Reviews

24 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Equus (1977)
10/10
Burton and Firth excel in Lumet's emotionally bruising drama.
30 September 2007
"All right! The normal is the good smile in a child's eyes. There's also the dead stare in a million adults. It both sustains and kills, like a god. It is the ordinary made beautiful, it is also the average made lethal. Normal is the indispensable murderous god of health and I am his priest."

Richard Burton's last truly great performance came in Sidney Lumet's screen adaption of Paul Shaffer's play; reprising the celebrated role that he himself had already wowed critics with on stage.

When a disturbed young man, Alan Strang (Peter Firth), blinds six horses with a metal spike he is referred by the magistrates to the care of psychiatrist Dr. Martin Dysart (Burton). Determined to unravel the mind of his patient and discover the trigger for this most brutal act, Dysart slowly forges a bond with the youth; unearthing, fragment by fragment, a childhood shaped of sexual repression, religious confusion, maternal overload and, of course, a burning equine obsession. However, as Dysart plunges deeper and deeper into Strangs psyche, he not only begins to question his own professional merit but begins to envy the World of passion and fantasy that the youth has retreated into.

Highly regarded for his character driven films, Equus is up there amongst Sidney Lumets very best. The script is extremely intelligent whilst there are a handful of small but eye-catching supporting roles that help Dysart slot the pieces of his puzzle together; most notably from Colin Blakely and Joan Plowright as Strangs parents and Jenny Agutter as the young girl who introduces Alan to the stables where his madness finally spirals into violence. There are also some evocative flashback sequences throughout that are impressively disturbing and yet, at the same time, succeed in capturing the wonder and beauty of Strangs obsession.

However, the film really stands as a two hander between the brooding Burton and the revelatory Peter Firth; a relationship that is light years more nuanced and evolved than the somewhat soft-centred dynamic between Robin Williams and Matt Damon in the similarly themed Good Will Hunting. Firth turns in a wonderfully sensitive performance as the shy, deeply damaged youth who is overwhelmed by his adolescence, repressed yearnings and befuddled sexuality whilst Burton is absolutely terrific as Dysart; his disillusionment with his own sterile existence and unhappy marriage diffusing slowly through his (sexually muted) conversations with his friend (Eileen Atkins) and spilling out in a string of acidic monologues that both narrate events and serve as vents to the emotional conflicts of a man whose career is devoted to unravelling them.

It's a most eloquent and rewarding performance in an eloquent and rewarding film. Equus is a film that asks no easy questions and offers no easy moral judgements. It is a mature, articulate and bruising character study that demands to be seen.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A Terrific Thriller
21 September 2007
"What the hell do you think spies are? Moral philosophers measuring everything they do against the word of God or Karl Marx? They're not! They're just a bunch of seedy, squalid bastards like me: drunkards, queers, hen-pecked husbands, civil servants playing cowboys and Indians to brighten their rotten little lives. Do you think they sit like monks in a cell, balancing right against wrong?"

Richard Burton's movie career is something of an enigma. An actor of immense talents, he emerged in the 1950's with rave reviews from his stage work and comparisons to Laurence Olivier ringing in his ear. However, in 1984, his premature death was followed by obituaries bemoaning his alcoholism, dragging up his tumultuous private life (lest we forget he was married to Liz Taylor twice) and picking the bones of his celebrity. Perhaps the biggest accusation of all though was the general agreement that, despite his seven Academy award nominations, he squandered his talent. Certainly this has a ring of truth about it. Sure, he put in some excellent performances (Look Back In Anger, Becket and Equus spring to mind) but, to be brutally honest, he slummed it in a huge amount of dross too.

Fortunately, The Spy Who Came In From The Cold falls firmly into the former category. In fact, it is, in my opinion, both his best film and his greatest performance. Based on a novel from John Le Carré, Burton plays Alec Leamas; an embittered section chief directing espionage operations along the Berlin Wall at the height of the Cold War. After his chief source of intelligence in the East is assassinated on the orders of his Stasi counterpart, Mundt (Peter Van Eyck), the disillusioned Leamas returns to London to his masters where he is given two choices: Come in from the cold to a desk job or engineer his own defection in order to feed Communists false information.

Burton is simply electric. His glowering presence, deep whiskey and cigarette voice and tortuously etched features projecting a malcontent mixture of apathy, cynicism and self loathing that Leamas seemingly seethes from every pore. He's a man left utterly numb by his job and the endless games of espionage and counter-espionage in which he has been immersed. He's belligerent, intelligent and, yes, impenetrably icy. For whilst "the cold" of the title references the act of an agent coming in from operations it also reflects Leamus' mental state.

Directed by the hugely underrated Martin Ritt, The Spy Who Came In From The Cold is a deathly, fatalistic and brilliant antidote to the glamorous super spies and swinging swagger that were swirling around London in the mid-sixties. Excellent support is offered too. Claire Bloom makes a quirky choice of romantic interest ("She offered me free love. At the time, that was all I could afford") whilst the likes of Robert Hardy, Sam Wanamaker, Cyril Cusack and Michael Hordern are all tangled up in the intrigue. There's even a cheeky cameo from Bernard Lee! The pick of the support comes from Oskar Werner as Mundt's Machiavellian second in command though.

Yet all fall into place behind the immense figure of Burton. From the bleak, frigid opening sequence in the shadow of the Berlin Wall to the soul deadening revelations of the final reels he dominates this psychologically gripping political thriller.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Transformers (2007)
6/10
Good and Bad but never Ugly
28 July 2007
Transformers, for me, is a film that veers somewhere between the absolutely spectacular and the cringe-worthy, the predictable and the plain bad.

First of all, the good things. Transformers, in all likelihood, contains the best action sequences that you will see all year. They are as bold and exciting and as crazy as anything in Michael Bay's career. The opening assault on the desert base is fantastic and the final forty five minutes that takes the action from the Hoover dam to the very heart of the city is sustained on pure adrenalin.

Alongside this, if it doesn't pick up awards for its effects come Oscar season it will be a crime. There's a fantastic sequence in which Optimus Prime transforms before our very eyes in near slow-motion and we get to see every piston and bolt and panel twisting into shape. For that alone it's breathtaking. Similarly, the Transformers are as real and believable as King Kong was eighteen months. If Peter Jackson was rightly lauded for breathing such humanity into a giant living breathing ape, then Bay should be afforded even greater credit for the enthusing his giant robots with such lifelike traits and dignity. My only complaint would be the lack of Megatron until the final thirty minutes!

As well as this, there is a performance that stands out as well. Although much attention has been drawn to Shia LeBeof (who I shall reluctantly come to later), the real standout, for me, came from Josh Duhamel. Admittedly he didn't have his limits stretched in the role of Captain Lennox but what he did have to do he did extremely well. Perhaps the biggest compliment that I can pay him is to say that he reminded me of a Terminator/Aliens era Michael Biehn. A piece of casting that Bay no doubt intended but, nonetheless, Duhamel pulled it off charismatic aplomb.

Unfortunately, there is little more positive that I have to say. For whilst I thoroughly enjoyed Tranformers whilst Bay was doing what he does best, the whole film is let down by a lacklustre script, weak two-dimensional characters, cringe-worthy attempts at humour and a crushing level of predictability.

We've simply seen Transformers so many times before. I mentioned Aliens and The Terminator earlier on but this movie stomps on narrative territories that have been de rigeur in modern blockbusters since Independence Day. That is not to say that Bay has ripped anything off but simply that there is very little original here. Multiple narratives that pull together to include geeky boys, attractive and seemingly unattainable objects of affection, computer experts who are ignored, US military overwhelmed by higher civilisations (apart from a single hardcore special ops unit of course) and shady Government organisations kept secret from even the highest ranking politicians. Transformers is a positive melting pot of modern blockbuster clichés.

