Reviews

I watched Tom Hanks' "Greyhound" the other day and I enjoyed every minute of it. I noticed the last entry in the credits was the Louisiana studio where it was filmed in it's entirety. I still favor production like Blade Runner 2049's where sets or location were used for almost every shot, but I am still happy CGI has come so far that I can't think of a single Science Fiction story that could not be convincingly made if enough money is involved. I wish someone would do Arthur C. Clark's "The City And The Stars".

With all but one brief opening scene being at sea, "Greyhound" is one of the few newer war films with no flashback female backstories.

Watching Greyhound, I thought about "Pride Of The Marines" (1945); also a true story but pre-CGI, with the combat a lucid middle between the family narrative at the heart of the piece. All three sections are Oscar worthy. The first is like "Marty" (1955), the second as realistic and hard-hitting as the opening of "Saving Private Ryan" (and done with three actors), and the third is as good as "The Men" (1950). By the way, "Marty" won four Oscars, "Saving Private Ryan" won five, and both "Pride Of The Marines" and "The Men" were nominated in multiple categories.

Last weekend I saw "Once Upon A Time ... In Hollywood". I am a big fan of Tarantino's films but this was so much better than even I had expected. It is much more nuanced than all his previous work but just as bold and interesting. It has just about the best and most immersive vibe, visually and narratively, of any contemporary film I have seen. To find anything equal or better in that sense I have to go back to movies like The Third Man, Rumble Fish, Runaway Train, or Terrence Malick's work. The last surprise this pleasant at a film I knew I would like going in was Blade Runner 2049. Just one non-spoiler spoiler. You are going to love the ending. One of these days they should finally give Brad Pitt an Oscar. Maybe this will do it. Incidentally, you could watch this just to see Dakota Fanning as a frightening villain.

The Execution Of Julie Ann Mabry squeezes more honest filmmaking out of six thousand dollars than most big budget movies ever manage to deliver at any price. It is a well-told tale of how difficult and often hopeless life is for people who have few advantages in this society. The parts major and brief are all played with an uncomplicated, direct and honest delivery that suits the material very well. Special mention to Olivia Adams II and Gemma Lee, who play the twin leads of Julie as a younger girl and as a woman. Kudos to Katie Madonna Lee as Julie's mother, and for writing, directing and producing this film. There are things urgent and frightening about this film because it is entirely believable. If it had been a true story I would not have been at all surprised. Born under different circumstances, this could have been the story of any of us. It hits so close to home if one is the least bit sensitive to what happens to our fellow travellers through life.

This film seems to be available only on Amazon, for streaming. It was apparently on Hulu in high def for a while, but not now. This deserves to be seen, shared and talked about as much as the usual Academy Award nominated offerings. I'm poor but I gave Amazon the ten dollars to "own" it and I hope this humble review will encourage others to support it.

Lynch's wildest story line. deftly realized. The intensity of the Jazz solo glimpsed briefly is a poster for the ride this film provides. How could a film be this uncomfortable to watch and so fascinating too? Only Lynch.

What this character is going through is like a class in German Expressionist agony. He is being manipulated by forces both sinister and mysterious, and there is no understanding any of it if you are him. For extra credit, the supernatural manipulation that his life becomes is shot in realistic, commonly found imagery. This is my favorite Lynch. I did not consider Mulholland Drive a stretch because I had already seen Lost Highway. I wish I had more than a poorly mastered Canadian DVD of it.

This can also be obtained on a DVD set of twenty Sci-fi films, lately sold as Sci-Fi Fever 20 Film Collection. I admit is was both unintentionally funny and a pretty tough go. Until the ending. I have read with interest how the production arrived at that point. What I found redeeming was the ending. Budget constraints, to put it mildly, dictated a static shot of minimal informational content. The concept in the voice over was fascinating, out of left field and possibly original. Worth five stars, to the two or less stars deserved by all the rest. So I rate it six, for that inadvertently stark presentation of a wonderful idea.

