Reviews

"Season of the Witch" (aka "Hungry Wives" aka "Jack's Wife") may be my favorite Romero film. However, it's almost impossible to compare this to his many fantastic and groundbreaking horror films. Though occasionally creepy and suspenseful, this isn't a horror film. It's essentially a sociological and psychological study of housewives in the age of women's lib and a society that was becoming more open about alternative lifestyles. It has a very sophisticated, existential edge to it. It has dramatic moments that remind me a little of John Cassavetes' films. It even has some moments that are almost Fellini-esquire. The acting is quite strong, the directing and editing are masterful (especially in the wonderful dream sequences), and the story is very engaging. It's really a shame that this movie went by virtually unnoticed. Knowing that this is a "lost" film, I was expecting to see something only mildly interesting, certainly nothing this original or fascinating.

The DVD release is loaded with extras. For one thing, it contains a second feature film, Romero's somewhat pedestrian but often entertaining second film, entitled, "There's Always Vanilla." It also has a great documentary on Romero's entire body of work, featuring interviews with Romero and a range of actors, including Ed Harris and Hal Holbrook. There's also a shorter documentary/interview with Romero, where he talks specifically about the two films on this DVD. And, there's another documentary/interview with the star of "Season of the Witch," Jan White. She has a lot of interesting things to say, including some words about the horrible marketing decisions that ultimately led to the film's lack of success. This DVD is obviously a must for fans of Romero. But it should also be given a chance by anyone interested in independent film-making.

I can't recommend this movie enough. If you haven't seen the original "Babe," don't worry. See this one first. The original won't tell you anything you need to know, and it's not nearly as good as this one.

I wasn't interested in the original "Babe." I rented "Pig In The City" because Gene Siskel called it one of the best films of the year. He wasn't kidding. I fell in love with it immediately, and it remains one of my all-time favorite films.

The storytelling is simply extraordinary. The images are breathtaking. More than once my jaw dropped at the colors on the screen. Sure, on the outside this looks like any old kids movie. However, notice who directed it: George Miller, the director of the "Mad Max" movies. As if that weren't enough, it features the incredible cinematography of Andrew Lesnie, the man who shot the Australian classic, "Dark Age," and went on to shoot the "Lord Of The Rings" trilogy with Peter Jackson. Like all of those other films, "Babe: Pig In The City" has a dark edge to it. It's not all about cutesy fun time. It'll make you laugh, no doubt, but don't be surprised if it shakes you up a bit, too. It'll make you think, and it may even make you cry. No matter who you are, young or old, you have to give this movie a chance. The sooner the better!

My expectations for this were pretty high, and I wasn't totally disappointed. This was almost a great movie. It is very well-paced. It begins slowly, introducing the characters in a very casual and subtle manner. The suspense builds slowly. After about twenty minutes or so, when things have started to get just a little tense, the film suddenly grabs you by the throat and doesn't let go till you're gasping for breath. It's that intense.

I love the way this movie pulled me in and didn't make any of the horrors easy to watch. The two female leads and John Jarratt all do a fantastic job. The other male lead doesn't have as meaty of a role, though what he does have he plays well enough. All of the actors help the film maintain a sense of realism that could easily have been lost due to the horrific nature of the material. The director probably deserves a lot of credit for that. Greg McLean must have pushed his actors very hard to get the performances we see on the screen. All in all, "Wolf Creek" is incredibly impressive considering it is McLean's feature debut. It's impressive anyway.

I have only two complaints. The first is that the film doesn't carry through with the intensity. The last ten minutes or so feel very anti-climactic. Second, a couple of scenes towards the end made me lose my suspension of disbelief. I actually balked at the screen at one point. When I left the theater, I felt that I had just experienced a very good film, but that it could've been great. Still, this is unquestionably a solid film. It deserves to be seen, especially if you like horror films that don't let you off the hook easily.

I just saw a sneak preview of Domino, followed by a Q&A with writer Richard Kelly. Kelly said that this whole film is "self-reflexive," and that it is supposed to be a satire of reality programming. However, it doesn't come off that way at all. Sure, there's a little satire in there. But the satire is so inconsequential, it ends up actually detracting from the force of the story. I don't know if Kelly just doesn't understand this movie, or what. Of course, it's not really his movie, as he freely admitted. It's Tony Scott's vision. And some of it works.

Mickey Rourke is in top form. However, I am very disappointed in how his character plays out. Just when he should really step up and show what he's all about, he fades away into the background. That was very disappointing. He's supposed to be the leader of this trio of bounty hunters. However, for the second half of the film, Domino is apparently in charge. This huge development is never explained or even acknowledged in the film. It really doesn't make any sense.

Also, the film has the makings of a slightly twisted love triangle, but unfortunately it is never fully realized. How the love theme plays out is wholly anti-climactic, unnecessary, and unconvincing.

Kiera Knightley does have some good moments here. She shows a lot of strength and courage. Still, her portrayal of Domino is often unconvincing. I don't think that is all her fault. I fault the direction and writing more than anything else.

Ultimately, I think the movie fails because of the style . . . that is, the plot and character development are too often sacrificed for the sake of style. Because of that, the film often seems a little ridiculous and occasionally nonsensical.

Richard Kelly said that it has to be viewed multiple times for all the subtleties to fall into place. I think he's completely wrong. This film is about as subtle as a sledgehammer.

On a more positive note, this film does have a few inspired moments. My favorite is a creative nod to the late Sam Kinison. So, if you like style over substance, this may be your favorite film of the year. If you prefer fully developed, complex characters, then you may want to skip this.

"The Lie Chair" is an episode of a Canadian TV show called "Peep Show." This short film obviously didn't cost very much, as the quality of the production shows. The sound is poor, and overall design is rather dull. It looks like a low-budget soap opera. However, the acting is very good, and the story is interesting. It's reminiscent of "The Twilight Zone." There doesn't seem to be very much of the trademark Cronenberg here, however.

This short is not easy to find in The States. I happened upon an imported DVD which was made in Japan. They released it as a double feature with another short film Cronenberg made for Canadian television the following year, called "The Italian Machine." Both shorts are worth checking out, if you can find them. "The Italian Machine" looks more like an actual film. It's also a lot more suggestive of Cronenberg's developing personality and style.

Also of interest: After "The Lie Chair," you can see a preview for another episode of "Peep Show." It stars Martin Short and Saul Rubinek, and it appears to be a drama about a homosexual (Rubinek) who picks up another homosexual (Short) on the street.

There's no other film like this. It is in a league of its own, standing out even apart from Jodorowsky's other films. It is a masterpiece. Many people may not be able to sit through this, since it has a rather abstract and philosophical narrative structure, and very little dialogue. However, I think everybody should see it. It has some very interesting and important things to say about religion and society. Not only that, but it is without a doubt the most visually stunning film I've ever seen. There are so many uniquely beautiful and thought-provoking images in this film--enough to fill a book. I'd buy that book, actually, if it existed. It's really quite a shame that there isn't a restored version of this film available on DVD. This should be required viewing for anyone interested in religion, film or art in general.

La Strada isn't quite as understated as Fellini's earlier films, nor is it nearly as self-indulgent as his later films. La Strada is right in the middle, and utterly flawless. Masina is as captivating and charming as ever. Even more so. Her nuanced and measured performance is perfect. Anthony Quinn is simply amazing. His sheer presence is tremendous. His movement, his voice, his face . . . I've never seen him better. On all counts, this is a masterpiece. Fellini's earlier films seemed to be climbing towards this peak, and everything after it seems little more than an echo of its greatness. I don't think I've ever seen a better film.