It's an entertaining read on the message boards regarding the comparison of the "True Grit" movies. Generally it seems that the one you see first will be the film you favor. I saw the Coen brothers version first. However, that was when it initially arrived in theaters in 2010, and my memory isn't what it used to be, which makes it difficult to offer a complete side-by-side analysis. While I prefer the Coen rendition, largely on the strength of Jeff Bridges, I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the John Wayne film.
Both actors provide strong interpretations of the Rooster Cogburn character, although they take them in different directions. Wayne's performance had a lighter, comedic touch, while Bridges' performance was more grizzled, rougher around the edges with a dialect that was occasionally hard to understand. That turned some people off, although I felt it made Cogburn feel authentic given his background and drinking habits. Still, Wayne maintains an imposing figure on the screen.
You can easily debate merits of the remainder of the cast, and this take on "True Grit" has great actors attached. Robert Duvall, Dennis Hopper, and Strother Martin all appear. Unfortunately, the weak link is provided by non-actor Glen Campbell as La Boeuf. Campbell had just a few acting credits before this film, and he won't win over any converts in that aspect of his career. I've seen worse examples of musicians trying to act, but don't consider that a ringing endorsement.
One contrast that will notice immediately is the tone of film in terms of cinematography. This film is bright and colorful as opposed to the darker style the Coens employed. Vast blue skies framing gorgeous mountain scenery again showcasing the difference in dramatic interpretation of the book.
It's interesting that both readings of Rooster Cogburn received Oscar nominations, but it was Wayne that walked off with the win. I think the performance and the film have held up better than expected.
Rating: 8/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 124
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Movie #129- "The Wolf Man" (1941)
As this project rolls forward, I'm astonished at the number of early movies that I haven't seen. Given that I once majored in cinema, I should have more of these classics under my belt (of course, due to a couple courses, I've seen my fair share of early Russian cinema). I used to joke about not seeing many films made before 1970, which was a statement that had a large amount of truth to it. One of the genres I've probably ignored the most is the horror film, especially the classic movie monsters. It's been entertaining to look back on the creatures that Hollywood has tried to revive far too often.
One key element I've noticed is how varied each key monster is handled (I've got a few more films in the future). The background stories, personas, and motivations differ with each character, giving some added depth so the monsters are not carbon copies of one another. Dracula was cold, emotionless, undead. He continued to feast on the living, with no mortality or conscience. In contrast, "The Wolf Man" gave us a man placed in a situation that leads to a tragic conclusion. Something terrible, and unbelievable, has inflected him, yet he doesn't have the ability to fight it. He arrives home to mourn the loss of a brother and reconcile with his father, then becomes a monster that he can't control. Lon Chaney brings humanity to the role of Larry Talbot, a sincere but conflicted man, not buying into the folklore until he becomes a part of it.
I also credit "The Wolf Man" for an excellent job in creating a creepy vibe. Whereas "Dracula" relied on the castle, "The Wolf Man" has the haunting atmosphere of a forest. Examples include the gypsy camp, featuring quality performances by Bela Lugosi and Maria Ouspenskaya, along with the swirling fog through the trees during the climatic chase scene. The early horror films are fairly fast-paced, wasting little time to get to the conclusion as they generally seem to clock in at under 80 minutes.
Another iconic movie that Hollywood will forever try to remake.
Rating: 9/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 123
One key element I've noticed is how varied each key monster is handled (I've got a few more films in the future). The background stories, personas, and motivations differ with each character, giving some added depth so the monsters are not carbon copies of one another. Dracula was cold, emotionless, undead. He continued to feast on the living, with no mortality or conscience. In contrast, "The Wolf Man" gave us a man placed in a situation that leads to a tragic conclusion. Something terrible, and unbelievable, has inflected him, yet he doesn't have the ability to fight it. He arrives home to mourn the loss of a brother and reconcile with his father, then becomes a monster that he can't control. Lon Chaney brings humanity to the role of Larry Talbot, a sincere but conflicted man, not buying into the folklore until he becomes a part of it.
I also credit "The Wolf Man" for an excellent job in creating a creepy vibe. Whereas "Dracula" relied on the castle, "The Wolf Man" has the haunting atmosphere of a forest. Examples include the gypsy camp, featuring quality performances by Bela Lugosi and Maria Ouspenskaya, along with the swirling fog through the trees during the climatic chase scene. The early horror films are fairly fast-paced, wasting little time to get to the conclusion as they generally seem to clock in at under 80 minutes.
Another iconic movie that Hollywood will forever try to remake.
Rating: 9/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 123
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Movie #128- "Slacker" (1991)
Many have said that "Seinfeld" was a show about nothing. Granted, in its later years, it did develop story lines and plots though originally, it was about such mundane aspects of life like waiting for a table at a restaurant or looking for your car in a parking garage. If "Seinfeld" was the show about nothing, then "Slacker" is the movie about nothing.
