gibson probably needs to return to action to reengage with an audience- still time for one last Lethal Weapon or Mad Max. Sometimes people just want escapism and not to be reminded of their hero’s foibles, not a film that bravely ignores the inherent comedy and a feel good ending. 9/10

Thor(2011)

Hammer Time.

Going into Thor, I admit all I knew about the character was he was kind of a Viking, had a big hammer and would often get into fights with the Hulk because they both had anger issues. He also was one of the worst dressed superheroes. If you thought the fuss over changing the X-Men’s costumes was overblown, Branagh deserves credit for pulling off a futuristic Viking look that isn’t totally embarrassing or makes you giggle. The armor in this is actually very cool but the film still allows the audience to poke fun when Thor’s companions land on Earth and a watching Fed wonders whether a Renaissance Festival is in town. It will be interesting to see how the film does, on the one hand IMDB are posting great figures with some people(whisper it), saying it’s better than Iron Man(2008) or Spiderman(2002). It isn’t, but it is better than Iron Man 2(2010) and possibly Spiderman 3(2007), on the other hand, the character is a lot less known by the mainstream. Kenneth Branagh, who ten years ago might have made a pretty good Thor himself, directs a very solid if not totally exceptional comic book adaptation. It’s like a slightly dotty mix of the first Superman movie( especially the scenes on Krypton), Flash Gordon(1980)(everyone has very silly costumes and take themselves dreadfully seriously) and of course Shakespeare. It’s actually a great tone to adopt and it the cause of much comedy when Thor is relegated to Earth. The acting and indeed actors chosen are all very good too. Chris Hemsworth makes a great Thor, his bravado and arrogance giving way to thoughtful contemplation and regret as the film proceeds, but still always up for a punch-up. Hopkins carries on breaking off big chunks of the scenery and chewing it as he’s been doing since The Wolf Man(2009), or even as far back as Dracula(1992) if we want to be honest, but sadly spends most of the film in a coma. Rene Russo hangs around in the background and wins the‘Danny Huston in the Remake of Clash of the Titans’ award for ‘I was in this film honest, but they cut all my parts out.’ Portman makes a good love interest although this feels a bit sketched compared to the ones in Superman and Spiderman, and indeed, Portman has now officially become a big money maker because since Black Swan and noticeably in this, like so many other actresses, the higher her box office, the thinner she gets, and she is very thin in this. In the deficit corner, the film suffers from the usual first part need to set things up, the action scenes lack real ‘wow’ factor and I felt no real sense of menace or jeopardy. Partly, I think this was due to there being no real villain, but in a similar weakness to the Superman movies, once Thor has his hammer(which is most of the film), he’s invincible, which is why we really need a General Zod equal to give him a proper run for his money. Also, compared to the vicious fight at the end of Spiderman(much complained about by parents) , Thor also seemed a little too kid friendly, no blood, no on camera deaths which didn’t help. There is also, probably the least effective so far, teaser for The Avengers at the end of the film( if for some reason they don’t make this now, audiences could sue under the trade descriptions act). Thor then was very good in every department, but was never great. 8/10

Arthur(2010)