Duhamel aside, the casting doesn't particularly help either. Megan Fox simply seems to be included to satisfy the audiences objectification needs, the heavyweight Jon Voight simply coasts his way to another paycheck and Bay shoehorns in every single African-American stereotype into the roles occupied by Tyrese Gibson, Anthony Anderson and Bernie Mac. Whilst it is always a pleasure to see John Turturro on screen, you could practically see his tongue protruding from his cheek in almost every single scene! As for Shia LeBeof, I am mystified how his star is rising so quickly in Hollywood. I'm all for studio's moving away from the bland leading clones of the early 00's but he's like the terrifying result of genetic experiments of Corey Feldman's pickled liver. An irritating smart-ass who here appears to be regurgitating his performance in Constantine.

Which leads nicely to the films biggest problems. The script. Oh dear. Right from the offset the script hums with a mixture of cheese and sleaze. If I were a cynical man, I'd argue that half of the reason that the action is so effective is simply because we have been aching for Bay to show some mercy and shut the characters up! LeBeouf and Anderson are prominent offenders but the characters of Ron and Judy Witwicky are by far the most grating. Intended as comic relief no doubt but ultimately an embarrassing instrument of torture. Like the Levensteins dumbed down and living under the Witness Protection Scheme. One can only presume that any sequel will have Alyson Hannigan returning from band camp to win Sam back from Mikaela!

Indeed, it's the moments in which Bay is trying to be self-consciously funny that really grate. There are some humorous exchanges that genuinely do work ("I'm gonna count to five"... "I'm gonna count to three") but when Bay steps out of his comfort zone the results often induce uncomfortable seat-squirming. The extended sequence in which the Autobots "hide out" in the Witwicky's back garden is the case in point. Heavy-handed, laboured and below even cartoonish. Transformers is, unfortunately, riven with such moments.

I left the cinema last night with the same mixture of satisfaction and disappointment that I felt when I watched King Kong. There is a lot to enjoy about Transformers and if you are looking for big, dumb fun then this film ticks all the boxes. However, be warned, there is a lot of dumb, not-so-fun, small talk to wade through too.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Queen Kelly (1932)
9/10
A notorious and lusty melodrama that is uneven, excessive and yet strangely compulsive.
14 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
One of the most mythic productions in Hollywood history, the story behind Queen Kelly has left a legacy that still, even today, intrigues film historians. For many, it could well be the most famous incomplete film of all time. A lavish romantic epic planned to weigh in at thirty reels (approximately five hours) that would be financed by the father of a future US President (Joseph Kennedy), directed by one the greatest auteurs of his age (Erich von Stroheim) and provide a definitive showcase vehicle for it's ambitious producer/star Gloria Swanson. Yet such was the acrimony and furore surrounding the films collapse, Kennedy reeled away from the industry never to return, von Stroheim (tragically) never directed a major Hollywood production and Swanson's star soon began to fade. Or should that be, her "pictures got small"!

Indeed! Such is the fascination of Queen Kelly that Billy Wilder used it in his own merciless critique of the film industry, Sunset Boulevard. Yep. That's right. The film that Norma Desmond (Swanson) and her butler Max (von Stroheim) watch in her decaying mansion... That's Queen Kelly! Now that is what I call satire!!!

However, from amidst the wreckage of incomplete scenes and a Shakespearean alternative ending (After von Stroheim was removed, Swanson employed future Citizen Kane Gregg Toland cinematographer to tack on a semblance of a denouement in order to at least salvage something that could be released - a futile effort as von Stroheim owned the rights to the screenplay and blocked it) emerges around 100 minutes of luscious, decadent cinema that, at times, approaches something close to genius.

The story is pure romantic melodrama. A love triangle between a handsome but sexually voracious young Prince (lustily played by Walter Byron) , a jealous and insane Queen (outrageously played Seema Owen) and a young, orphaned convent girl, Kelly (Gloria Swanson, herself). The Prince and the Queen he loathes are due to wed, yet both her status and his fear of her violent fits of pique holds him reluctantly to her... Although it doesn't stop his drunken dalliances with the local prostitutes! Yet, whilst out with his cavalry on parade he meets Kelly and they fall in love at first sight. He whisks her away from her convent and brings her to his luxurious rooms at the palace and woos her. However, the Queen walks into the room at the moment of consummation and explodes with rage. She puts the Prince under house arrest before driving Kelly out of the palace whilst flogging her with a riding crop! Bereft, Kelly leaps from a tower into a river below.

This is where the story breaks asunder. Swanson's abrupt, enforced close see's the Prince freed only to arrive at the convent to find Kelly drowned. In his despair, he kills himself in front of her plinth. Von Stroheim's vision embraced Kelly being rescued, joining her dying Aunt in the German East Indies to run a brothel and being forced into marriage to a sleazy, lecherous pimp (Tully Marshall)... Only for her Prince to track her down years later. Not that it got that far!

It was the gruesome, deeply disturbing wedding sequence that finally brought Queen Kelly crashing to a halt. No more footage remains after this point. Already containing enough material to give the censors a heart attack (Seema Owen is virtually naked throughout the film and the Prince's sexual forays are barely disguised), von Stroheim's perverse change of direction and attention to almost squalid detail finally convinced Swanson that her project would never, ever pass the censors of the day. With costs spiralling, she called her financiers and von Stroheim was removed.

What now remains is the fascinating, lusty and wildly decadent corpse of a decaying, subversive fairy tale. A bizarre cinematic cross between Hans Christian Anderson and The Marquis de Sade! The directors attention to detail and elegant, regal sets seem almost at odds with the lurid (almost ludicrous) potboiler storyline and the wildly hedonistic performances from not only Owen and Marshall but also of the actors within the Queens court and from Rae Daggett as a prostitute called Coughdrops. Yet, somehow, Queen Kelly enchants. Bewitches. There's a real sultriness running throughout and a distinctly European sense of liberal humour that anticipates the films of Joseph Sternberg and Marlene Dietrich a couple of years later. Most of all though, Swanson's performance is fabulous. A real breathing counterpoint to camp excesses around her. Her terror at the wedding sequence is absolutely striking, as is the fear and subsequent heartbreak as she is discovered in the bed of her already betrothed paramour. Similarly, her moments of supposed penance in which she kneels at the alter of the chapel instead prays for another moment with the Prince is electric. What is most admirable of all, however, is her ability to find at a sexual knowingness beneath her genuine innocence.

Is Queen Kelly a lost masterpiece? I'd say it just falls short. Just. Whether a completed version would have been will be forever open to debate. What von Stroheim and Swanson do deliver is wild, vivid, fantastical, lusty melodrama that is uneven, excessive and yet strangely compulsive.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Top Gun 2: MiGalodon
26 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
In the late 1990's as the wonder of the new millennium was closing in fast, countless film fans across the rapidly expanded intranet super highway were pondering just one question on message boards around the globe... Whatever happened to Pete "Maverick" Mitchell after his heroics in Top Gun?

It was a question that only one man could answer. Hugely influential art-house director David Worth. He was the natural choice. An auteur of biblical vision to whom such square Hollywood concepts as narrative, coherent dialogue and editing were little more than antiquated film making tools used by wannabe hack has-beens such as Spielberg and Scorsese. Worth intended to lead cinema into the 21st century with the movie equivalent of the nuking of Nagasaki.

And boy did he succeed!