I drove to the local mega plex to see this film at a 10:30AM Sunday showing and shared the theater with fourteen other viewers. In its second or third and probably final week here it has been cut down to one showing a day.

I am no fan of Ayn Rand's philosophy, at least not for these times. As I see it, unfettered profit motive, unencumbered by government regulation, has brought us to our present grim business climate. Let us say a little balance would be nice. Not to talk politics, just giving a little background. So why did I go and spend my limited treasure and leisure time to see Atlas Shrugged Part I? Because two things I love are railroads (and trains) and films. With all the bad press out there, I wanted to give it a chance. Well, I am one viewer who enjoyed this film a lot.

Big names are no more necessary for a movie to be good than 5.1 surround or 3D are. I think Charlize Theron would have been great and Angelina Jolie or Julia Roberts would have been terrible. All three had been discussed for the lead at some point. Taylor Schilling was good for the part and I bought into her completely. I would also buy a ticket just to see the performances of some of the supporting actors, no matter what the film (as long as it was not a comedy). It was great to see John Polito and Armin Shimerman, for instance. Schilling and Grant Bowler as the leads were good casting. Wealthy, successful captains of industry often are good looking, self assured and low key. Most are closer to that than to Donald Trump. I know that the casting, with everything else, was done at the last minute to prevent the option from expiring, but it turned out fine.

Let me give it a personal test. Would I, the real me, be happy to work for, follow orders unquestionably from, and give my right arm to sleep with Taylor Schilling's Dagny Taggart? Three times yes. Same for Grant Bowler's Henry Reardon, minus the sex of course. I know, I am such a guy. I would not like to see any of the roles in this story go to a scenery chewing high profile popular star. Russell Crowe I would buy as Reardon, but not most A-list actors.

I enjoyed the storytelling, the pace, the road picture elements, and the boardroom/cocktail party exposition so widely savaged by the critics. All locations were spot on. I would rather see realistic characters going to unfamiliar locations than another travesty like The Tourist trotting across jet set Europe with an A list, too pretty cast. If the look and feel was forced by the budget, no loss I say. There are things in a big budget, big project movie that usually make it less good, and things in many low budget efforts with television actors that make a film special that are difficult to achieve any other way.

I went to the theater thinking I was probably making a mistake. Instead I was entertained and seduced. I had a blast and the only thing that sometimes un-suspended my disbelief – took me out of the frame – was whenever I realized how much I was enjoying being there.

This has been my candidate for the funniest film I have ever seen, ever since I caught it at a last chance theater late in its initial run.

It was a small theater in a multiplex. Total attendance was myself (solo), a thirty or forty something married couple, two young guys, a dating couple and another group of two or three college students.

A group dynamic soon established itself. We all became so sore from laughing that no one wanted to be the initial victim of the next gag. But each time someone would start laughing and we all helplessly joined in, EVERY TIME.

We really did think we could hold out once, but the next thing The Dude dropped the joint in his pants and his Torino ended up sideways in the alley. After that we gave up on even trying. It was the most powerful bonding experience I ever had with strangers in a theater.

I have always been completely high on Jeff Bridges' talent, wondering why he was not appreciated like DeNiro, Duvall, Hackman, Pacino, etc. It seemed odd to me that he will probably be remembered for playing this part, but now I think that might not be a bad fate after all. I think he is like Robert Mitchum - the best Hollywood actor alive, under appreciated because he makes it look so easy. Lebowski is the perfect example of that. It looks like a simple acting job but no one could have done it better, or even as well.

To give the Coen Brothers their due, the one-two-three roll of Fargo-The Big Lebowski-Oh Brother, Where Art Thou may be unmatched in cinema history. And they keep getting better.

It would be impossible to make a biographical film of Ms. Earhart then or now without some included elements of myth. Noting them would be not so much a criticism as an observation.

Re: comments about her pilot skill shortcomings, I think the issue was well served by the takeoff accident depiction. I agree that her busy schedule seemed to have precluded enough up to date stick time.