Director Richard Linklater made a splash in the independent film world with the release of "Slacker." It was probably a film that resonated more in towns with a "hipster" population, most likely college towns, but not necessarily (although I had heard about the film, I wasn't living in that kind of surrounding). It is a film without a plot and a revolving cast of characters. It's a day in the life of Austin, Texas. The best way to describe it is thus; image you have a video camera and you simply start filming. You meet a person (or more), have a conversation, then pass the camera along. Repeat this process until you have a 90 minute movie.
The pure simplicity of "Slacker" is its beautiful quality. The lo-fi feel and variety of characters is what gives the film charm. "Slacker" careens from individual to individual, providing a brief glimpse into their personality. Don't like a character? Don't worry, because you'll cross paths with a new one soon enough. Conspiracies, philosophies, new age thinking, and music become part of the conversation (along with Madonna's pap-smear). Linklater used a similar approach with "Dazed and Confused", although the narrative was more controlled and the focus was on a main group of kids.
This obviously isn't a film for everyone given the structure. That is what drew me into "Slacker" given I didn't know what ideas would be expressed and the direction the movie was going to take me. I'm hoping to check out Linklater's "Before Sunrise" trilogy at some point. A unique piece of work.
Rating: 7/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 122
Director Richard Linklater made a splash in the independent film world with the release of "Slacker." It was probably a film that resonated more in towns with a "hipster" population, most likely college towns, but not necessarily (although I had heard about the film, I wasn't living in that kind of surrounding). It is a film without a plot and a revolving cast of characters. It's a day in the life of Austin, Texas. The best way to describe it is thus; image you have a video camera and you simply start filming. You meet a person (or more), have a conversation, then pass the camera along. Repeat this process until you have a 90 minute movie.
The pure simplicity of "Slacker" is its beautiful quality. The lo-fi feel and variety of characters is what gives the film charm. "Slacker" careens from individual to individual, providing a brief glimpse into their personality. Don't like a character? Don't worry, because you'll cross paths with a new one soon enough. Conspiracies, philosophies, new age thinking, and music become part of the conversation (along with Madonna's pap-smear). Linklater used a similar approach with "Dazed and Confused", although the narrative was more controlled and the focus was on a main group of kids.
This obviously isn't a film for everyone given the structure. That is what drew me into "Slacker" given I didn't know what ideas would be expressed and the direction the movie was going to take me. I'm hoping to check out Linklater's "Before Sunrise" trilogy at some point. A unique piece of work.
Rating: 7/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 122
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Movie #127- "The Last Stand" (2013)
The best way to describe "The Last Stand" is by using a sports analogy. It's the bottom of the ninth inning and your team is down a run. A runner is on base, when the old, grizzled slugger saunters up to the plate. He's been out of the game for a while and may be past his prime, yet on occasion, has been able to flash the magic of years ago. The first pitch is driven deep down the line, home run distance, but foul. The second pitch, a swing and a miss. Finally, the third pitch freezes him, resulting in a called strike. The at-bat ends in disappointment. Thankfully, it's only the first out of the inning, so the game moves on. Will the slugger bat again? Maybe. So goes Schwarzenegger's career.
A lot was made about Arnold's return to a starring role. This appeared to be the perfect vehicle for him; the aging sheriff in a sleepy border town with big trouble heading his way in the form of the escaped leader of a drug cartel. The town is basically deserted for a football game and his only back-up consists of an inexperienced staff and a crazed munitions collector. This leads to a very loud, and violent conclusion.
"The Last Stand" could have been more fun than it is, but I'll place a majority of the blame on the script. The initial set-up of the story gets you excited (big showdown in small town), yet "The Last Stand" fails in the execution. I can overlook plot holes if the film can draw me into its world. Here, there are too many gaps that keep you waiting. The villain and his goal isn't that interesting, the build up to the conclusion drags too long, Johnny Knoxville is given an outrageous character that is barely used in the first half of the movie, and while Schwarnenegger gets to inject some humor in regards to his age, that is an opportunity that is sparingly explored. Luis Guzman is dependable in the role of a deputy while I really wanted to see more of Harry Dean Stanton in an uncredited part.
Arnold appears to be up for the challenge of aging action hero. Although he may not return to past glories, he could become a reliable box office draw again. He just needs to find a script that better suits him.
Rating: 5/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 121
A lot was made about Arnold's return to a starring role. This appeared to be the perfect vehicle for him; the aging sheriff in a sleepy border town with big trouble heading his way in the form of the escaped leader of a drug cartel. The town is basically deserted for a football game and his only back-up consists of an inexperienced staff and a crazed munitions collector. This leads to a very loud, and violent conclusion.
