Change Your Image
joenook
Reviews
Der Tiger von Eschnapur (1959)
Brilliant Sets Do Not Make a Brilliant Movie
Fritz Lang's two part Indian Epic made up of the films The Tiger of Bengal and The Tomb of Love is, to put it lightly, a cinematic enigma. While Lang is no stranger to both pulp fiction and long films, he oddly fails at both in this two-part travesty.
Watching a film like Lang's Metropolis or his five hour epic of Die Nibelungen is a magical experience. The films flow at such a brilliant pace, drawing in the viewer and creating a world of high drama and excitement amidst some of the most lavish and beautiful sets of the silent era. Yet, somehow, this magic is lost in his Indian Epic, as the nearly three and a half hours that comprise both films drags for what seems like an eternity. While the first film, The Tiger of Bengal, starts off like a pleasing, pulpy adventure story, it soon peters off nearly halfway through, setting the pace for what will be the rest of the first and the entire second film.
Production was evidently a very expensive and impressive one, complete with jewel-studded clothing, immense and desolate dungeons, and large and grandiose palaces, stocked with every little intricate detailed imagined; yet, these impressive settings are hardly utilized in to making this the film(s) it could have been, for they remain nothing more than eye-candy in what is ultimately a theatrical play of the most dire sort. Stilted, bland dialogue and scenes that drag and repeat play out almost cyclically: Where is the princess? She's over there. Where is the foreigner? He's over there. What should we do? We should do this... and so on, ad nauseam, until nearly three and a half hours of a film still unrealized is completed.
Even in some of Lang's previous minor failings he never achieved such a monotony as this. In his canceled pulp-adventure project, The Spiders, Lang was able to pull off an exhilarating tale of adventure in a foreign land for the first film, which would be canceled shortly after just the second Admittedly, the second and last entry of The Spiders almost seems to set a precedent for what would go wrong with both The Tiger of Bengal and The Tomb of Love: hardly anything happens.
I simply just don't understand what Lang went in to this project imagining. After reading this was a remake of the Indian Epic that he originally produced earlier on in his career I was so excited to finally sit and view what I imagined would be a wonderful adventure. I assumed it was one of his last, final great works; a tale of intrigue and adventure and lavish sets, and a film I could rely on for years to come to go back to and relieve the magic all again. Such a disappointment on so many levels, both as an adventure film, and arguably one of Lang's worst.
Les nuits brûlantes de Linda (1975)
Lukewarm Nights of Linda
Even as a big fan of Franco's films, this one is up there as one of his most drab. Made in a year when he worked on 11 films, some incomplete, it unfortunately really shows. There is some atmospheric lighting and nice sets with gorgeous furnishing, but these are typically not used to their full potential and lack no real substance. The story is near incomprehensible, often interlaced with incessant shots of someone sitting on a bed, walking through a hallway, and then awkwardly zoomed-in softcore. For an 80 minute film, it feels like it goes on forever, skimping on the erotica and atmosphere, and ultimately ending with no real payoff.
On the plus side, Lina Romay looks as fine as ever, showcasing some very attractive outfits throughout, often though only for a minute or two. Only one scene in the film is particularly worth viewing, that of a rather infamously seductive scene involving Lina and a banana.
In all, this should be near the bottom of your list when checking out Franco's films, if not maybe skipping it altogether and just viewing the standout Lina scene if you're a fan. As much as it pains me to say it, but this is a highly disappointing film that I was really looking forward to.
Dai tôzoku (1963)
A Criminal Waste of Talent and Setting
Every once and a while you stumble upon a film that gets your heart racing, a film that you must track down immediately. So, you say that Toho made a Sinbad film in the 60s, when films like that flourished? Leading man Toshiro Mifune (Yojimbo, Seven Samurai, etc.) plays the Sinbad-like pirate? The gorgeous Mie Hama (You Only Live Twice, Ironfinger, Toho's King Kong films) plays a princess, Kumi Mizuno (tons of Godzilla and Kaiju) plays a bandit leader? So many other familiar faces, even Takashi Shimura and Masanari Nihei (the lovable dope from Ultraman) make small appearances, amongst many other Toho players as well? Wow, that sounds amazing! Well... it's not, because simply, nothing really happens. If you're aware of Toho films and Japanese films of the era, you can always expect gorgeous sets and highly detailed costumes--yes, that's all here. But that's about all you get. Mifune's titular Sinbad is at sea for a total of about five minutes, spending most of the film arguing and wandering around as palace guards and the antagonist's henchmen give him grief, yet seem to let him pass and do what he wants most of the time.
After about the hour and fifteen minute mark things finally start to get interesting: a bit of sword fighting (the first in the entire movie; the rest is solely Mifune dodging,) arrows being shot, and a Gorgon-like witch character (sorta) battling it out with a mystical hermit. And as quick as the action beings, it dies off, leaving the viewer with a completely unfulfilling experience, and maybe a bit upset that these intricate sets and amazing actors weren't utilized to their true potential.
I hate to put myself up on a pedestal, but this film is nothing short of a failure, even from a die-hard fan. Despite such a cast, it's tedious and boring, lacks adventure and monsters and action, and is truly not worth even the most devoted Toho or Japanese film aficionado's time. I know, I find it hard to believe myself.
The Thief of Bagdad (1940)
An Ambitious, Yet Insubstantial and Insipid Adventure
As with most highly rated IMDb titles, majority rule typically connotes an undeserved rating based on highly flawed perspectives of nostalgic praise, and, unfortunately, the 1940 remake of The Thief of Baghdad deserves such insinuation. As with most Technicolor films, each shot is a display of vibrant beauty and the marvelous colors that made the Technicolor process such a joy to look at; however, here is where the admiration begins and simultaneously ends, for this is a film that seems so highly ambitious that it forgets what truly counts in adventure films: the adventure! A very loose remake of the Douglas Fairbanks 1924 masterpiece of the same name, based on the writings of One Thousand and One Nights, one would imagine that a film with the credit of three(!) directors, 16 years of (presumably) increased talent in special effects, and the marvelous aesthetic of Technicolor would be such a film to behold! I can only surmise that such ambition and the seemingly unnecessary amount of directorial credit is the consequence of a rather insubstantial and insipid adventure.
