Change Your Image
Emideon
Reviews
Fidel (2001)
A magicians hand hides the other
To be frank and up front with my position, I am a socialist and I hold little sympathy for Castro and his regime. However I have many questions, the man and the island his politburo rule hold puzzling answers to what I, up to fairly recently cared little about. This documentary was interesting at first, and the one thing I do give it credit for is detailing a sort of time-line of events, events which I would assume very few Americans ever knew about (too complex for a simplistic national myth). That merited 4 (out of 10) stars in my book, and after it was done thats all it garnered from me. This documentary does not pretend to be balanced, its called "The Untold Story", what greater asterisk could be placed on a documentary! So yes from the get-go we know were to hear a positive light on the life and times of the Cuban leader, I and anyone watching this should have known that. However they did so by largely omitting fact and detail, a good documentary representing a position should at the least present the arguments against its position (and explain against them undoubtedly) or leave them out without conclusion by the filmmaker for the audience to mull it over. The fact that the filmmakers didn't feel comfortable enough with the notion of bringing up these issues tells me they had intentions that lay beyond informing the public of the other side of the coin but instead to promote the other side of the coin beyond reasonable means, in other words propaganda.
There is a fine line, a very real one, between an opinionated documentary and "Reafer Madness". The more I watched I felt almost like I was being talked down to, they expect and hope we don't recall the prison camps for homosexuals, they ignore explaining the political structure of Cuba throughout its development, and they omit any voice of dissenter's within the island, one of the interviewed guests had the nerve to say "the most fascinating thing I think about him is...that he cant dance....I read that somewhere". At the end, I learned no more than I already knew or that which someone else could have read from a quick one-page biography. No context, no explanations. I didn't want nor expected a condemnation of him, I wanted details, I wanted to understand Cuba, Fidel and the revolutionary process, I wanted to hear from the horses mouth and have him defend himself, I wanted to hear the guests answer the questions in me, I wanted to see the life of the man juxtaposed with with his reasoning and narrated, rare (or rarely mentioned) documented evidence. I think all of this was within the boundary of my reasonable expectations, none was a part of this film (with a small exception of the rush to hostilities with the US in 1960-61). "Commandante" was much better.
Gojira (1954)
A legacy not dependant on platitudes, but well earned.
Among the kaiju diaspora, there is constant disagreement worthy of a Star Trek convention (not necessarily a compliment) on every minor detail of a film, running the gamut from aesthetics in cinematography to monster originality to th "realness" or "fakeness" of the godzilla suit in this or that film. The general conversation on Kaiju rarely simmers above that appropriate in a sandbox. However, almost instinctively, each kaiju fan when asked will rank this at the top of the list the genre has produced, glowing remarks follow about its tone, its somber atmosphere, the general sad feeling one felt and of course the importance of the subtext of the whole screenplay. I always find it odd how uniformly they all take their hats off at the mention of this film, like a Casablanca or Citizen Kane of the giant monster movie.
The plot is well known and so I wont detail it. Borrowing much from its inspiration "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms" and to a lesser extent "King Kong", it begins with mysterious happenings at sea, reports by islanders are muddled with ancient mysticism and the government goes to check out the evidence. In the midst of this is a love triangle, all linked to apposing sides on the matter of the devastation. The film is above all an anti-war film, the inspiration for much of the film was director Ishiro Honda's journey through Hiroshima in 1945. Godzilla is a symbol, the incarnation really of unstoppable, unreasonable death. Towering over Tokyo and moving slowly across he is war at its core=war against civilians. There are subtle notes scattered all over, the scene where parliament erupts into a shouting match for example, the scientists, men of reason are heard and quickly forgotten, the politicians go on bickering (note also that Serizawa is also a scientist), it is obvious Honda placed little hope on politicians.
I think the general appeal of the film is partly warranted, partly nominal, and partly unavoidable. The warranted aspect is present to anyone who has taken the time to see it more than twice. The writing has been derided by many a critic, for example Roger Ebert (I originally intended to make this review a rebuttal to his) but I found it eloquent, the characters have a sense of restraint, they always seemed urged to say more than they do. I also like the cinematography, the vast number of shots of the beast are from below, from afar, in the distance within a corner like a silhouette figure shining in dark black waters and sky. Sadly its a form never again taken up by the genre, preferring a bland approach, mid sized shots on the center of action so as to not miss out on the tumbling creatures, and even more recently is to ape what Hollywood generally finds to work (the simple angle shots which I think come standard on every camera by this point).