"The Last Stand" could have been more fun than it is, but I'll place a majority of the blame on the script. The initial set-up of the story gets you excited (big showdown in small town), yet "The Last Stand" fails in the execution. I can overlook plot holes if the film can draw me into its world. Here, there are too many gaps that keep you waiting. The villain and his goal isn't that interesting, the build up to the conclusion drags too long, Johnny Knoxville is given an outrageous character that is barely used in the first half of the movie, and while Schwarnenegger gets to inject some humor in regards to his age, that is an opportunity that is sparingly explored. Luis Guzman is dependable in the role of a deputy while I really wanted to see more of Harry Dean Stanton in an uncredited part.
Arnold appears to be up for the challenge of aging action hero. Although he may not return to past glories, he could become a reliable box office draw again. He just needs to find a script that better suits him.
Rating: 5/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 121
Movie #126- "The Bank Dick" (1940)
You've got to hand it to W.C. Fields. Where the Marx Brothers relied on their crazy antics and Charlie Chaplin had his Tramp character, Fields went the direction of alcoholic curmudgeon. He could effortlessly trade sharp barbs with anyone his path, unless it was his wife, in which the comments were generally under his breath. And if that sour aspect in his character made him an unlikely hero, he also displayed a strong dislike for children, usually a less than endearing quality. Kids appeared to be the enemy and Fields wasn't afraid to unload his insults toward them. One has to wonder if someone could repeat such a character in today's climate without some dark undertone or apologetic stance. Yet Fields made it all work.
In "The Bank Dick", Fields plays the humorously named Egbert Souse (accent on the e), and while the title implies his role as a bank detective, that is only part of the plot. He briefly dabbles as a movie director (purely on accident) and gets caught up in an embezzlement scheme (due to his own greed). The situations provide Fields the opportunity to flex his ability at verbal sparing. However, he was adept to slapstick too, as evidenced in playful bar scene involving his hat. Modern slapstick just doesn't hold a candle to the early classics.
Another common thread I've noticed about the early comedies is the love of a car chase. As long as there have been automobiles and films, high speed thrills is part of the equation. And "The Bank Dick" follows with a comedic car chase involving Souse, the police, and crooks. The sheer timing and mayhem that goes into these elaborate sequences is quite impressive.
Fields was not just the star of this film, but also wrote the screenplay, using the name Mahatma Kane Jeeves (read it fast). It's a shame that Fields would make only four more films following "The Bank Dick" as he died in 1946. Fields was another early comedian who I knew for his style and manner, yet not his film work. My love of early film comedy is continuing to grow due to films like this.
Rating: 8/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 120
In "The Bank Dick", Fields plays the humorously named Egbert Souse (accent on the e), and while the title implies his role as a bank detective, that is only part of the plot. He briefly dabbles as a movie director (purely on accident) and gets caught up in an embezzlement scheme (due to his own greed). The situations provide Fields the opportunity to flex his ability at verbal sparing. However, he was adept to slapstick too, as evidenced in playful bar scene involving his hat. Modern slapstick just doesn't hold a candle to the early classics.
Another common thread I've noticed about the early comedies is the love of a car chase. As long as there have been automobiles and films, high speed thrills is part of the equation. And "The Bank Dick" follows with a comedic car chase involving Souse, the police, and crooks. The sheer timing and mayhem that goes into these elaborate sequences is quite impressive.
Fields was not just the star of this film, but also wrote the screenplay, using the name Mahatma Kane Jeeves (read it fast). It's a shame that Fields would make only four more films following "The Bank Dick" as he died in 1946. Fields was another early comedian who I knew for his style and manner, yet not his film work. My love of early film comedy is continuing to grow due to films like this.
Rating: 8/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 120
Saturday, September 7, 2013
Movie #125- "Death Race 2000" (1975)
Roger Corman has an astonishing legacy in the world of Hollywood. Director of 50-plus titles, producer of over 400, Corman
is known as the "King of B Movies". His movies inexpensive and shot at
a quick pace, yet it is rare for his films to not to turn a profit. Corman has also been instrumental in the start of several careers. Ron Howard, Martin Scorsese, Jack Nicholson, and Robert DeNiro are some of the names that Corman assisted, whether it be in the acting or directing arena.
"Death Race 2000" centers around a government sponsored cross country race that has one twisted plot point... racers are given points for striking pedestrians. Given the gruesome nature of the plot, the death scenes are actually handled very tongue-in-cheek, almost replicating a Benny Hill chase sequence. Of course, there are factions that exist wanting to put an end to the race and one of the drivers may share in that very idea.
Some may shake their head at the plot and believe it's sadistic, "Death Race 2000"is an entertaining social commentary complete with cheesy production values. Our love of violence still holds true (along with an early look at reality television) while the rebels trying to stop the race are making an attempt to restore America to a previous time (sound familiar). "Death Race 2000" takes these ideas and gooses them with comic book styling as each racer is given a unique identity along with a vehicle that matches the personality. The cars themselves are hilarious creations on a shoestring budget.