By far one of the most egregious anomalies in the film is the odd bisection of the thief/prince protagonist into two separate entities, rather than the use of the singular archetypal "rags to riches" character of Fairbanks' character. Here the character is split into the prince, played by John Justin, and the thief, played by Sabu, as seen and often credited in first name only. While Justin's character plays the love interest and naïve prince to the isolated damsel-in-distress, Sabu seems almost relegated to the simpleminded thief, partly playing the lead to what little on screen adventure happens, but almost ostensibly as a vehicle of the noble savage that constantly and selflessly gets in harm's way to the benefit and protection of Justin's prince.
While there are other flaws both in characters and on screen chemistry, the narrative and pace also suffers from an odd mixture of overly long flashbacks. Nearly half of the almost two hour runtime consists of a broken up flashback in the prince's perspective, and when finally told, accomplishes almost nothing but poor storytelling. The actual adventure of the film begins too late in the film to really accomplish anything, and while some of the sets are a wonder to behold, little excitement takes place to warrant the long and convoluted buildup to a weak finale.
One can see a very liberal amount of "inspiration" here that would later serve Disney's Aladdin (1992), including almost identical representations in both the diabolical Jafar (here Jaffar,) and the bumbling Sultan, amongst other small details. While I don't consider it entirely fair to keep comparing it to the Fairbanks film, or even films after, I do not understand how this film is not considered an objective failure on many levels, both in direction and purely in entertainment value. Previous reviews tout a generous gaze of rose colored glasses under the guise of nostalgia, with a seemingly unanimous majority unaware of the previous silent film, while others seem to claim that such a film is nothing short of a technical and aesthetic masterpiece, and in summation should be considered a great film as a whole. Furthermore, past praise by Ebert and a generous DVD release by The Criterion Collection further project the idea that such a film is a deserved masterpiece, despite such obvious shortcomings.
In conclusion, while my review may seem at times harsh, it is not a complete failure. It's certainly a lavish and pretty production with a few notable things of interest, but I would seek elsewhere in need of adventure, starting with the Fairbank's 1924 film of the same name, and especially the special effects wonders of Ray Harryhausen, be it the Arabian Nights themed Sinbad films, or the more mythological Clash of the Titans and Jason and the Argonauts. As for another film by a 1/3 of the directorial effort starring Sabu, there is always Michael Powell's (and Emeric Pressburger's) Black Narcissus, a wonderful film both technically and cinematically.
Le mort qui tue (1913)
Worst of the Fantomas series
Despite the rave reviews from the other fans on here, I feel compelled to speak some truth and even this out a bit from a more objective standpoint. While this is indeed the longest of the Fantomas films--or serials, really. While the first two films move at a fairly quick pace, the third plays as more of a mystery, with Fantomas rarely on the screen. This is especially a shame, as he now finally dons his Executioner hood, looking more diabolical than ever, yet he unfortunately has an estimated total of five minutes screen time with this new attire.
While the murder/mystery storyline is at first compelling and interesting, it quickly dissipates into a boring, convoluted mess. For starters, gone is Fantomas' disguise gimmick from the beginning of the first two serials. While not imperative, it served as an interesting look into the titular evildoer himself with some impressive effects, and as sort of a recap of the character himself. The most egregious aspect of the film isn't the story itself, but Feuillade's bland, static direction. Scenes go on for far two long, with the average shot length well over thirty seconds. While the camera blocking is at times well placed in its execution, each and every scene drags, testing the viewer to keep focused on characters or actions that matter, most of which are simply superfluous.
While the resolution is quite grisly in the motives and actions of Fantomas himself, the ending feels anti-climactic and rushed compared to the previous outings of suspense and mystery. While it's a necessary film to view in the series, be warned, for it's also the worst.
Punk Rock Holocaust (2004)
Some music for the fans...but that's about it.
Well, if you like pop/punk, punk, ska, and a tad bit of modern psycho billy, then seeing the live performances are about the only thing worth watching. This movie has tons and tons of band cameos, along with president of Troma, Lloyd Kaufman as a semi-major role, and lots of goofy death scenes. Sounds like it may be good, right? Well, the deaths keep coming, and repeatedly to many different bands of the Warp Tour and the fans at the event. Some of the deaths start of stylish, but then they are recycled over and over, to the point of being completely repetitive. Almost everyone dies of having their head smashed, or intestines being pulled from their stomach. The gore looks as if it was from Andreas Schnaas' "Zombie 90: Extreme Pestilence"; with this being the "watered-down type blood", but now that movie is actually decent, and provides humor-something that this movie terribly lacks. Sure, the movie is made by Doug Sakmann from Troma, it's got great low-budget potential, and it tries...but just too hard. Everything is overly meant to be funny in this movie, and thats what brings it down. Everything tries to be too comic and goofy, by using intentional bad acting, an overuse of pointless deaths, and doing the same thing...over and over. It's basically "Mulva: Zombie Ass-Kicker", "Chairman of the Board", or any movie you have made with your friends: it's funny to those who made it, and that's about it.
Great potential, great idea, great use of effects-but it's the same thing...over and over: A band plays, a band dies, fans die. Everyone dies, blood is sprayed everywhere, the process is repeated.
The question is for these types of movies-which is basically 'bad slap-stick'-do they try too hard, or not at all?