The cinematography was above the made for TV standard throughout. The aerial shot of the lonely taxi and lineup to the last takeoff was one of the most visually evocative scenes in the history of film.

It will be interesting to compare this modest effort to the impending release. Diane Keaton vs Hilary Swank, no comment from me. Rutger Hauer Vs Christopher Eccleston. Bruce Dern vs Richard Gere will be interesting. I like them both but would lean towards Dern, all else being equal. But it won't be. The tale will be told in the battle of the writers. Given the tone and level of the work today, I will bet on this film. The trailer makes the new version seem a bit florid, but it is just a trailer.

There must be a lot of people like me. Older, turned off by Anime's deliberately juvenile Manga artwork, Disney Channel level plots, and voices completely obnoxious to anyone over the age of nineteen. I have enjoyed Cowboy Bebop and Tactics, but that is about it. Tactics at least has a genuine sense of humor that is not completely juvenile, and at least a hint of a thoughtful darker side that is not lifted from cheap scare films.

With Flag, the basic artwork is for grownups. Not a triangle mouth or Keane painting set of eyes to be found. Beyond that, the 100% camera, photographic print and web cam viewpoint, with selective focus and hand held movement, is groundbreaking, done to perfection and generally brilliant. The music employed is moving and appropriate, and also very grown up.

The narrative content is WAY past anything I have ever seen in Anime. Serious drama, intelligently portrayed. The major themes encompass pretty much everything that is actually important to the life of human beings. I can't recount very many narrative films that covered this much serious ground. The web of life, death, religion, politics, war, ethics, bravery, power, nature, faith, love and the big picture is all woven convincingly into a really first rate film experience. It is very compact for a serially presented film, having been envisioned from the beginning as a limited series. While there is much action, it is presented realistically. No animated recycled Power Rangers rip-offs here.

Kids' stuff is fine, but fantasy has its limitations as a story telling medium. This is much deeper and ultimately more rewarding and satisfying. Anime has been giving us The Three Stooges and Star Wars. Now I realize it could also give us Wild Strawberries, Pather Panchali and Cross Of Iron.

The details are outstanding. Just one example, I had no idea that the camera at the end of the credits in each episode was setting up for the final resolution.

I am going beyond recommending Flag as Anime, I am giving it a top rating as a movie.

I can see how this film could be tossed into the Violent Action or confusingly written low budget categories, but I found it to be a cut or more above those types of films because of its feel. It seemed to me more like a long waking nightmare than an action yarn. It was personal. Where Dirty Harry or Arnold type films tend to try to inject societal relevance, this is about what is happening to one lone guy's little world. It seems to start the usual way in the big city, but the road trip begins immediately after the cops vs bad guy shootout. Then it is just him against the darker side of the world.

Odd to say it, but it had elements in it of a gentle, thoughtful road film like Wild Strawberries. But these gentle experiences were incessantly subverted by the nightmarish downward spiral that was this day or so in the life of the antihero lead. Dr. Borg could not find an experience or place that could distract him for long from his regrets. Boomer's problems were less existential. He could not find a safe place, even to sleep. One thing led to another and every time it couldn't get worse it did. Sustaining that through the length of the film in writing and directing is quite an accomplishment and it all goes to Wiper. The other actors did a sturdy to inspired job of playing it on the money and not ruining the vibe.

I think of it as a Film Noir and it reminds me of an Edmond O'Brien character running afoul of Communist spies and their thugs. Constantly on the run, both to and from, never knowing what is around the next corner.

Without giving anything away, the other element running through the film is an amazing tale of, ultimately, redemption involving Boomer and Cleveland. It is of course given the necessary weight by the usual brilliant performance by Andre Braugher.

Much of the film had a claustrophobic quality to it, another departure from a typical action film. I don't say this often, but being in black and white would have taken as much away from this film as it would have added. It is pretty darn good the way it is. And it does not remind me very much of any other film I have ever seen. It is coming from another place entirely.