Sylvester Stallone is featured in his pre-Rocky days as one of the contestants, working hard on his monosyllabic delivery. At the time, the bigger star was David Carradine, coming fresh off the television series "Kung Fu" and looking for an image change. I think he succeeded. Paul Bartel, who has appeared in several Corman films, gets behind the camera, directing with a manic glee.
However, as much I enjoyed the first half of "Death Race 2000", there was a problem of stretching the absurdity over a scant 80 minutes. Best viewed on a late Saturday night or at the drive-in.
Rating: 6/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 119
"Death Race 2000" centers around a government sponsored cross country race that has one twisted plot point... racers are given points for striking pedestrians. Given the gruesome nature of the plot, the death scenes are actually handled very tongue-in-cheek, almost replicating a Benny Hill chase sequence. Of course, there are factions that exist wanting to put an end to the race and one of the drivers may share in that very idea.
Some may shake their head at the plot and believe it's sadistic, "Death Race 2000"is an entertaining social commentary complete with cheesy production values. Our love of violence still holds true (along with an early look at reality television) while the rebels trying to stop the race are making an attempt to restore America to a previous time (sound familiar). "Death Race 2000" takes these ideas and gooses them with comic book styling as each racer is given a unique identity along with a vehicle that matches the personality. The cars themselves are hilarious creations on a shoestring budget.
Sylvester Stallone is featured in his pre-Rocky days as one of the contestants, working hard on his monosyllabic delivery. At the time, the bigger star was David Carradine, coming fresh off the television series "Kung Fu" and looking for an image change. I think he succeeded. Paul Bartel, who has appeared in several Corman films, gets behind the camera, directing with a manic glee.
However, as much I enjoyed the first half of "Death Race 2000", there was a problem of stretching the absurdity over a scant 80 minutes. Best viewed on a late Saturday night or at the drive-in.
Rating: 6/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 119
Monday, September 2, 2013
Movie #124- "Bachelorette" (2012)
Comparisons have been drawn to "Bridesmaids", along with a dash of "The Hangover" thrown in. While the trio of films focus on an impending wedding, "Bachelorette" takes a left turn into the darkness with the headlights turned off. I probably laughed more at "Bridesmaids" and "The Hangover" and would give them higher marks, yet that's not to take away anything from this film. Friendship seemed to be at the heart of "Bridesmaids" and "The Hangover" (more so with the former film) along with the generous supply of wacky antics. "Bachelorette" is more interested in probing the dark side of the human condition.
Three women, friends in high school, are drawn back together for the wedding of a former classmate (Becky) that they used to ridicule. It is not a joyous occasion for them, being they can't believe Becky is getting married ahead of them. Their lives haven't exactly panned out. One has a drug problem, one drifts from one relationship to another, and the third, while doing the "right things" in life, is a contentious planner with an unpleasant attitude. The nuptials cause their life bitterness to surface, rising to the point that you wonder how they remained friends. A wedding dress is ruined, an old boyfriend appears, and various forms of debauchery takes place.
"Bachelorette" carries its mean streak proudly with Kirsten Dunst as the controlling, bitch on wheels. Isla Fisher along with Lizzy Caplan, Rebel Wilson, and Adam Scott add to a cringe-inducing evening. I've worked my share of weddings in the past and have seen many ceremonies that are happy on the outside, not so much inside. "Bachelorette" cuts away some of the wedding sheen with vicious slashes. Sure, the trio are obnoxious and unlikeable, but it gives them a chance to hopefully grow, although I doubt it.
Rating: 7/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 118
Three women, friends in high school, are drawn back together for the wedding of a former classmate (Becky) that they used to ridicule. It is not a joyous occasion for them, being they can't believe Becky is getting married ahead of them. Their lives haven't exactly panned out. One has a drug problem, one drifts from one relationship to another, and the third, while doing the "right things" in life, is a contentious planner with an unpleasant attitude. The nuptials cause their life bitterness to surface, rising to the point that you wonder how they remained friends. A wedding dress is ruined, an old boyfriend appears, and various forms of debauchery takes place.
"Bachelorette" carries its mean streak proudly with Kirsten Dunst as the controlling, bitch on wheels. Isla Fisher along with Lizzy Caplan, Rebel Wilson, and Adam Scott add to a cringe-inducing evening. I've worked my share of weddings in the past and have seen many ceremonies that are happy on the outside, not so much inside. "Bachelorette" cuts away some of the wedding sheen with vicious slashes. Sure, the trio are obnoxious and unlikeable, but it gives them a chance to hopefully grow, although I doubt it.
Rating: 7/10
Movies I've previously seen: 6
First time viewings: 118
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