ReBranded


The remake of Arthur neither trends a brand new path, or sticks to the original’s script verbatim. It’s actually a weird mix of the same story with minor tweeks, but with new dialogue, peppered with the classic lines of the original. Sadly missing is my favorite from the original. Prostitute to Arthur-“My mother died when I was 5, my father raped me when I was 10,” Arthur(drunk as usual), “So you had a relatively good 5 years.” The fact that such a great line is missing kind of sums up the new movie. It’s rudder, as in it has more swearing, yet it is also a lot more scared of offending anyone. You’ve probably heard that in this version Arthur actually does attend an AA meeting, although to Brand’s credit he gets a big laugh out of it by saying, “this is depressing stuff, I need a drink.” Later however the movie caves and we are told that Arthur has dried out. If I’m not exactly selling you on the film, don’t dismay though. The film is very funny, I laughed out loud several times which for me, these days, is a very good sign in a comedy where often I sit stony faced with the odd lip twitch. Brand holds the film together sometimes through sheer willpower, luckily coming across like Dudley Moore’s ruder, younger brother, which is a great compliment, and he also feels like a leading man in this rather than the stunt casting of Sarah Marshall(2008), or secret weapon in Get Him to the Greek(2010). You can tell Brand probably improvised a lot of his lines and while some miss, and some may be more Brand than Arthur, when they hit, they really work. One of the best lines is when Arthur says, “not if I keep them moist,” in response to Jennifer Garner saying her father will cut his balls off. This is a great punchline to an unfunny scene set up way, way before. In the theatre the audience I was with actually paused to remember the set up but then laughed all the harder. If Brand works wonders(and I’m only a recent convert to him myself, I used to not understand his appeal at all, especially the sexual frenzy of women for him), the rest of the cast is ill served by the lines the script gives them. Garner actually shows good comic muscles but doesn’t feel like a real person, Guzman as Bitterman is just the idiot foil in a role that could have really worked very well, as he is basically the audiences eyes, Nolte- the stunt casting here is wasted, and seemed ill or on drugs to me, also he’s unfortunate to be part of the most uncomfortable and unfunny scene in the film with the table saw- although it does lead to that great line later. Surprisingly the biggest disappointment is Mirren, not because of anything she does but again by the script. Strangely enough one of the biggest fumbles is in her reading of Gielgud’s lines such as “if I die, take back my library books,” which are totally mishandled and sadly have nothing new of the same power to replace them. In the place of comedy and sarcasm is sentiment and Hobson does get two speeches, one in the AA meeting where she talks for Arthur about his problems, and one about why she didn’t leave him when she fell in love as a younger woman. These do work well, but give me Gielgud saying “do you need me to wash you dick for you, you little shit,” any day. Also, interestingly, whereas in the original we had a beautiful scene of Moore closing the door to Hobson’s room and locking it, after he had died, here we have Brand finding Mirren in bed and trying to rouse her- it shows us more but gives us less, which to me sums up the new version. So Arthur is not as good as the original, which frankly no one expected it to be, and it feels more like a succession of sketches than an organic film but it is a funny romantic comedy with a very rude and British slant, and for that speaking as an Englishman, we should be very greatful. 8/10

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers(1988)

You can see why some people love Halloween 4, and going to the Alamo’s sixth year showing, in a room with Owen Edgerton giving a good defense, and a crowd full of fans, it would be easy to be swayed. Halloween 4 also made a lot of money, and brought back Michael Myers again, putting him, like Halloween 1, 2 and H20, in a secure position to survive as a franchise through some less than stellar installments- Halloween 6: The Curse of Michael Myers(1995) anyone? I hated Halloween 4 when I first saw it on video, but a couple of theatrical experiences later, I can see its limited charms, it does try hard to plug any holes from Halloween 2(1981), and continue the story with as few bumps as possible, some shots are very good, the characters are not as annoying or as thinly drawn as they later became, and of course Donald Pleasence is still fantastic value( although for my money, he’s the only thing that actually improved between this and Halloween 5:The Revenge of Michael Myers(1989), where he roughs up a child and beats Michael Myers while screaming at him, with a four by four- the Inspector Dreyfus of the Horror world, Halloween 5 is his Curse of the Pink Panther(1976). Even how 80s it looks, which originally used to irk me, now gives it a period charm. Against this though, sorry Owen, but you must be on crack to think this is better than Carpenter’s original, the kills seem toned down and tame compared to Part 2, the hunters are very annoying, as are nearly all of the characters with the exception of the Jaime and Rachel- making you not really care who gets killed, and Michael himself looks slightly off. Here is the first mask that looks wrong to me- a problem that caused reshoots on Halloween H20(1998). The climax also seems strangely anti-climatic after the great endings of the first two installments(Halloween 3:Season of the Witch(1983) was of course a totally different story), or even later sequels, like H20. In the history of the franchise, Halloween 4 deserves recognition for keeping it, like Michael himself, alive and kicking, but not much else. 6/10

Far from Brain Dead

Dead Alive, Braindead(UK)(1992)