Picking up five years after the end of Top Gun, Pete Mitchell is now working as a life guard in Mexico after being dishonourably discharged for flagrant homo-eroticism and tupping Kelly McGillis. The shame has forced him to change his name to "Ben Carpenter" but the old Maverick spirit has not been diminished. He may have a stretch of beach to protect but bucking the man has never been an issue with this man. In any sense of the phrase. Just ask his new "bitch". In the first five minutes Mitchell/Carpenter has gone hunting lobster in flagrant contravention of code 37A of the lifeguards rules of engagement.

Yet this is just setting the scene of what is to come. He may have seen a MiG28 do a 4g negative dive but nothing could have prepared him for the Megalodon.... A giant prehistoric shark with very big but easily detachable teeth, the ability to thrash on the surface at the depth of 1,500ft and that sounds like my Gran slurping soup when it is munching on stoned Mexican party revellers. A terrifying eating machine from the depths of the ocean. A MiGalodon if you will. Now it's cruising his beach like a Navy Flyer cruises Soho and he's got to stop it... fast.

Yet this isn't a job he can do alone. He needs to see the light first. Enter Cataline Stone, natural historian in the Lara Croft mode. He likes her a lot. She gives him a smile. He gives her his extremely rare shark tooth for free. What's more, she brings along a couple of cronies; Friedman and Davis. Friedman is an "assman". Mitchell likes him too. If you say it quick enough it sounds like "Iceman". Obviously. With an excess of brain, he desperately needs brawn to take this "motherfucker" down. There's only one man to turn to. Chuck Rampart. Another ex-navy man with his own yellow submarine and a torpedo stashed away for a rainy day. Chuck knows Maverick from his navy days. "He's got good instincts" he tells his friend. Maverick just wants to be his wingman sometime! "Bull-fucking-shit" Rampart bellows later on. It's a match made in retro 1980's heaven.

Which leads me perfectly on to the true genius of this film. For where as Top Gun was simply a high-octane, high-concept thrill ride, Shark Attack 3: Megalodon is that and so much more... Operating on a far more profound, deeply theological level. For, when stripped down, what David Worth is really offering here is a fully realised metaphor about the battle between Heaven and Hell. An eternal biblical tale translated into a roistering, perfectly crafted hit of 21st century carnage.

Maverick is now a Christ figure. A man-God descended from the clouds to once again do battle with the relentless beast from the depths in a battle for the souls he watches over. The devil himself being drawn from the trenches of darkness by the greed and the avarice of these very men. Men who reject this ancient beings very existence in this cynical religion mocking modern age. When Maverick offers to takes Cataline home to eat her pussy, he's actually purging her of her earthly sins and filling her with the love of God in order to prepare her for the day of judgement. It's a beautiful metaphor played out in Heavenly soft focus. Their faith is fully realised in the lighting of candles. Even Mavericks choice of pseudonym, "Carpenter", points audiences towards this daring, provocative and timeless subtext.

And who better to play the Son of God/Pete "Maverick" Mitchell than John "Any Dream Will Do" Barrowman? An actor of extraordinary depth and shiny white teeth. It's a compelling performance played with charisma and sincerity that not only captures the mannerisms of Tom Cruise's original performance (check out his reaction to the Goose-like death of new buddy Esai 'Sy') but also channels the holy spirit of our saviour Jesus Christ throughout.

This perfectly realised performance coupled with the inspired invention and genius of David Worth makes Shark Attack 3: Megalodon the first true cinematic masterpiece since Coleman Francis gifted us The Beast Of Yukka Flats way back in 1961.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pursued (1947)
9/10
Truly original with a tough yet poetic style. A must-see for all Mitchum fans.
26 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Released in the same year as the seminal double whammy of "Crossfire" and "Out Of The Past", Mitchum cemented his burgeoning reputation with his tortured performance in this brooding psychological western directed by Raoul Walsh.

Jed Rand (Mitchum) is a man tormented by a childhood memory of traumatic violence that he can never fully grasp. Orphaned as a young boy, he is discovered cowering in a cellar by a strong minded cattle woman, "Ma" Callum (Judith Anderson), who flee's her homestead with young Jed and her own two children in tow. She brings him up as part of her own family, intent on harbouring him from the horrors of his past. Yet as years go by, Jed's restlessness and constant sense that the shadowy figures from the recesses of his mind are doggedly reaching after him slowly begin to consume their relationship. Indeed, "Ma" may hold the key to unlocking his dark secret.

Jed has a strong effect on the Callum family as they grow together. A deep love slowly blossoms between him and his step-sister, Thorley (Teresa Wright), but his step-brother Adam (John Rodney) gradually begins to deeply resent his presence; something that is twisted into something even darker and more hateful when Jed returns home a war hero. Similarly, the sinister one-armed figure of Callum kinsman, Grant (Dean Jagger), constantly lingers on the periphery of Jed's life, seemingly orchestrating his enemies against him. As the secrets and lies begin to chafe away at the bonds between them, only the inevitable violence and conflict will bring the truth crashing down upon them.

Told mostly in flashback, "Pursued" offers a twisted, noiresque vision of the west. The family turmoil plays out like a dust choked Greek tragedy; full of tragic unspoken truths, deep-rooted jealousy and hatred, sibling rivalry and an almost incestuous love between the three children. The death and violence that chases Jed throughout his life until his moment of revelation does not confront him head-on but instead through unseen rifle fire, unexpected pot-shots and shadowy figures that come to kill him in the dead of night. Even Jed's fractured memories are conveyed with flashes of light, incoherent background noise and a pair of clattering spurs seemingly dancing before the terrified childs face.

Mitchum's performance is excellent. Brooding and manly, only occasionally hinting at the vulnerability beneath. It's almost impossible to take your eyes off him at times. Judith Anderson and Teresa Wright both match him in their key scenes too whilst the ever-watchable Dean Jagger is on fine form; playing it mean to the bone throughout. In fact, of the central players, only newcomer John Rodney really struggles to hit the right notes throughout.

"Pursued" is a fine, fine film. Truly original with a tough yet poetic style, it is beautifully photographed, erotically charged and masterfully directed by the great Raoul Walsh. This is a must-see for all Mitchum fans.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Thunder Road (1958)
7/10
A loving homage to fast cars and rocket fuel whiskey.
19 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Robert Mitchum's most personal film (he produced, wrote the screenplay and even co-penned the films two songs) is a strange little bird. A lurid, freewheeling thriller about the illicit moonshine business that is bursting with what audiences nowadays regard as all the essential ingredients of a cult classic and one that would, over the ten years following its release, garner the unofficial crown of "the Gone With The Wind of the drive-in".

Mitchum plays Lucas Doolin; a hard-nosed war-veteran and moonshine runner who sees his fearless ferrying between the illegal still communities of the mountains and their buyers in Memphis as an individual right earned through the ways of his pioneering ancestors. However, his daring forays and reputation for avoiding the law have attracted the attention of FBI Treasury Agent Troy Barrett (Gene Barry) whilst violence is thrust into his path by a ruthless mob connected smuggler, Kogan (Jacques Aubuchon), who is determined to muscle into his business. Soon Doolin is trapped between the two as he endeavours to take on one more run.

Not that trouble only lies on the road itself. Doolin is equally determined to see that his devoted younger brother Robin (a role originally intended for Elvis Presley but eventually played by his own son, James) does not follow him into the whisky running business whilst he is emotionally torn between his life in the mountains, personified by the love of his parents and an adoring girl-next-door (Sandra Knight), and his desire to live in the wider World with his jazz chanteuse lover (Keely Smith).