The nominal aspect is the general tendency of people to treat the older movie as above criticism, to be stashed in shrink wrap and on ice. It is sacrilege to speak ill of the original, the "Masterpiece", the serious toned grandfather of all that is rubbery and rampaging. Quick example, I remember noting in passing how I felt Akira Ifukube's score sounded hoarse and almost amateurish in the film, and that the themes took life with Mothra vs. Godzilla (1964). Immediately he defended the score, calling it the best in the whole series from what I gather for no better reason then that it was the original, and the masters work cannot be challenged. Many a film fan will be quick to defend "Phantom of the Opera" or "Nosferatu", and with justified historical and technical reasons, which would be much more entertaining than watching those films again, I may be schooled on the context of them but the context can do little to bring it back from the depths of anachronism.
Finally black and white just looks glorious. As many know color dates a film, but black & white always looks classy and supersedes any particular era, it looks as good in 1932 as it does in 2008, violence is given meaning by simply moving through the contrast, a man walking down an empty street is a non literal expression of his life and thoughts, in color its an extended scene editing mistake. For "Gojira" a monster crushing a city in B & W is a commentary on violence, in color a summer popcorn romp at a multiplex, many-a-time color has no patience for subtext.
In my view, it is the greatest kaiju film, and one of the best films of a golden age of Japanese cinema.
10/10
DaikaijĂ» kettĂ´: Gamera tai Barugon (1966)
An out of left field surprise that hits all the marks
Gamera tai Barugon was the first in a long line of often Horrendous sequels, a film which in my view is a lost and well forgotten gem. The sequel to the first Gamera film, "Gammera The Invincible" a black and white cheap but fun knock off of the very successful and prestigious (at the time especially since it was the year of Godzilla vs Monster Zero, the pinnacle high water mark in terms of production values and casting), the first film was such a hit Daiei went on to make the Daimajin films and this Gamera sequel.
Now apparently I own the Sandy Frank version, seeing as how this film is only available on extremely low budget DVD packs, mine came with an especially grainy blurred and discolored version of the film with terrible audio quality. However despite this almost terminal flaw to the watch-ability of a film, I not only sat through it, but hugely enjoyed it.
I wasn't just impressed that a knock off series could have a quality story to tell, but its production values were pretty decent and the characters actually involving. The film begins with 3 men out to find an enormous opal, one of the three men is the brother of the man who left the opal there (we are told during the Second World War). The men travel to the cave and find it. The story afterword is filled with betrayal, lies and greed, the three characters are distinct and we sympathize with at least two of them, making the following events all the more shocking. The opal we find out in a far fetched scene involving an X ray machine is actually an egg, containing Barugon, he dashes to the sea with the boat in flames. Our surviving original member asks their financier to pony up for a diving team to find the opal, but reveals too much and another dramatic scene ensues. The Gamera fight scenes were also very interesting and fun, full of bizarre ideas like a giant diamond and rainbow beams. Usually such contrasting events would ruin the other, but here they work in this cartoonish film, we see the drama and care for it, and we at times forget were watching a picture about a giant turtle and long tongued lizard. It is always rare to see a kaiju films that not just exceeds your expectations but breaks precedent, which very surprisingly, this film did.
8/10
Taekoesu Yonggary (1967)
A mixed bag of charming camp
Yonggary (1967) is much like Gamera, a cash crop film, aping off the success of other pilfered monsters, better ones. The film opens with what I thought was a rather nice shot of space with rolling credits, followed by a fine cast of mediocre actors and a young boy in shorts, the evil omen for any giant monster movie fan of terrible things to come. The story and plot run through very worn out terrain, mysterious happenings somewhere, a loving couple, monster attack, and discovery of weapon to kill the monster. The film was geared to children, as most kaiju films of this time (late 60s), one would expect this in itself would diagnose Yonggary as terminally unwatchable, but the kid aspect is what to me kept it entertaining, Yonggary dancing, drinking, etc. were all bizarre enouph to keep a smile, bad editing also played it part. As for the action sequences, Yonggary's arrival and first rampage was well done, not very convincing mind you, but thats never really the point in these films, to look interesting and incite nostalgic inner child hollaring.
Yonggary is by far one of the most forgettable Kaiju monsters to grace East Asian screens, his physical appearance is right down the middle neutral to anything that may catch attention; his skin color bland, his design simple and uninspired and his range of emotion nonexistent. However , despite all of this, I had fun watching it, unlike Gappa, pretension toward seriousness is out the window, thus making the inevitable moral lesson and speech at the end all the more bearable.