This is the movie that made me fall in love with Peter Jackson. It was love at first sight as I rented the video to tide me over a damp, cold, early Christmas holiday in my deserted student house. I got this and Map of the Human Heart(1993), simply on the strength of good reviews, I hadn’t seen Bad Taste(1987) or Meet the Feebles(1990) yet, so had no idea of the anarchy to expect. Five minutes in, I was smitten, by the end I was ready to search out or go and see any film Jackson had made. Some people are snooty that Braindead is played more for laughs and gore than genuine horror, but even they have to respect the sheer invention on display here. Jackson, armed with a love of slapstick and horror movies, unleashes his imagination on a mock-up 50s New Zealand- Brits in particular will love the references, to The Archers, the Queen and custard- “no pudding,” as Lionel and his mother try to keep up appearances while literally falling apart, and being attacked by zombies. Like Monsters, which I saw the same weekend, both contain love stories at their centers, although while Monsters is awkwardly realistic, Braindead is the usual cheesy Hollywood romance, sweetly innocent when not hacking up bodies. Also, it has a Freudian angle second only to Pink Floyd’s The Wall when it comes to suffocating and literally monstrous mothers. Very quotable, very funny and I would guess still unsurpassed in the amount of body limbs and blood used. 10/10

Who are the real Monsters?

Monsters(2010)

Described by many critics as an artier Cloverfield(2008), or Before Sunrise(1995) with special effects, Monsters gets along way on its premise, and certainly manages a lot of bang for its buck on a small budget, however, ultimately not enough seems to really happen, horror and action junkies may feel short changed while drama fans might baulk at the silly creatures. I personally must admit that this wasn’t the film I was hoping or expecting, but once I had readjusted my expectations, I did enjoy it and was impressed at the very realistic genre mix. Worth supporting and a good alternative date movie. 7/10

Almost an Angel (1990)

…or Crocodile Dundee(1986) without the hat. Terry Dean(Hogan) is hardly a stretch for the actor, being basically him playing himself again- the easy charm, the snappy wisecracks, the cheeky grin. Sadly, whereas after the world conquering Dundee, and it’s first sequel, he really needed a strong concept film to cement his position as a star. The fact that Almost an Angel feels like a briefly sketched idea, probably caused it to flop badly, and Hogan never had another hit movie. Or perhaps audiences only liked him as Mick Dundee. The film skims along very inoffensively, but is held up single handedly by Hogan, lacking any real forward momentum, subplots or characters we care about. Linda Kozlowski funnily enough(and yes, I am being sarcastic) plays the love interest, while a young(and with added hair), Elias Koteas embarrasses himself but at least gets some experience on the way to becoming the great actor he is today. Then we have the totally mad ending, which comes out of nowhere and doesn’t make any sense, but is the most memorable part of the film. 5/10

Zombie(1979)

The confusingly titled Zombi, Zombie, Zombi 2, or Zombie Flesh Eaters, depending when and where you saw it, originally rode on the coattails of Dawn of the Dead’s success, hence the ‘2’ in its title. Directed by Lucio Fulci, who would give us varying quality of movies, but always different and always interesting (compared to Bava or Argento, his fellow countrymen), however successfully they turned out. Zombie is probably viewed as his most popular movie. The reasons for this is possibly in its straightforward telling, for a director who would often throw the audience narrative curveballs, and often be incomprehensible- (even in his better films like The Beyond(1981), here we have a simple story of mad doctor and investigating group trapped on an island populated by increasingly antagonistic zombies. It also has some of the most arresting images of his career- the eye on the splinter, the famed zombie versus shark fight, and enthusiastic performances, from amongst others, genre favorite, Ian McCulloch , who at this time was a dependable, British Tom Atkins in a run of Italian horrors. He could always be relied on to turn up in a Roger Moore like outfit, and hopeful comb over, to try to rationalize the situation or if in doubt, start a punch-up. These points win over the obvious cheapness of the production- most notably in the fiery climax, where the same shot is used again and again. Add to this the annoyingly catchy soundtrack and women willing to strip off when nothing else is going on, and your in horror heaven. 9/10

Kiss This

The Great Rock ‘n’ Roll Swindle (1980)