Mitchum is superb in the lead role. Whether tearing up the back roads in his souped up Ford 57 or casually flicking a cigarette into a hoodlums face, he remains achingly cool throughout... Pre-empting the likes of Steve McQueen by a good ten years. Yet there's plenty going on underneath too. A listlessness and loneliness that informs his every action. An underlying worldliness too. Although never clearly revealed, Doolins war-time experiences are referenced throughout. Experiences that have wrought a nihilistic streak not dissimilar to that found in much of Mitchums own late 40's/early 50's noir works.

With Mitchum dominating, the rest of the cast are a little less convincing; Jazz singer Keely Smith is particularly vacant (Mitchum hiring her on the wayward premise that "anyone who could sing a lyric like her must be able to act") whilst bull-necked Aubuchon plays it large as the surly hood. Knight is sweet as the lovelorn local gal but is all but consumed when faced with Mitchum's effortless underplaying. Young James fares a little better though. Although clearly inheriting more of his fathers' looks than his acting talent, there is nonetheless a palpable chemistry between them that translates to the screen. Barry is suitably earnest as the Government cop doggedly chasing Doolins tail. "Catch me… If you can" Mitchum goads in one low key skirmish; immediately bringing to mind the Spielberg film of the same name some forty something years later.

Yet, under the eye of maverick director Arthur Ripley, this ragged, distinctively unvarnished assortment of b-players compliments Thunder Road's offbeat, earthy style rather well. Whilst it may not be a "great" film, its reputation as a sub-culture classic is thoroughly deserved. Devoid of any pretence yet capturing the very essence of the Easy Rider generation a full decade before the cultural revolution of the late 60's. Not that Mitchum would have cared one jot. For him this film was a labour of love. A homage to fast cars, rocket fuel whiskey and the independent spirit of the deep South. As such, Thunder Road is a roaring success.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Judge Priest (1934)
7/10
A taste of things to come.
5 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
John Ford's often whimsical view of 19th century mid-west America is on full display here in this comic reflection about, as the authors prologue puts it, "the familiar ghosts of my own boyhood".

The immensely likable Will Rogers is the eponymous hero of the title. A small town judge who has sat on the local bench since the civil war ended without necessarily having all the right credentials to do so. Indeed, as Priest himself puts it, during his tenure he has tended to follow the spirit of the law rather than the letter of it! Never-the-less, his Confederate war-stories and his folksy approach to justice (and life in general) make him a much loved figure amongst the community... Much to the chagrin of an over-orating state senator (Berton Churchill) who is eyeing his position enviously!

Things are further complicated by the fact that Priests young lawyer nephew (Tom Brown) is caught in something of an innocent love triangle with the senators daughter (Rochelle Hudson) and his own childhood sweetheart(Anita Louise). When the latter unknowingly becomes the catalyst for what soon becomes the towns latest trial it is up for the Judge to get to the bottom of the matter before an innocent man - well, half-innocent anyway - is sent to gaol!

Of course, the courtroom drama isn't really what matters here. It is Fords heavily mythologised evocation of 1890's Kansas life that really takes centre stage. A laconic, gentry led backwater full of Southern ideals where the struggle of the Confederacy is idealised and celebrated and a town where a love of fishing, a tale of gallantry or the playing "Dixie" outside of a courtroom can swing a jury in a man's favour. A place where white men and singing Negroes happily co-exist as if the civil war never really changed anything anyway!

Yet, despite this somewhat outmoded (and superficially un-PC) rose-tinted view of mid-west life, Judge Priest succeeds in presenting itself with such charm and good-natured humour that it is almost lovable. Indeed, whilst Ford presents this as a heavily romanticised reminiscence he also plays it as a delightfully knowing satire too. To this end, the director makes particularly good use of the legendary (and hugely controversial) black comic Stepin Fetchit – manically lampooning every "coon" stereotype in the book.

Ford would go on to hone the kind of bawdy, knockabout humour and lively stock of characters found here almost constantly throughout his career. As such, Judge Priest may not quite be amongst the great directors very best work but, with the help of the talented Rogers and Fetchit, it is still an extremely enjoyable entry upon his illustrious CV.
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Quiet Man (1952)
10/10
Fist-fights and blarney! What more can you want?
5 April 2007
"Well, then. Now. I'll begin at the beginnin'. A fine soft day in the spring, it was, when the train pulled into Castletown, three hours late as usual, and himself got off. He didn't have the look of an American tourist at all about him. Not a camera on him; what was worse, not even a fishin' rod."

So begins "The Quiet Man", John Fords labour of love that turned a twee tale of Irish blarney into one of cinema's most passionate romances.

When the Irish-American boxer Sean Thornton (John Wayne) kills an opponent in the ring, he returns home to the small rural village of his birth where he immediately purchases his old family cottage... An act that leads to him incurring the wrath of local squire Red Danaher (Victor McLagen). Their feud is escalated when Sean meets Danahers feisty, beautiful sister Mary-Kate (Maureen O'Hara) and they quickly embark upon a tempestuous romance. The assorted locals conspire in this courtship but the stubborn Danaher continues to block the road to happiness.

With such flamboyant stock character actors as Ward Bond, Barry Fitzgerald and Mildred Natwick on typically barnstorming form, what Ford presents here is a loving, charming depiction of the whimsical rural Ireland of his imagination. An idealised homeland full of larger than life characters, strong women, hard-drinking men and innocent parochial religion and a place where and all disputes can be happily resolved with a fistfight. And boy what a fistfight!

Words such as "lyrical" and "mythic" are often applied to the directors work and this was probably never more apparent than here. From the first sighting of Mary-Kate in the tree encircled glade through to the final secretive whisper between man and wife, there can be few films as brimming with undiluted joie de vivre as "The Quiet Man".
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fort Apache (1948)
10/10
One of Ford and Fonda's very best.
5 April 2007
The first feature in Fords majestic cavalry trilogy.

Colonel Thursday (Henry Fonda) is the martinet officer who begrudgingly takes command of the remote western cavalry outpost of the title. Resenting this move sideways, Thursday slowly begins to alienate his men with his strict pedantic adherence to discipline, class prejudice and dangerous lack of understanding of Indian warfare. This particularly brings him into conflict with Captain York (a steadfast John Wayne), a veteran officer who realises that Thursdays desire for honour and glory will inevitably end in folly. Sure enough, Thursday decides that his route back east lies with the duplicitous capture of Cochise and his band of Apaches who have been forced off their reservations by an unscrupulous agent.

A veiled, lyrical take on the demise of Custer, Ford ensures that the austere machinations of Colonel Thursday are tempered by the warmth and wit of day-to-day cavalry community life whilst a charming romance between Thursdays daughter and a young lieutenant (Shirley temple and John Agar) allows not only a glimpse into Thursdays class prejudice but also gives further evidence of his paternalistic sensibilities.

Co-starring Ford regulars such as Victor McLagen, Ward Bond and George O'Brien, Fort Apache is an absolute delight. Shot in a stark black and white, it works both as an intelligent contemplation upon what constitutes leadership and honour and glory as well as a wonderfully paced character study. Either way, there is little doubt that Fonda dominates. For all of his buttoned up resentment and misplaced pomposity, his strangely charismatic Thursday is certainly not a character for whom one can feel no sympathy or even dislike. Whether sparring with Wayne or leading his men into the jaws of death, he paradoxically remains a man to admire and man to pity.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Babel (I) (2006)
7/10
If only Inárittu had kept his own message simple!
23 January 2007
A grieving American couple (Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett) are holidaying in Morocco when their coach is hit by a stray bullet fired from a rifle belonging to the teenage son (Boubker Ait El Caid) of a local farmer. Meanwhile an immigrant nanny (Adriana Barraza) makes a return to Mexico for her sons wedding with her two young charges illegally in tow. And in Japan, a disturbed deaf-mute adolescent girl (Rinko Kikuchi) trawls the streets and clubs of Tokyo awkwardly seeking a fervent sexual awakening.