This film reminds me of two very different films. In its pacing, use of space and landscape, cinematography, spare character development with deliberate mystery and blanks to be filled in by the viewer - or to be left a mystery - it reminds me very much of L'Avventura. This is a comparison of success, as Idaho Transfer does all the same things quite well. Not the masterpiece the great Italian film is, but very successful none the less.

I also admit to being very taken with the spare quality that low cost productions sometimes create out of necessity. The resulting atmosphere is one of my favorite things to discover in a film, and this is one of the most successful examples I have ever seen.

Another plus is the way amateur actors, with the right direction, create an ambiance of dialog and presence almost impossible to get with experienced performers. Again, this film does it better than most. It is a little like the extremely effective delivery of Bela Lugosi's lines in Dracula - a result of delivering them phonetically in that case.

The other film I thought of was Virus - Fukkatsu no hi (1980), reputedly the most expensive Japanese film ever. Virus tried to do most of the same things as Idaho Transfer, but with a large scale, name actors and way too much wasted cash. It is by comparison dead on arrival. Peter Fonda's little film walks all over it, beating it at its own game on every level, and by a large margin. That is no small accomplishment, and neither is this film. For me it is close to perfect in every quality I most enjoy in films. I'd like to give it a ten, but then what would I give L'Avventura?

One could go on and on analyzing this great film, but I will settle here for merely (hopefully) being entitled to my opinion.

I have my favorites (Rumble Fish, The Last Picture Show), my most moving (The Plague Dogs and Pather Panchali), greatest achievements (Ben Hur, The Remains of The Day, Wild Strawberries), my no brainers (Citizen Kane, The Third Man, Intolerance). But this is, if I were objective yet receptive, probably the Best film I've ever seen. The only film that could make his Blowup seem less than it is, which is fabulous. I saw this film only once, on the big screen, thirty years ago. Even now, just thinking about it knocks me off my foundation and forces a reevaluation of all that I believe about humans interacting between nature, themselves and each other.

After reading the other reviews, I must add one observation. All my long adult life I have read about segments of `otherwise' great films dragging. Even accounting for the 'enjoy a baseball game' vs. `NBA gives action every second' mentalities and the endless MTV Generation attention span analogies, this is a load of dung. This is not a matter of taste. It is always a matter of the filmmaker's realization going over the viewer's head, to put it bluntly. When I was a kid, scientists explained that we use only five percent of our brain. Each decade they admit to a bit more of it being used to some effect. How learned exponents of the scientific method could ignore atrophy and evolution is beyond me, but film fans are often expert in this exercise in self delusion. We don't grasp something, so we call it a mistake. We don't see how something is helping us, so we say it doesn't do anything at all. It's called ignorance, not stupidity. Nothing to be ashamed of. We can learn if we continue to expose ourselves to the work of filmmakers more talented than ourselves.

The griping about today's blockbusters being special effects and deal driven are well known, and largely true. Here is a film that illuminates and reveals, I suspect, more than we viewers can ever perceive from it. It works superbly on so many levels at once that it dazzles us with its brilliance. It informs all of that with pure filmmaking consisting of director's craft, acting ability, writing talent and cinematography. It reveals its vision with its spaces as effectively as with its active elements. It allows us to bring much of ourselves to it by not filling up the experience wall to wall with specifics. It forces us to see most films as the obvious, spoon fed tripe that they are. What more could you ask from a film?

Born in 1947 and raised watching tens of thousands of hours of tv (am I the only living person who watched all the episodes of Whirlybirds - four times?), Sea Hunt is a real childhood memory for me. It was fun, it was cool and it was on every week. We were so innocent in those days, audiences would watch just to see scuba diving. The only show I looked forward to more was Science Fiction Theater ("Hello, I'm your host, Truman Bradley.")

One odd touch sticks in my mind these forty years later. I'm thinking it must have been deliberate. Each and every episode - I swear - seemed to use one particular line of dialog. At some point in an underwater scene, Mike Nelson utters with surprise - in narration, of course - "And then I saw it!" Is there an insider out there who can shed light on this phenomenon? Or, heaven help me, does 30,000 hours of television actually turn your brain to jello?