Julien Temple’s film is basically Malcolm McLaren’s rewrite of The Sex Pistols history, as lessons in business in how he planned everything, by the man himself. Even taking aside the fact that if McLaren is such a genius, how was he never able to repeat this success with his other bands, the film does make an interesting bookend and counterpoint to The Filth and the Fury(2000), Temple’s excellent documentary of the band members versions of events, where unsurprisingly McLaren is portrayed as a clueless buffoon(often in footage used to impress earlier) and opportunist, as amazed as anyone else at the outcry. Indeed, the best pieces of Swindle- the animation, band performance footage, and talking heads are recycled for the later doc. While what is left is hardly illuminating or of historic value, you can’t say a naked McLaren in the bath lecturing(which he does a lot) to an obviously underage naked teenage girl(one of the two images along with an gynecological glimpse of a woman that still shocks now), transforming into a Punk. There’s lots of sex, naked bodies, swearing, fighting and puking, and Ronnie Biggs apparently taking over as lead singer. If none of these at least titillate you, or the car-crash quality of the film give you some anarchy to cheer, then your best off just going straight to the much better Filth. However, if you treat Swindle as performance art- all surface and not much depth, there’s fun to have. Probably it’s greatest crime is the obvious sidelining of Rotten(who had been sacked and only appears in old footage), and the fact that the Pistols are treated as a subversive creation who can’t play or sing, to annoy everyone, instead of the tight, great band they actually were. Swindle is the Pistols seen by their manager, who perversely seems to value their music last. 5/10

A Love Story Across the Ages

Somewhere in Time (1980)

Watching Somewhere in Time again, having not watching it for several years, I was struck by two things. Firstly, it’s a lot more stately in its progress than I remember, possibly because it’s tale is so slight. Also, Christopher Reeve’s character is a lot more emotionally unstable and downright obsessed. Viewed from a certain perspective, he could have had a breakdown upon staying at the hotel and have fantasized everything else. Indeed, his character in the novel has a brain tumor, clouding the issue further. You can see why this became a Cable Cruncher, and then cult hit though. It’s chaste enough for children to watch unsupervised, but is unashamedly sentimental, containing one of John Barry’s most beautiful scores. Modern audiences, or even ones from when it was released, may not have had the patience with it, but true romantics will always hold it dear. 9/10

I ain't afraid of no Ghost

Ghost(1990)

Ghost, that blockbuster, supernatural, romantic juggernaut of 1990, has not aged well. This was the first time I had seen it after remembering a good proportion of the female members of my Secondary School going to see it. I’m actually glad I waited though, as its 20 year old fashions and styles actually make it more sympathetic than I think I would have found it originally. From the first scene of the three main characters knocking down a wall, the guys stripped to the waist in designer dungarees, Patrick Swayze’s terrible shirts, the “Ditto” response- such bad Yuppie script shorthand for unexpressed feelings, and of course the much spoofed Potter’s Wheel scene, actually gave it a cheery charm. So Demi cries, Patrick is bland, and Whoopi saves the day(a few years before we got tired of her one note schtick), the animated spirits are appallingly badly rendered, but it is a cold blooded person who doesn’t still get a little moist eyed at the sound of The Righteous Brothers or the long goodbye at the end. 6/10

The Best Film Ever Made

Jaws(1975)

I normally watch Jaws once a year, normally in May to start off my Summer- a form of sadomasicistic pleasure as I grew up in a seaside town. I’ve seen it twice this Summer, a month apart- once on the 4th July- “you’ve got a panic on your hands on the 4th July,” and am tempted to see it again, as you never know when it will be around again. It is that good, one of those rare films that you can literally watch again and again, back to back, just to relish every aspect. Not many films, not even Spielberg films can claim that- maybe Raiders or perhaps E.T. are the only other two I can think of, off the top of my head. So much has been written about Jaws( indeed, see my review on The Shark is Still Working(2006), that it is probably wise to simply state the changes I have personally noticed in watching the film. Well firstly, without a doubt, it still works. It hooked the half full audience- like most old films, I think people who’ve seen it on TV, forget how good it is on the big screen, and mix it up with the substandard sequels. Also, while the first half is peppered with great moments- Chrissie’s death, the ferry conversation, Alex Kintner’s death, Quint’s speech among many others, the second half, from the Orca leaving the dockyard, doesn’t let the audience go for a second. It was also the first time on seeing it, that I realized that Jaws is officially looking dated to me, the fashions and cars look old, the colour is too saturated, but it doesn’t matter. It may have slipped from contemporary to period piece in my eyes, but just like Psycho(1960) or North by Northwest(1959), once it’s playing, you get dragged back into the familiar story. An evergreen classic. If only Spielberg still killed dogs and children in his films with such glee. 10/10