Alejandro González Inárritu's Oscar contender Babel is a strange work. A multi-stranded contemplation on language barriers and cultural prejudices set audaciously across three continents. Four far-reaching tales spun (somewhat haphazardly) around a single gunshot.

Mechanics-wise, Babel is almost flawless; a better edited film has not been seen all year and the photography is stunning. From the unforgiving plains of Morocco through the tawdry, tequila fuelled wedding party in Guadalupe to the neon emblazoned city-scape of Tokyo, cinematographer Rodrigo Prieto captures both mankind and nature at its most beautiful and its most desolate. Similarly, the use of sound is almost as pristine.

On top of this, the acting is exemplary from a wide ranging ensemble cast. Pitt, in the grips of despair, displays a gravitas that has only been hinted at in the past. El Caid shows a maturity way beyond his years. Barraza cuts a tragic figure as the nanny whose conflicted maternal instincts (and a bitingly loco Gael Garcia Bernal) drive her towards her fate. As the isolated teen grasping for male attention through increasingly self-degrading acts of exposure, Kikuchi is nothing short of a revelation.

So where does it all go wrong?

Lacking the startling vibrancy of Amores Perros and the gut-wrenching emotional body-blows of 21 Grams, Babel is modern cinema of biblical pretensions rendered partially impotent by an infuriatingly detached script that piles contrivance upon ludicrous contrivance until it buckles under its own self-important weight. As the stories continue to run parallel, the tenuous point of contact between the stories lends a jarringly absurd tone to the weighty proceedings. An unnecessary and slightly burdensome link.

Inárittu's determination to illicit a dramatic kick in the last third also backfires. Irrationality and melodrama threaten to overwhelm as the director attempts to slot his pieces into place for their final revelations. The previously restrained, character motivated film lurches in an unwelcome tangent as if all before it were a charade. A sense of desperation enters proceedings and, although somewhat rescued by the touching closing scene, the damage is unfortunately done.

What is left is a jigsaw that doesn't quite fit. Or rather three jigsaws that simply do not go together. Each strand engages on their own specific terms yet the cohesion between them is simply lacking and feels forced and ultimately diminishes from the whole. Which is a shame as Babel clearly had a lot to say both on international barriers/relations and upon our isolation and lack of understanding in a World of technology and, ironically, communication. If only Inárittu had just kept his own message simple!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A gentle early short from DW Griffith.
28 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Inspired by a poem by Charles Kingsley, this is a touching tale of love lost and found from D.W. Griffith.

Set in a small fishing community, a young wife says farewell to her husband as he sets out to sea. However, his small boat is lost and she presumes him to be drowned. Years pass by and their daughter grows up to find love and to marry whilst all of the time the "widow" continues to grieve. However, her husband did not die but was washed up upon the shore with amnesia further up the coast. As she stares out upon the abyss that took her love, he once again sets out to sea.

Charming in its simplicity and boasting some crisp photography, The Unchanging Sea is a gentle early short in which Griffith (like in his masterpiece Broken Blossoms) imbues his love story with a tenderness and minimalism not often associated with the often histrionic early silent cinema.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Bunuel distills a nightmare.
27 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Despite running for just sixteen minutes, Luis Bunuel's surrealist vision has become one of the most important and influential films ever made.

In collaboration with the artist Salvador Dali, Bunuel bombards the viewer with a barrage of seemingly abstract and thoroughly harrowing images. I say "seemingly abstract" because although there is little or no narrative to the work, Bunuel builds his images to form a stinging comment on man and his values, morals and carnal desires.

The opening moment of a man slicing a woman's eyeball with a razor is still sickeningly shocking today and probably remains the films most enduring image. A cold, brutal moment it directly assaults the audience (in both representation and in reality) and sets out the nightmarish tone of what follows. We see a man with ants crawling all over his hands (representing a desire to murder) whilst later, as if to emphasise the burden of society we carry, we see him dragging a piano with a dead donkey inside it and shacked to a pair of clergyman and tablets of the ten commandments. Image upon image upon image pile on top each. A severed hand in the street, a hermaphrodite run down by a car, a woman having her breasts groped, books transforming into guns. Bunuel distills a nightmare and creates a World of fear and horror.

This film is not to everybody's taste. It is nasty, disturbing and, like most surrealistic works, it can be interpreted as anywhere between artful genius to a pretentious attempt to shock. I obviously veer towards the former. However, what nobody can deny is that Un Chien Andalou was utterly unique in the way it challenged cinematic conventions and, above all, that the audience will be left feeling the power of the imagery long after the film has ended
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The first landmark of American cinema.
27 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Considered by some to be the first ever western, Edwin S. Porters 1902 short is arguably the first landmark movie of American cinema.

By modern standards it is incredibly simplistic. A group of outlaws burst into a telegraph office and force the operator to send a false message before tying him up and proceeding to hold up a train and its passengers. They escape but the telegraphed operator is discovered and a posse gives chase, culminating in a gun battle finale.

What set this film apart at its time is the use of narrative to tell a story. Following Lumieres' Le Voyage Dans La Lune the previous year, Porter crafts an enjoyable tale that set standards for what was to follow in their respective genre. Hold ups, gunmen, posses, horseback chases, shoot-outs they're all here and tied together coherently and with the confidence to not simply follow the outlaw protagonists from A to B. The film may not boast special effects or any intellectual layers, but it did set a template of basic cinematic language. Similarly, the final shot of a gunman blasting directly into the camera* is an iconic moment that brought audiences directly into the firing line.

The Great Train Robbery may not seem much more than a curiosity to some now, but it is more than that. Simple but enjoyable and a must for all film lovers.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Humanity And Nature
27 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Directed by Robert J. Flaherty, this moving feature about the hardships faced by an Inuit family is one of the seminal films of the silent era and brought about his reputation as "the father of the documentary".

Although only having spent a few weeks out in the icy wilderness, Flaherty presents us with a series of beautiful vignettes that capture the absolute essence of the daily struggles for survival that Nanook and his people face. The audiences follows them on their long treks in the constant search for food; picking their way over floes and towers of ice in order to catch a fish or hunt seal and walrus. Yet amongst the hardships and privations, Flaherty also allows glimpses of the tenderness and love within the family. The joy of a meal, the warmth of a shelter, the fascinating communal construction of an igloo. The humanity of the Inuits is rendered with heartwarming affection.

However, often setting his subjects against the bleak yet stunning vistas of unending snow, Flaherty leaves the audience in no doubt that the environment is as much the star. Some critics argue that Nanook is not a true documentary as Flaherty staged some scenes and directed his subjects. However, these critics are wildly missing the point. Nanook Of the North is as much about the barren landscape that Nanook and his clan wander. At its centre, this film is the age old tale of the battle between man and nature.

This is none more evident of the films wonderful final scenes. Caught in a blizzard, the family are forced to find refuge in an abandoned igloo. A happy respite together from the wild storm outside. This scene has been given extra poignancy with the tragic knowledge that Nanook and his family perished in such a blizzard a few months after the film was released.

It's a sad footnote to a tremendous film. A masterpiece of film making that inspires and enthrals and, most importantly, celebrates nature, life and humanity.
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Way Down East (1920)
An old fashioned melodrama with a universal message
23 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
D.W. Griffith followed up the majestic Broken Blossoms with this epic melodrama.