One of the better, lesser kaiju films. 6/10
Gojira vs. Kingu GidorĂ¢ (1991)
The most terrible film in a lackluster series
I cant understand at all why so many Godzilla fans think this is excellent, one of the best Godzilla films ever in fact. This film is horrible and one of the very few Gojira films I cant stand to watch again (the other being G. vs Megalon).
The plot is too campy to be in the Heisei series, a series that attempted to turn the aging Godzilla franchise into bonafide action films, revolving around ideas that seemed more in place in 1974 than 1991. It just sounded ridiculous, especially with some of the subject matter, take for example the WW2 scene, with the Japanese soldiers praising a dying Godzillasaurus, a mournful and serious tone, take the exuberant former commander turn capitalist and his death, serious seens in a film its fans somehow denote as played for laughs, as a goofy romp with guilty illogical fun, if so than this is easily one of the most tasteless films I've seen, however I think its more likely it was only talent the filmmakers lacked and this was a case of a straight faced action movie gone bad. It was made ever worse by the fact that the special effects are terrible beyond compare, from the jet packs to the android, to the hokey sound effects emitted from everything, its impossible to take anything seriously, and yet the film expects you to, there's no nudges to the camera.
Like nearly all Godzilla films there's a pointless romance, and this is no exception, though something can be said about the fact that this one is especially pointless since and inexplicable. There is literally no reason at all presented for the romance, it just happens and there lives make 360 degree commitments for it. Aside from this the other terrible aspect of this film is dialogue, both the Japanese and English is horrible, clunky and possibly the inspiration for Battlefield Earth.
The Tristar DVD compounds the problems, making everything look grainy, blurred, dim and just plain ugly, the same was for the sound. I first saw the Japanese Region 2 version and the differences are night and day, with the original vibrant colors and texture, the noteworthy score, the fight scenes especially, are actually watchable.
In my opinion, the Heisei series is a disappointment, with the exception of Godzilla 1984 (Japanese version) there is little to praise here, and Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah is case in point of this failure. It doesn't even come close to deserving the reputation and fans it gets.
2 out of 10
D-War (2007)
Lets be fair, you don't go into D-War thinking Citizen Kane
Compared to Shim's previous outing, we have a gigantic leap forward in every way imaginable. And if compared to a lot of the horrible monster films of the 60s, 70s and 90s which some people give so much credit to, D-War is by far a disappointing mess.
The story, in my view wasn't bad at all, at least the prologue . We start with Ethan Kendrick (Cody Arens) and his father at an antique shop trying to sell a dagger to Jack (Robert Forster), who pretends to have a heart attack to talk to Ethan alone about the story of his destiny. Forster narrates the story well I thought, he tells of a good and a bad Imoogi (Korean dragons) who become celestial dragons if a girl with a certain mark on her shoulder, that appears every 500 years, is sacrificed to them, called Yeo-Yi-Joo. In 1507 Korea, the girl is born and a wizard/shaman named Bochun and his ward Haram are entrusted to protect her till her 18 or 20 birthday, which is when her power is activated. The bad Imoogi, Buraki and his Artox army (you heard right, ARTOX army) ravage the village or kingdom in search of her. However Haram and Yeo-Yi-Joo have fallen in love, being her life long protector, which we are assured by Forster should surprise no one (except apparently him and the king who ordered the whole mess together). as they flee for there lives rather than sacrifice her to the good Imoogi, Buraki chases them to a cliff, and rather than die by him, they jump, and die "as star-crossed lovers". Ethan is the re-incarnation of Haram, Jack of Bochun and an unknown girl which he must find (Sarah) who is Yeo-Yi-Joo, as the time for a new dragon war nears.
Now that prologue is fine in my view, and had the film been about Haram and Yeo-Yi-Joo falling in love vs. following there proscribed destinies, an exploration of the strict caste systems of Feudalism vs. there ever growing tenderness, about Yeo-Yi-Joo's father (the King) and his grief at the death of his wife and the curse of his child, playing up the star-crossed lovers angle, and of course Giant snake fights and Artox armies with feudal age missiles, than this would have gone far and beyond the standard giant monster film, and even a very good film in general. But that would take a director with more talent (though something can be said for his work on action scenes) and a bit more courage to film for the sake of art rather than to score bank in the States (which is why the majority of the film is with American actors), and we have to have a reason for the snake and the Artox general to fight and chase Sarah and Ethan all over LA.
Now from that statement you would get the notion that this is a terrible film, which it is, but it is because of things rather than despite (which I know is only different in how you organize a sentence but I think I can make a case for a bigger differentiation) , its horrible acting rather than despite good acting makes things easier to forgive, because it means there is some untainted qualities to like about a film. If you tell your friend "the movie would have been great if it wasn't for the..." it means there was something there to enjoy, but if you say "even though it had (insert positive remark) it sucked" it means whatever good quality it had was nullified by something overlapping and worse.
By far the worst aspect, was the acting, which makes sense, Shim's not a great director, and like anyone who isn't bi-lingual in said languages you cant really tell if what your actors are saying came off as over-the-top, cheesy, slurred, awkward and like Nick Adams in "Invasion of Astro-Monster" your likely to be directed into hamming it up pretty strong. The second nail is the plot after Forster finishes talking, it goes nowhere and fast, it pretty much boils down to excuses for the snake to chase from location to location smashing things. By this point plots are pointless and intrusive, but they intrude anyway with revelations which add nothing, a love story which is anti-compelling, and federal officers running about for a quasi sub plot that goes nowhere in an anti climactic anything-but-tense moment in an empty garage. Altogether, considering the type of film and the obvious state of mind you go to these movies for, you'll hate part of it, the subordinate part (story, plot, human characters, any attempts at blossoming relationships) and love the rest (the dragons, battles, the inevitable monster clash winner-take-all ending to save the world).
There is one thing that can be said for Shim, his determination to make quality CGI without Hollywood, entirely in Korea. I think in years to come Korea will thank the work done here by Younggu-Art's for making Korean action/fantasy films able to compete with America, Britain and Japan, and they might very well become a sort of Asian Pixar out of there achievements here.
This is the kind of film you watch with your friends, pointing out the plot holes like hidden message Easter eggs (of which there is no short supply) and being dumb founded by some of the more impossible leaps of even fictional faith and the least convincing effects (the dead elephant, the entire bridge scene). The kind of film you hope to be pleasantly surprised by or nostalgia with quality explosions. The more I've seen it and thought about it the more my disdain for the worst parts turn into welcomed additions. The kind of film you go into shouting "D-War! woo!".
A sincere 7 out of 10
Catch a Fire (2006)
Great film, but fails on so many levels
I saw the film Saturday, knowing that it wouldn't be up for long, and was somewhat left with a feeling of satisfaction of such a film even being distributed in the U.S. and the courage of the films creator's, but with a sense of obvious revisionism.
The film is about South Africa during the brutal years of Apartheid (violent segregation), opening with a grim reminder of the seriousness of the issue, we see a montage of old BBC clips and a commentator giving us a brief overview of the situation, we see images of Blacks being shot, beat, and a world of oppression. We then meet the cast. The film pays a great amount of time on Patrick Chamusso's family life, some may say this is to make the characters more human and the story more engaging, but it seemed to me that it should have dealt more with Apartheid. It felt much too long before anything really begins.
I'll avoid boring people with yet another narration of the plot, but Patrick is imprisoned and tortured, when his own wife is put through the very same he becomes enraged, and upon his release he seeks revenge and see's the necessity of overthrowing the government. Throughout the film, only slight remarks are ever uttered about the conflict, and the terrorist actions in the beginning really only begin to matter around the end portion of the film. This is the most troublesome part of the whole film to me, the ANC, the war in Angola, the war in Mozambique, the Cold War, the situation in Africa as a whole is almost ignored (we only see a hammer and sickle once in the entire film for god sakes, yet Marxist movements dominated social life there for decades). The story of Patrick Chamusso, is overly simplified to depict a revenge story and nothing more, nothing about the ideals he fought for. Never is the intentions of the African National Congress portrayed, the guerrilla war in the North and the overall fervor is omitted. With a story that although succeeds as a humanitarian story it fails to really show the terror, the movements, and In the end we are left with a simplified Africa.
I give it a 7 out of ten.
Plan 9 from Outer Space (1957)
What can I say, the best movie ever for the worst reasons.
I gave this film a 1 because lets face it, it deserves it. The legendary Ed Wood was my inspiration to buy this film, now although I respect the fact that this was a very ambitious film, ambition isnt talent. Why is this film considered the worst in history (a bold but true title), oh let me count the ways. Okay the list: acting, writing, screenplay, direction, budget, and props. Im not kidding, this film is terrible, and because of it slightly amusing, but dont expect a laugh riot. All in all, a must see for anyone interested in horrible films or anyone who wants to know about the epic tale of "GRAVE ROBBERS FROM OUTER SPACE!". A cinematic masterpeice and a cult classic that shall forever be outdated.