This Doc's Got Teeth

The Shark is Still Working (2006)

This excellent documentary about Jaws(1975), has been a festival favorite since it was made but having waited patiently to see it for four years with no sign of a theatrical release, or it being used as a dvd extra, I jumped at the chance to watch it as part of the Alamo’s Shark Week. So did it live up to the hype? Well, yes, and no. By default, any documentary is going to have aspects more interesting to you than others, and this was no different. Some things I wanted to know more about were skimmed over or just not touched on- the sequels or references in other films for instance. Other things, primarily the Jawsfest at Martha’s Vineyard could have been trimmed further. What it did achieve though was some impressive new stories- the fate of both Orcas which hadn’t been heard before. It also proved it’s title true in igniting your interest in well beaten ground and making you want to watch the film again.
Richard Dreyfuss by the way is hilarious, and possibly this is responsible for getting him back in the water as the very Hooper looking character in Piranha 3D this Summer. It’s also nice to see how many directors line up to bestow their thanks on a film for changing their lives, that isn’t Star Wars(1977). Kevin Smith’s Weed to Crack analogy for the narrator of the trailer is priceless. Well worth seeing and perfect as a double feature before the movie. 9/10

Travolta on Form Shocker!!

From Paris with Love (2010)

The poster, trailer and cheekily pilfered(from the Bond canon) title of this film, plus the threat of Travolta overacting- always a double-edged sword of one part entertaining(Face Off), to two parts appalling(see pretty much everything else), did not bode well. Infact, the director of Taken(2008) was a plus negated by the Luc Besson producer credit which is not necessarily a mark of quality anymore.
As the film starts, all of my worst fears seemed to be realized. Jonathan Rhys Meyers American accent slides about uncomfortably like a contact lense that doesn’t want to stay in, while Travolta gets a big reveal scene which is instantly undercut by him swearing and shouting about energy drinks and the French. Does the plot of a big American cutting a swath through France sound familiar? Later there is also an uncomfortable Pulp Fiction(1994) reference which is in danger of reminding us of a much better film. Like Taken though, this is another slow starter which gets progressively better as it goes along. Travolta we realize is putting on his asshole façade(sometimes very amusingly with his ‘I Love Paris’ hat), rather than just being one, while Rhys Meyers, less interesting but still believable, is forced to go off book with his protocol. There is also a nicely held threat that Travolta’s Charlie Wax may turn out to be the bad guy after all. The film’s twist is sadly telegraphed but still provides a shock in the film’s best scene at a dinner party, and then doesn’t leave you enough time to question it too closely as it races for the finish with a great Ronin(1998) style motorway chase. Not Shakespeare then, but a refreshingly short action thriller with a distinctive French taste, and Travolta having more fun but also irritating us less than he has in 15 years. 8/10

Dante's Peak

The Burbs (1989)

You’ve got to hand it to Joe Dante. After upsetting everyone’s parents and scaring kids senseless with Gremlins(1984), here he gives us the only PG horror movie, disguised as a Tom Hanks comedy. Featuring serial killers, Satanism(what was it with Hanks and Satanists in the 80s- he was also chasing them in Dragnet(1987), and possibly cannibalism, the Burbs skirts deliriously close to bad taste for much of its running time. Although the tale sometimes seems too slight for Dante’s talents, he unleashes every trick in his considerable arsenal to keep it interesting, including a great soundtrack by Jerry Goldsmith aping his own Patton(1970) score everytime Bruce Dern appears. You can see why regular audiences didn’t know how to take this but for film nerds(who will wet themselves seeing Dick Miller and Robert Picardo as arguing binmen), this is manna from heaven, from the Spaghetti Western clichés to breakfast cereals called Freakies, and of course Gremlins. Dante would go on to top even this with Gremlins 2 the next year. 10/10