The subtitle, "A Simple Story Of Plain People", tells only half the story. Way Down East is a parable with simple values told on a bravura scale. At the time of release the story Griffith offered seemed out of kilter with a society on the cusp of a decade of decadence. However, the Victorian messages of tolerance, charity, understanding and forgiveness seemed more pertinent than ever. And as much as the film is an affirmation of love, honest living and general goodness, it is also takes a swipe at the puritanical aspects of Christianity. It became one of the highest grossing films of the 1920's.

The story is one of hardship and of suffering. Anna Moore (Lillian Gish) is a naive country girl sent to stay as a "poor relation" with her cousins in the city where she falls under the influence of a cad Lennox Sanderson (deliciously played Lowell Shermann) who sets up a false wedding and tricks the infatuated Anna into sleeping with him. Inevitably, Anna quickly falls pregnant and Sanderson absconds leaving her to face her fate alone. And it is a terrible fate. She returns home but her mother soon dies and then, in one of the films most poignant scenes, the illegitimate newborn child that will be her curse dies in her arms in a boarding house. It is soon realised that Anna has no husband and she becomes a pariah; unable to find work and told to leave her board.

She is forced to wander to find work and, finally, she stumbles across a farm owned by the puritanical Squire Bartlett. At first he turns Anna away, but his wife speaks to him of Christian scripture and they take her in. She lives a blameless, hardworking life with the Bartletts and slowly finds herself falling in love with the Bartletts son David (Richard Barthelmess) but the cross she bears prevents her from giving in to her feelings. This is only amplified when she discovers that Sanderson owns an estate adjacent to the Bartletts and he puts pressure on her to leave. However, her secret is only eventually when she is recognised by her old landlady. She is cast out into the blizzard by the Squire but not before she exposes Sanderson (who is present) as the architect of her doom. Wandering into the freezing night she finally passes out on a drifting glacier leading to one of the most exciting and jaw-dropping climaxes of Silent cinema.

Way Down East was a labour of love for Griffith. The photography is some of the finest he was to ever produce whilst he waited for the seasons to change and for nature to flourish in order to capture and represent the changing moods and emotions of his characters. Similarly, the final moments on the ice floes of the Mamaroneck river is one of the great location sequences. Gish herself (who died in 1993 aged 99) never regained full feeling in her hand from having it draped in the icy water for so long.

This film is open to accusations of being old fashioned, but I feel anybody who levels such claims would be missing the point. This is melodrama of grand proportions and it carries within it messages and morals that are universal and timeless. And when these messages are carried by an actress as mesmerising and as dignified as Lillian Gish then, as Way Down East undoubtedly proves, no amount of generational drift can render them obsolete.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
D.W. Griffith shows cinema it's soul.
23 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Eschewing the epic grandeur of his previous works like Birth Of A Nation and Intolerance, Broken Blossoms is an exquisitely crafted tragedy from D.W. Griffith. Whilst perhaps not his most important film, it could very possibly be his most perfect.

Heartwarming and heartbreaking in equal measure, it is the story of an all too brief innocent love between two broken souls amongst unbearable poverty and brutality. Richard Barthelmess plays Chen (The Yellow Man), a noble soul full of peace and love who, as the film opens, leaves his homeland to spread the word of Buddha to "white barbarians" in England. However, the film cuts forward a few years and we find Chen living amidst the squalor of Londons docklands. His hope crushed by the drudgery and vice that surrounds him he flits between his small shop and an opium den where he loses himself in gambling and drugs.

There is, however, one ray of light. Lucy (Liilian Gish), an illegitimate fifteen year old girl who suffers daily abuse at the hands of her brutal, prizefighting father (Donald Crisp). Unable to smile after years of torment, she shuffles through the streets past Chens window everyday, stopping at the opposite shop to look at the flowers she longs to be able to afford. When she returns home she is treated like a slave in constant fear of her fathers wrath. One night he goes goes too far and beats her to within an inch of her life. She manages to crawl out of her hovel only to collapse inside Chens doorway. Their fate is now set. He treats her with the gentleness that she has never known whilst she reignites the innocence in his heart. Yet, tragedy inevitably looms.

Such was the power of the romantic partnership Richard Barthelmess and Lillian Gish, they were to be drawn together again by Griffith in the following years Way Down East. Although modern audiences may raise eyebrows at the thought of an American actor playing a Chinese immigrant, these things must be seen in the context of their day. Besides, Barthelmess, with his slender good looks and sad eyes, perfectly captures the starved yearnings of Chen whilst the tenderness of his character is captured in his slow, graceful movements.

Yet it is Lillian Gish who is the revelation. Already a well known star under the guidance of Griffith, she raised the bar for screen acting to extraordinary heights in Broken Blossoms and once and for all confirmed herself as the greatest actress of the silent era; light years ahead of her contemporaries. Just watching her in this film is like watching a lesson in screen acting. Not a gesture is wasted as she haunts the mazey alleyways of East London whilst in dreamlike soft focus close up she radiates beauty and charm through her grimy, downtrodden appearance. Her final screen moments capture perhaps the defining image of defiance in the face of adversity.

Besides the groundbreaking acting, I could recommend Broken Blossoms for so many different reasons. The soft camera-work gives procedures an ethereal, dream like quality whilst the framing of both close-ups and the interior sets is exemplary. Almost every frame drips with care and attention to detail. The film also riffs numerously on dark wit and irony. At one point a zealous minister tells Chen that his brother "leaves for China tomorrow to convert the heathen" whilst later a policeman talks of "only 40,000 casualties this week" in a reference to the Great War. On top of this there is the brave representation inter-racial love and subsequent all destroying racism. Similarly the brutal scenes of child abuse ("Please daddy, don't") are terrifying as Lucy cowers in the corner begging for mercy.

This film really is a complete work from one of the masters of American cinema at his very peak. If Birth Of A Nation showed the World the vast possibilities of this still new art form, then Broken Blossoms proved it could have a soul too.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An expression of cinema in its purest form.
23 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
F.W. Murnau often spoke of his belief in pure cinema. The capacity to tell a story visually without the need for words. The Last Laugh is probably the closest he came to achieving this ideal. It is a film of exquisite beauty that tells an incredibly moving story without the use of inter-title cards or "dialogue" to propel it. Well, there is one which the studio inflicted upon Murnau when it ordered the addition of a rather misplaced happy ending. Something I shall come to later.

The tale is a simple but painful one. An ageing, pompous porter at a high class hotel (Emil Jannings) finds his World falling apart when he is demoted to the position of lavatory attendant. Stripped of his grand doorman's uniform and his pride, the porters life disintegrates as the humiliation of his new, lesser position dawns on him. Feeling unable to return to his home in such shame, he steals the uniform which means so much to him (and gives him an inflated sense of his own importance) and then proceeds to live a lie with his family and his neighbours by wearing it to and from work each day. Of course, such secrets can't stay hidden forever and eventually the awful truth is discovered. Returning to his apartment that evening he endures the mockery of those neighbours he once strode proudly amongst and, most heartbreakingly of all, he is coldly rebuked by his family for the shame he has heaped upon them. By this time he is near cataclysmic and he returns to the hotel to finally return his uniform as a broken man.

This is where Murnau originally ended his tragic tale. And rightly so. The final images of a harrowed Jannings curled up motionless in a darkened lavatory fittingly capture the bleak reality of mans expendability and downward emotional spiral brought about by (false) pride. Yet the film does not end here. The studio insisted on a happy ending. As it is, the final fifteen minutes of the film completely jar with everything before. We learn through the films sole inter-title that the porter is left a vast inheritance by an eccentric millionaire who died in his arms and what follows is a sequence of opulent decadence as the now gentleman porter dines and entertains at the very hotel where he was previously employed.

It's an unfortunate way to close the film and completely unnecessary. For what Murnau presents us with in those crucial seventy minutes of the porters tragedy is up there amongst his best work. Of course Jannings is massive in the central role. The non-use of "dialogue" meant that he had to convey every thought and every emotion with sensitivity and clarity. His transformation over the course of the film from a wide shouldered, straight-backed almost militaristic figure to a decrepit, shuffling, wild eyed old man is a testament to his talents as well as the make up department. Yet, it is the stunning expressionist camera-work which dominates this film. Beautifully designed and lit sets are seeming haunted by the use of moving cameras that roll through the shadows and windows and across apartment blocks whilst cameraman Karl Freund strapped his camera to his chest in order to achieve the films revolutionary POV shots. Similarly, the use of multiple and smeared lenses add a wonderful sense of of distortion to the films innovative dream sequence as well as an ingenious hangover sequence also.

All in all, this is another fine achievement by one of the very few genuine geniuses of cinema. The studio imposed ending may jar more than slightly and some might find the story at worst a little weak or insignificant, but The Last Laugh is a film designed as an expression of Murnau's belief in imagery as a storytelling form. Something he achieves with undeniable success.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Metropolis (1927)
8/10
A film brimming with imagination and invention
23 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
One of the most visually arresting films of all time, Fritz Langs Metropolis is a sci-fi masterpiece that's scope and imagination have influenced almost all that have followed it. From Star Wars to Blade Runner and even to the likes of 1984 and V For Vendetta, the vast cityscapes and nightmarish dystopian vision of the future have set the template for generation after generation of writers and directors. Perhaps only Kubricks 2001: A Space Oddysey can claim to have such a profound influence within the genre.

Inspired by Langs first impression of the Manhattan skyline, Metropolis is a seemingly utopian city of immense architectural grandeur and towering skyscrapers. Those who live in this city lead an opulent, almost decadent lifestyle. They are the thinkers of society and they have almost all that they could desire. Yet deep underground below them live the workers; men and women who toil slavishly in unrelenting ten hours shifts in order to sustain the city above. It is a hellish existence that emphasises the two-tier society that has developed through the creation of this futuristic Tower of Babel.

The film centres around Freder (Gustav Frolich), the sensitive son of Joh Fredersen (Alfred Abel), the all-powerful Master of Metropolis. The young Freder becomes infatuated with a saintly worker woman named Maria (Brigitte Helm) and descends down into the depths to seek her out. However, once down amongst the slaves and oppressive machinery, Freder is appalled by the hardship and suffering that he witnesses. He pleads with his father to do something about the conditions yet is rebuked. So instead he goes down once again and, after taking over a workers agonising shift, he attends a meeting of workers where the raging discontent amongst them is clear. The only person keeping them from revolution is the elusive Maria herself, who speaks of peace and of finding a middle way by using the films lasting mantra...

"There can be no understanding between the hands and the brain unless the heart acts as mediator"

When Freder reveals himself, Maria believes she has found her mediator. Yet political machinations in the "utopia" above puts them in both in peril. Aware of the workers barely tempered disgruntlement, Joh Fredersen turns to his inventor friend Rotwang (Rudolph Klein-Rogge) to to kidnap Maria and to give a robot (or "machine-man") a likeness of her in order to instigate a rising amongst the Workers which he can subsequently crush once and for all. It's a dangerous game to play, especially as Rotwang is quite insane and harbours his own duplicitous desires to bring down Frederson and all he has built. As the revolt begins and the Workers city starts to flood it is left for Freder and Maria to lead the children left there to safety and to ultimately reunite the hands and the head.

Obviously the narrative is incredibly overblown and rather contrived, yet the story of the constant battle between the oppressors and the oppressed is a timeless one. This is never more apparent than Langs masterful blending of futuristic landscapes and machinery with surreal biblical, mythical and at times medieval imagery. The toil of the Workers is imaginatively illustrated in a sequence where they transform into slaves of the Pharaohs, whilst the heights of Metropolis itself are like opulent gardens belonging to Greek gods. The zenith of civilisation itself.

Metropolis truly is a film, brimming with verve, energy and an abundance of invention and imagination. The acting may clunk a little and the moral may lack subtlety, but Fritz Langs far-reaching vision, be it artistic or philosophical, never once dwindles whilst the the final rampage of the oppressed is as spectacular and as exciting as anything Hollywood has ever produced.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An oppressive and haunting study of insanity and the insatiable lust for power and glory.
13 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Perhaps the greatest work to have flourished out of the volatile love-hate relationship between director Werner Herzog and his intense and talismanic screen interpreter Klaus Kinski. Based on the fragmentary accounts of a futile expedition deep into the heart of the Amazonian rainforests by an army of Spanish conquistadors seeking to find the fabled city of El Dorado, the film is a haunting and oppressive study of insanity and the insatiable lust for power and glory.

Bogged down in the increasingly impenetrable jungle and with his troops suffering from exhaustion, Pizarro (Alejandro Repulles) sends forth a scouting party of his best men under the leadership of Don Pedro de Ursua (Ruy Guerra) down the river on rafts to reconnoitre the area and judge whether there is any point in leading his army any further. However, the expedition is hit with misfortune from the outset as one of the rafts is lost in rapids. Unable to return by the river, Ursua determines to lead his men back to camp through the dense jungle but is instead challenged by his ambitious second in command, Don Lope De Aguirre (Kinski), who leads a mutiny and installs a corpulent nobleman, Guzman (Peter Berling), as the new ruler of his separatist regime.

Driven by his desire to conquer the fabled city of gold, Aguirre leads his men further down the river to their inevitable doom on a giant raft which soon takes the appearance of a floating fortress. As they float deeper and deeper into the wilderness the band of soldiers find themselves not only under increasing attack from the unseen native enemy camouflaged amidst the wild river banks but torn apart by the presence of the now captive Ursua, who still retains the loyalty of some of the group. Dissent and fear set in, followed swiftly by hunger, fever, hallucinations and eventually madness until finally a now raving (and seemingly indestructible) Aguirre prowls alone on his raft surrounded by bloodstained corpses and a plague of monkeys.

Echoes of Joseph Conrads Heart Of Darkness resonate through this film. Indeed, the parallels between Aguirre and Kurtz are not to be overlooked. Charismatic, ruthless and egotistical men lured into insanity and delusions of grandeur by obsessions with power and glory. As well as this, Herzog tackles religious hypocrisy and weakness through the expeditions priest (Del Negro), whose piety drives him to spread the word of God, but who puts any morality to one side and sways with the breeze in the power struggle between Aguirre and A. Similarly the concept of nobility is treated with cynicism. At one point Guzman boasts of the the size of his new empire that surrounds him only to be cut down when Aguirre notes that not once have they found one piece of firm land capable of taking his weight.

A majestically paced masterpiece, Aguirre: The Wrath Of God is at once both vast and claustrophobic. Herzogs use of location and nature creates an oppressive and stagnant atmosphere where the beauty of the surroundings serves to makes the squalid quest for fame and empire all the more harrowing. The cast is faultless, the tensions from the arduous shoot etched deep into their performances. However, it is Kinski who dominates. His menacing presence towers over all around him, creating a complex and very human character who is monstrously pragmatic yet utterly corrupted by his ambition and the pursuit of a dream.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sunrise (1927)
10/10
One of the most beautiful pieces of cinema I've ever seen.
13 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Released just eleven days before the premiere of the first ever talkie, The Jazz Singer, F.W. Murnau's masterpiece is both one of the last great silent pictures of the age and probably the zenith of early expressionist cinema.

It's a simple tale, but in Murnau's masterful hands the film becomes a breathtaking and visually poetic fable of temptation and redemption. A simple and naive farmer, simply referred to in the film as The Man (George O'Brien) is seduced by a visiting Woman From The City (Margaret Livingstone), who convinces him to kill his loyal young Wife (an Oscar winning Janet Gaynor) by drowning her in the lake and making it look like an accident.

He almost goes through with his plan, but breaks down at the last minute as he realises his own wickedness and they spend the rest of the day in the city themselves, rediscovering the love they once shared so freely. On their return home across the lake disaster strikes.

The cinematography on this film is nothing short of sensational and is simply jaw dropping in its imagination. The film opens with a wonderful montage of people escaping from the city for the summer, whilst, later on, there is a beautiful shot of the two lovers walking through traffic that fades perfectly into a romantic countryside stroll and finally cuts back again. There's also an evocative dreamlike scene where The Man imagines himself drowning as water washes over him whilst lying on his bed. This camera trick is repeated a couple of scenes later as The Man becomes haunted, perhaps even possessed, by the figure of his lover as he struggles with his conscience.

On top of these, there are two beautiful long tracking camera movements early on. The first follows darkly vampish Woman Of The City walking through the small town, whilst the second (and even more impressive) sweeps along with The Man across the marshland as he heads for a riverside rendezvous with his lover.

My vocabulary isn't big enough to describe the beautiful brilliance of this film. As a piece of innovation, nothing came close to matching this until the arrival of Citizen Kane nearly fifteen years later. However, where this film really succeeds is in its soul. The scenes between O'Brien and Gaynor are both touching and heart-warming. It's a celebration good over bad, love over lust and ultimately of redemption in the wake of deceit.

It's certainly a simple tale, but sheer verve, beauty and heart with which it is told elevates it to something so much more powerful, compelling special. A truly magnificent achievement.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A Masterpiece
13 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Following up on his sparkling noiresque masterpiece Double Indemnity from the previous year, legendary director Billy Wilder shocked post-war audiences looking for escapism with this hard bitten and bleak look at alcoholism.

In an Oscar winning performance, Ray Milland plays Don Birnam, a frustrated writer whose chronic inability to stop drinking is slowly destroying his life and his relationships with those around him that care. Resentful of the fact that he living is a lie of an existence in flat provided by the generosity of his brother (Phillip Terry) and seething with self pity and disgust for having to rely on the emotional support of his long term socialite girlfriend, Helen (Jane Wyman), he spends his days battling his addiction, finding ingenious places in which to hide his booze and writing the openings to his never-to-be-finished novels.

As the film begins, Birnam is preparing for a weekend of recuperation away in the country with his brother, but instead he steals $10 from him and flees. What follows is a harrowing three day odyssey as he crashes spectacularly off the wagon; rapidly turning from the eloquent, jovial drunk at the bar making grandiose speeches about Van Gogh, John Barrymore and Shakespeare into a desperate, aggressive shell of a man totally devoid of dignity and resorting to begging for rye, stealing from womens handbags for loose change and finally trying to sell the typewriter that represents his only way to get his life back.

Juxtaposing the narrative with flashbacks to the blossomings of his relationship with Helen, Wilder paints a sympathetic portrait of a man being destroyed by his own insecurities and hurtling uncontrollably towards rock bottom. Naturally charming and ferociously intelligent his illness takes away everything until he is left paralysed by nightmarish hallucinations and on the brink of self-destruction. The stark, shadowy cinematography and imagery adds to the air of fatalism whilst the inclusion of genuinely harrowing scenes such as Birnam ransacking his own apartment for a bottle he knows he has hidden but can't remember where and a particularly hellish scene at an alcoholics hospital have lost none of their power over time.

Boasting some fine, edgy supporting turns as well as a gargantuan central performance from Milland, this is an unrelenting film that will linger long in the memory.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Marvelous Stuff
13 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I don't think any other film of the period comes close to breaking down and epitomising the spirit of rebellion and disillusionment that became a motif of the 1970's.

As Robert Eroica Dupea, Jack Nicholson gives a mesmerising performance. Shifting between quiet inner turmoil and unrest and moments of wild, unfettered rage, he is a man who has rejected his intellectual, middle class upbringing, yet seems unable to find peace in the low brow life he has chosen. He is the essence of anti-hero. At times he is thoroughly dislikeable - an abomination of a man who treats those around him with contempt and intolerance, yet Nicholson fills him with enough charm as to create both audience sympathy and empathy.

He claims to be without sentiment or inner feeling, yet his explosions of passion belie this. His impassioned defence of his irritating girlfriend - "You don't even deserve to be in the same room as her, you pompous celibate" - is both shocking in its heartfelt delivery and its explosive vitriol.

The story is both rambling and bleak, yet there is an undercurrent of warmth and feeling throughout. It's not a film that sets out to entertain... it's a film that makes you think. The low key ending comes abruptly, but is a perfect reflection of the restlessness of the character we have followed. A man who is still searching for his inner peace.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A film that gets even more spellbinding with each viewing.
13 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
"Disparate souls" is such a perfect way to describe the multitude of characters in this film. They are people with the most genuine of human qualities and frailties, filled with frustrated ambition and world beaten regret. The town and way of life is dying around them and they are going down with it. Escape can come only through fighting and dying in Korea or through the luxury of inherited wealth.

The central protagonist is Sonny (Timothy Bottom's), an awkward, sensitive adolescent who, resigned to life in this small town, embarks in an affair with an older woman (Cloris Leachman) in order to fulfil his sexual yearnings. In his spare time he hangs out with his reckless, roughneck best friend, Duane (Jeff Bridges) and a mute child (Sam Bottoms) at the local pool hall, burger bar and two bit picture show - all run by the grizzled heartbeat of the local community, Sam The Lion.

As Sam, Ben Johnson puts in a magnificent performance. Wily and weather-beaten, he brings an over bearing physical and moral strength to the character. His monologue at the fishing tank as he talks of his past and of having no regrets is one of the most perfect moments of cinema. Beautifully framed, he evokes the great cowboys of the past. He is the eulogy of a dying age. It is Sam who is the spine of the film and the man who really binds all the other characters together.

Coming between the two friends is Duane's spoilt girlfriend Jacy (Cybil Shepherd) who longs for sexual experience yet is at the same time frightened by her own sexuality. She turns to other men to fulfil her needs, including a wealthy dullard (Randy Quaid) and an older man. As frustrating as her character is, it is impossible not to feel sympathy for her as we realise that she is nothing more than a confused adolescent in the middle of a sexual awakening. Her mother (the magnificent Ellen Burstyn) see's much of herself in her daughter and tries to help her, yet she too is rendered powerless by her own boredom and regret.

Bogdanovich's direction is faultless, being at once claustrophobic yet at the same time giving the characters time and space to develop their nuances. The stark black and white cinematography adds a beautiful elegiac atmosphere (not unlike The Misfits ten years previously) whilst picking up the dusty, decaying surroundings in which these decaying lives are being played out. His use of early 50's country music standards only adds to the sense of longing.

A bleak and honest look at the underbelly of Americana and the dying American dream, the films foreboding outlook is tempered only by its wonderfully sympathetic characterisation, sexual eroticism and wit. The final scene of the film sums up the previous two hours perfectly... An emotional train wreck dulled by the soft hand of reconciliation, comfort and humanity. Beautiful.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed