Tonight I watched 20th Century Fox's epic production of "The Son Also Rises" (1957), based on the famous book by Ernest Hemingway. I've never read any Hemingway, and I don't think he'd be my cup of tea, but I discovered the movie through a database search of Tyrone Power, one of my favorite actors. He's accompanied here by Ava Gardner, Errol Flynn, Mel Ferrer and Eddie Albert, an all-star cast if there ever was one, so I had to check it out.
We've been discussing existentialist themes lately. I don't know if Hemingway's writing falls into that category, but the movie has a flavor of ennui. Most of the characters are jaded, wandering through life without purpose. According to the narrator who opens and closes the film, the young people of the 1920s were known as The Lost Generation because they suffered through the first World War and were thus disillusioned on a hitherto unknown scale by what they felt was the meaninglessness of life. The generational tag may also refer to the number of young men who were lost in the war. I'm no expert on that era, but in Googling the term "existentialism" - the philosophy of pondering the meaning of life - I see that it began in the mid-1930s, about the time The Lost Generation would've been heading into middle age. Hitler had just come into power, and there would no doubt have been a feeling of "here we go again".
But in the early 1920s, the emptiness inside was only beginning. The Great Depression had not yet hit. Some folks still had a little money, and for those in the artistic community, France was a popular destination because you could live inexpensively on the Left Bank.
Tyrone Power plays Jake Barnes, an American reporter stationed in Paris. We see him with a prostitute as the movie opens, but as they venture through a series of bars and restaurants, it is clear that he has no interest in her. In one joint, Jake runs into his old flame, Lady Brett Ashley (Ava Gardner). Her title is exaggerated, she's actually a fellow American posing as an Noblewoman because of a brief marriage, but Jake has known her for years and is very glad to see her. Lady Brett was his nurse during the war. They fell in love then, but Jake's battlefield wounds rendered him unable to perform. Due to this they drifted apart, but now, as they meet again, we can see that Lady Brett still loves him. She asks Jake to take her away from the restaurant and back to his hotel.
The next day, we meet Robert Cohn (Mel Ferrer), a writer friend of Jake's. He's an energetic fellow who's always up for adventure. He asks Jake to accompany him to South America but Jake declines. Later, Jake introduces Robert to Lady Brett, and he forgets all about his intended trip. He falls instantly in love with her, and makes no secret of it, but while Lady Brett loves Jake, she is actually more interested in a third man, Mike Campbell (Errol Fynn), an older Scot. She tells Jake and Robert that she plans to marry Mike. Jake knows this is because Mike has money. Lady Brett is an alcoholic who is used to a high lifestyle. She can have any man she wants, and she keeps them all on different strings, but cash is her bottom line. At least it seems that way. But she keeps running back to Jake every time she has a problem.
Every Summer, Jake heads to Spain for a fishing vacation. We now meet his buddy Eddie Albert, an affable gent Jake met in the Army. While Eddie and Jake are fishing in Spain, who should arrive at their hotel but Lady Brett and Mike Campbell! The Lady can't stay away from Jake, and it appears that her man Mike is not all he's cracked up to be. For one thing, he has a strong appetite for booze. I must step in here to say that Errol Flynn looks pretty beat up in this movie. He's only 48, but is bloated and watery-eyed. His skin is rough and he is but a shadow of his former self. He seemed to actually be drunk in some of the scenes. I'll have to do some Googling to find out, but at any rate, even though it's sad to see him this way (because he is one of my very favorite actors), he is nonetheless quite good in his role. He and Eddie Albert liven things up and provide comic relief. Flynn would only live another two years, but I guess he was an Old Pro to the end.
Back to the story : Joining the foursome in Spain is Robert Cohn. He shows up on the heels of Lady Brett and Mike Campbell. Mike knows Cohn is after his woman, and drunkenly insults him over dinner. Mike needn't worry because the Lady doesn't like Cohn. He's too eager and too straight laced. As the five friends drink their way around Madrid, we discover that Mike Campbell is as broke as the rest of them. He's bankrupt. Much of the rest of the picture deals with Mike having to come to grips with the fact that Lady Brett only wanted him for his money.
The last act focuses on a bullfighting exhibition. Hemingway loved bullfighting (what an a-hole), and as another aside, so did Ava Gardner, possibly due to her experience in this movie. My Dad, who was vice-president of Deluxe Laboratories at the time, once told me a story of being at a restaurant (I can't recall if it was in Hollywood or Mexico), and Ava Gardner was there. Dad said she was at a table with a group of bullfighters, but more importantly that she was the most beautiful woman he had ever seen. Seeing the movie, I am wondering if Dad's Ava sighting took place during the shoot, because there are a couple of scenes that mirror Dad's experience. Deluxe was the film lab for 20th Century in those days. Dad worked at times in coordination with producer Darryl Zanuck. He was often at the 20th Century Fox lot, so maybe he saw Ava in the commissary? Or at a nearby restaurant? But then again, Ava went on to have a fascination with bullfighters in her offscreen life, so maybe it was in Mexico after all.
In the movie, we are introduced to Lady Brett's final lover : Pedro the young Toreador, infamously played by Robert Evans. Evans, who died recently, was more well known as a producer. He made "The Godfather", among other major pictures. But his acting career was brief, and watching him in "The Sun Also Rises", it's not hard to see why, lol. He was so bad, the story goes, that Ty Power, Errol Flynn and the others wanted him replaced. They complained to director Henry King, who relayed their message to Zanuck, who declined to get rid of Robert Evans. His famous reply led to the title of Evans' autobiography : "The Kid Stays In The Picture"! Evans, however, knew that acting was not his forte. He made his mark in producing, and also in romancing many women, among them Ava Gardner.
This film is one of those old-fashioned big-budget Oscar Vehicles, with lots of drama and many Stars. It runs 130 minutes and is slow to develop, so you have to have patience. But Power and Gardner are both first rate. I didn't know she was such a capable actress, but indeed this is her movie. Mel Ferrer is very good in the supporting role, though we never really discover what Cohn's purpose is, what he wants besides Lady Brett, whom he knows he can't have. As noted, Errol Flynn and Eddie Albert provide much needed energy (the two old guys, haha). There isn't a lot of plot, mostly the characters wander from place to place in search of a drink, while Ava sorts out her men. So it's fun to watch Flynn and Albert goof off, and I'll bet they had fun on the set, too.
The settings in France and Spain are beautifully photographed. Everything looks gorgeous - Color by Deluxe donchaknow - I worked there too for a brief spell in 1999-2000.
Because of comparisons to Hemingway's book, fan reviews at IMDB are mixed. I, however, didn't read the book, and I very much enjoyed the film. I give "The Son Also Rises" Two Big Thumbs Up, and recommend it for fans of great dramas. There's an aimlessness to the story, but the acting is so good that it all makes sense and keeps you interested. /////
I hope you are enjoying your Saturday. I'm gonna head out for a short walk and then back to Pearl's. I'll see you tonight at the Usual Time.
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Saturday, November 16, 2019
Friday, November 15, 2019
"The Clovehitch Killer" starring Charlie Plummer
Ever since I found "My Amityville Horror" I've been having good luck with the IFC label, and tonight was no exception. The movie was called "The Clovehitch Killer"(2018). It was released on the subsidiary IFC Midnight and I found it in a database search of same. I'm not sure what the deal is with IFC movies, whether or not they actually play in theatres (and I know IFC is a cable channel), but IMDB lists a box office total for this film, albeit very small, so perhaps it had a limited or regional release. But man oh man was it ever well done! Unfortunately, I'm not sure how much I want to tell you, due to spoilers, but I'll start writing and see what comes out.
A young actor named Charlie Plummer stars as 18 year old Tyler Burnside, the son of a Christian couple in northern Kentucky. Tyler is a good kid. He attends church regularly, has respect for his parents, and is a Boy Scout of high merit. His Dad (played by Bob Dylan McDermott Mulroney) is the Scout Leader for Tyler's troop. Dad is a solid citizen in the community. Besides working as a general handyman, doing construction jobs, etc., he also helps care for his severely disabled brother Rudy, who lives in a convalescent home. Tyler's mother (Samantha Mathis) is a traditional housewife, not unusual in a conservative state. She takes good care of her husband and son, and all is well in their world. The Burnsides are a nice family, as All-American as they come. Director Duncan Skiles portrays them without modern "us vs. them" bias. Yes, they are Red State Baptists, but they could easily be your neighbors in San Francisco or Massachusetts. They're not uptight or self-righteous. Dad is a jokester and Mom is an easygoing, openminded lady. Most of all, they love their son, who dreams of becoming a pilot.
A dark cloud hangs over their town, though. Ten years ago, there was a series of murders that were never solved. The killer left few clues but was known for his facility with knots. One of these was the clove hitch knot, which he used to bind his victims. As an aside, while watching the film I wondered, because of the bondage factor, if it was based on the BTK case.
But back to the story: one night while they are out on a date, something bad happens to spoil the evening between Tyler and his prospective girlfriend. All of a sudden she wants to be taken home. Her image of Tyler is besmirched. She can't trust him anymore. In the days ahead, he acquires a bad name at his high school. Rumors are spread at his church. Suddenly, no one wants to be around him. There is an odd girl who hangs around, however. Tyler has heard bad rumors about her, too (that she's "easy", etc.) Knowing how it feels to be accused of something that isn't true, he feels a kinship to her and approaches her one Sunday after mass.
They go for a walk in the nearby woods, and Tyler opens up to the girl, whose name is Krissi. The thing he's been accused of (it's more correct to say he's been "labeled") may have a connection to the Clovehitch murders. Though they are a decade in the past, the killings remain very much on the minds of the townspeople because the killer was never caught. The subject of Clovehitch gets Krissi's attention. She takes out a pocket notebook and writes down an address, telling Tyler to meet her there the next day. He does this, and it turns out that the woman who lives at that house is a local author who has written a book on the case. This woman formerly worked for the police and is a friend of Krissi's. Between them, Krissi and the woman are a font of information about Clovehitch. They've cross catalogued every detail, but what Tyler has told Krissi is a shocker because it's previously unknown to both women. Krissi has a reason for her own interest in the case, and she gets right to work helping Tyler with his problem.
I think, because this is such a suspenseful movie, that I'm going to have to stop here and divulge no more of the plot. What I do want to say is that "The Clovehitch Killer" knocked my socks off. I'd glanced at a handful of fan reviews on IMDB, the ones that were brief and didn't contain spoilers, and I because of the general consensus I wasn't expecting a great film. Perhaps a competent one, but not a thriller that chilled me to the bone. I don't know if you remember a movie called "The Strangers" that was released in 2008. It was one of those rare horror movies that had the quality of absolute realism, and because of this, and because of the skill with which it was made, it is to this day perhaps the most terrifying film I've ever seen. It was so frightening that I will never watch it again. "Clovehitch", while not on the same level of terror (and it's not trying to be because that's not what the story is about) nevertheless has the same quality of realism and is made with equal skill by first time director Duncan Skiles. He gets natural performances out of his actors, so that they seem like your neighbors, as noted. Particularly good is Charlie Plummer, who was seen as John Paul Getty in Ridley Scott's "All The Money In The World". He's an actor to watch, and here in "Clovehitch" he has all the mannerisms of an angst ridden teen down pat, but without ever showing a lot of "actor-y" technique. He's great as Tyler. McDermott-Mulroney, besides being part of one of the largest Combo Celebrities ever discovered, has always been an underrated actor in my book. He shines as Don Burnside, Tyler's jocular father. He caught my attention way back in 1987 in "Hamburger Hill", playing a G.I. in Vietnam. I've always thought he had a personable way in front of the camera, and he demonstrates that here once again.
Director Skiles knows how to build suspense, and how to use slow burn camerawork to create unease. The thing about this movie, because it feels so real, is that it's also very sad. The horror and the sadness balance each other, and the result is to drain the viewer and leave him or her badly shaken. Like "The Strangers", there are a few scenes of sheer terror, but not so extreme that you'll have nightmares, as I did with that movie. Skiles also uses his minimal soundtrack to great effect, quietly cueing you in places so you won't be startled, because that's not what he is after. He never overdoes anything, but manages to get everything right. With "The Clovehitch Killer" I think he's created one of the most disturbing movies ever made about an American psycho.
Two Gigantic Thumbs Up and my highest recommendation for this scary but intelligent little film. There are a couple of things I should mention : 1) That it's obviously not for the squeamish, and 2) that there exists a fair-sized plot hole near the end that has to do with logic, but take my word for it, you can let that go. If you can handle this type of picture, the ending won't detract in any way from it's brilliance, and the plothole was not a problem for me. ////
Well, that'll do it for the moment. Nice to see Roger Stone get convicted, eh? And it looks like Rudolph Giuliani (aka The Second Biggest A-Hole In The World) is in a lot of hot water himself with the Second District of New York. Go, SDNY! Me, I'm going to the produce mart and then back to Pearl's. I'll see you tonight at the Usual Time.
Tons of love! xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
A young actor named Charlie Plummer stars as 18 year old Tyler Burnside, the son of a Christian couple in northern Kentucky. Tyler is a good kid. He attends church regularly, has respect for his parents, and is a Boy Scout of high merit. His Dad (played by Bob Dylan McDermott Mulroney) is the Scout Leader for Tyler's troop. Dad is a solid citizen in the community. Besides working as a general handyman, doing construction jobs, etc., he also helps care for his severely disabled brother Rudy, who lives in a convalescent home. Tyler's mother (Samantha Mathis) is a traditional housewife, not unusual in a conservative state. She takes good care of her husband and son, and all is well in their world. The Burnsides are a nice family, as All-American as they come. Director Duncan Skiles portrays them without modern "us vs. them" bias. Yes, they are Red State Baptists, but they could easily be your neighbors in San Francisco or Massachusetts. They're not uptight or self-righteous. Dad is a jokester and Mom is an easygoing, openminded lady. Most of all, they love their son, who dreams of becoming a pilot.
A dark cloud hangs over their town, though. Ten years ago, there was a series of murders that were never solved. The killer left few clues but was known for his facility with knots. One of these was the clove hitch knot, which he used to bind his victims. As an aside, while watching the film I wondered, because of the bondage factor, if it was based on the BTK case.
But back to the story: one night while they are out on a date, something bad happens to spoil the evening between Tyler and his prospective girlfriend. All of a sudden she wants to be taken home. Her image of Tyler is besmirched. She can't trust him anymore. In the days ahead, he acquires a bad name at his high school. Rumors are spread at his church. Suddenly, no one wants to be around him. There is an odd girl who hangs around, however. Tyler has heard bad rumors about her, too (that she's "easy", etc.) Knowing how it feels to be accused of something that isn't true, he feels a kinship to her and approaches her one Sunday after mass.
They go for a walk in the nearby woods, and Tyler opens up to the girl, whose name is Krissi. The thing he's been accused of (it's more correct to say he's been "labeled") may have a connection to the Clovehitch murders. Though they are a decade in the past, the killings remain very much on the minds of the townspeople because the killer was never caught. The subject of Clovehitch gets Krissi's attention. She takes out a pocket notebook and writes down an address, telling Tyler to meet her there the next day. He does this, and it turns out that the woman who lives at that house is a local author who has written a book on the case. This woman formerly worked for the police and is a friend of Krissi's. Between them, Krissi and the woman are a font of information about Clovehitch. They've cross catalogued every detail, but what Tyler has told Krissi is a shocker because it's previously unknown to both women. Krissi has a reason for her own interest in the case, and she gets right to work helping Tyler with his problem.
I think, because this is such a suspenseful movie, that I'm going to have to stop here and divulge no more of the plot. What I do want to say is that "The Clovehitch Killer" knocked my socks off. I'd glanced at a handful of fan reviews on IMDB, the ones that were brief and didn't contain spoilers, and I because of the general consensus I wasn't expecting a great film. Perhaps a competent one, but not a thriller that chilled me to the bone. I don't know if you remember a movie called "The Strangers" that was released in 2008. It was one of those rare horror movies that had the quality of absolute realism, and because of this, and because of the skill with which it was made, it is to this day perhaps the most terrifying film I've ever seen. It was so frightening that I will never watch it again. "Clovehitch", while not on the same level of terror (and it's not trying to be because that's not what the story is about) nevertheless has the same quality of realism and is made with equal skill by first time director Duncan Skiles. He gets natural performances out of his actors, so that they seem like your neighbors, as noted. Particularly good is Charlie Plummer, who was seen as John Paul Getty in Ridley Scott's "All The Money In The World". He's an actor to watch, and here in "Clovehitch" he has all the mannerisms of an angst ridden teen down pat, but without ever showing a lot of "actor-y" technique. He's great as Tyler. McDermott-Mulroney, besides being part of one of the largest Combo Celebrities ever discovered, has always been an underrated actor in my book. He shines as Don Burnside, Tyler's jocular father. He caught my attention way back in 1987 in "Hamburger Hill", playing a G.I. in Vietnam. I've always thought he had a personable way in front of the camera, and he demonstrates that here once again.
Director Skiles knows how to build suspense, and how to use slow burn camerawork to create unease. The thing about this movie, because it feels so real, is that it's also very sad. The horror and the sadness balance each other, and the result is to drain the viewer and leave him or her badly shaken. Like "The Strangers", there are a few scenes of sheer terror, but not so extreme that you'll have nightmares, as I did with that movie. Skiles also uses his minimal soundtrack to great effect, quietly cueing you in places so you won't be startled, because that's not what he is after. He never overdoes anything, but manages to get everything right. With "The Clovehitch Killer" I think he's created one of the most disturbing movies ever made about an American psycho.
Two Gigantic Thumbs Up and my highest recommendation for this scary but intelligent little film. There are a couple of things I should mention : 1) That it's obviously not for the squeamish, and 2) that there exists a fair-sized plot hole near the end that has to do with logic, but take my word for it, you can let that go. If you can handle this type of picture, the ending won't detract in any way from it's brilliance, and the plothole was not a problem for me. ////
Well, that'll do it for the moment. Nice to see Roger Stone get convicted, eh? And it looks like Rudolph Giuliani (aka The Second Biggest A-Hole In The World) is in a lot of hot water himself with the Second District of New York. Go, SDNY! Me, I'm going to the produce mart and then back to Pearl's. I'll see you tonight at the Usual Time.
Tons of love! xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Thursday, November 14, 2019
"Castle Keep" starring Burt Lancaster (pronounced "Bhuht Lahncahstah")
Tonight's movie was another World War Two saga, "Castle Keep"(1969). In my experience, you have to be careful with pictures from the late 60s, because counterculture influences were seeping in to the content. This was most apparent in the screenwriting of that era, and while many movies adhered to tried and true formulaic writing, there were also attempts to break out of the mold and experiment, especially with philosophical or existential dialogue. In movies, books and art in general, it was a time to look inward and "pull things out", bring them to the surface. Psychoanalysis became the great healer in the time of Vietnam.
Of course, people in real life don't usually speak in the way a screenwriter has dictated, even in the most well written, standard format films. But that's okay, because we are experiencing drama in it's ten states of conflict (man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. himself, etc.) I learned about those in Mrs. Fields' English class in 8th grade. My point is that the embellishment of ordinary speech, or putting one's personal stamp on the dialogue ala Aaron Sorkin or someone like that, is standard procedure for the industry and perfectly fine, because it is how entertaining drama is created.
But in the late 1960s, and especially after LSD use became popular, the oratorial horizons were broadened. This turn toward deep emotional expression in theater and motion pictures actually began in the 1950s, and was promulgated though the technique of Method Acting, but at that time directors were mainly using the body language of the actors to get the point across. Though heavy psychological themes were explored, and characters engaged in self-examination, the dialogue in most scripts was still composed of more or less straightforward conversation. But after pot and acid came into prominence, the gates were thrown open. Now anything went. A writer could use a character to express an abstract concept through dialogue that he or she would never have uttered in a normally scripted film, and it was okay - it got green-lighted - because This Was The Late 1960s. The Revolution was at hand, we were gonna do away with all the "isms" and personal hang-ups, and everyone would be free. It was a time to experiment and explore.
Unfortunately, this led to some really bad scripts, and one of them was used to produce "Castle Keep".
The story is as follows : a group of eight battle weary soldiers, led by a one-eyed Major (Burt Lancaster), arrive at a beautifully preserved castle in Belgium. They've been ordered there to bivouac and wait for a possible German advance. Right away the existentialism begins. No sooner does Lancaster set foot in the castle than he is sleeping with the owner's young wife. This is partly because he's an immoral horndog, but also because the castle's owner, a Count, has ED. He wants a child but cannot produce one. This too, would be a standard dramatic plotline if it weren't for the way it is presented, almost as if it were foretold. We see the soldiers slogging through the mud and then - boom - Lancaster is in bed with the Count's wife. Maybe Burt had that stipulated in his contract, haha.
Lancaster's right hand man is Captain Beckman (Patrick O'Neal), an art historian in civilian life. He takes one look at the Count's collection of paintings and sculptures and vows to protect them from the Germans. Early on, he tries to give a lecture to the rest of the men on the importance of great art, but his speech is continuously interrupted by sex jokes. This would seem normal in the case of macho soldiers who've been looking death in the eye. Quiet reverence during a professorial chat would not be an expected reaction. But again, the way this scene is presented doesn't have a "ring of truth", or accuracy. The writer wants to present his soldiers like the characters from M.A.S.H., each man a Cutting Wit with an endless supply of one liners at the ready, but instead of using cynical or even crude humor of the type Hawkeye might utter, the men here speak in flat, idiosyncratic dictums. The conversation often seems to consist of non-sequiturs, and it's not just the dialogue that's the problem. Everyone delivers their lines as if they were speaking to a wall. And that's only during the art lecture. Things get a whole lot worse as the movie progresses.
There is a whorehouse in town called The Red Queen. Some of the men head over there in the evenings. Peter Falk, the tough Sergeant, joins them at first, until he spies a nearby bakery. He'd been a baker himself before the war, and as soon as he sees the joint, we are back in Existential Mode. The writing switches immediately from standard narrative to whatever fantasy Falk is experiencing in his head. "Where are you going"?, the men ask him. "I'm a baker", he replies. "I'm going to see the baker's wife". Now, on paper this sounds like type of sexual double-entendre a movie soldier would use, but in Falk's case, it is meant also to show that he is detached from reality. And so is the film. Falk knocks on the door, the baker's wife does answer, she invites him in with no questions, and - voila! He starts baking and becomes The Baker immediately. The Baker's Wife becomes his wife......as he gets to work baking bread, he spouts more nutty dialogue.
Scott Wilson, a great character actor most recently seen in "The Walking Dead", is another of the soldiers who bypasses the whorehouse to pursue an obsession. He discovers a disused Volkswagen on the castle grounds and falls in love with it. Literally. This is meant as light comedy, and it works as such, but again, the rapidity with which Wilson loses his mind doesn't make any sense. It feels as if we are watching an Experimental Theater production. Characters spout whatever they are thinking at a given moment. Everyone is acting out. Half the time, you can't tell if Major Lancaster is giving orders or reciting abstract philosophical concepts. It all becomes a bit maddening to keep track of.
There is a point to the story - the question of whether or not to try and save the castle and it's artworks (hence the title "Castle Keep"). Captain Beckman is willing to give his life to the effort, but Lancaster, knowing the Nazi penchant for looting, wants to use the castle as a trap. Once the Germans are inside, ka-blammo! He will explode the building. The enemy will be destroyed, but unfortunately so will the art. Whose plan will win out? Documenting the mission is a young private who dreams of becoming an author. "Castle Keep" is the name of the book he is working on, and was also the title of an actual book by writer William Eastlake, on which the movie is based. Actor/Producer Tony Bill plays the company chaplain and Bruce Dern appears late in the proceedings, leading a band of conscientious objectors. He's as nutty as a fruitcake, but then isn't he always? It's what you expect from Dern, lol. He makes the other crazy characters seem sane in comparison.
"Castle Keep" was directed by Sidney Pollack, who went on to make some pretty big films like "Tootsie" and "Out Of Africa". It says on IMDB that he was also the uncredited director for a film called "The Swimmer"(1968) that also starred Burt Lancaster and preceded this picture by a year. I have "The Swimmer" on dvd and have seen it several times. If you want Abstract, that's the movie for you. I wasn't aware Pollack was the director, but he did that one right. With "Castle Keep" I was on the ropes by the middle of the movie and was struggling to make it to the finish line. I guess it was the production values that kept me afloat. The whole thing looks great. The castle location is real and gorgeous. There is also some battle action toward the end that is, to quote the dvd box, "epic" and "furious". This much is true, though for a war film there is much less war than usual. What there's way too much of is talk, and not just talk but nonsensical talk. In the spirit of the times, they were trying to create an Existential War Movie, but it just didn't work out.
There are things to like about "Castle Keep". It's not a terrible movie, or even a bad one, per se, where you just go "this is awful". Instead, it's a misfire, a bad concept for a war film. Existentialism didn't work for Terrence Malick either, in "The Thin Red Line", which almost put me to sleep. "Castle Keep" is marginally more entertaining for it's kookyness, but I'm afraid I can't recommend it.
I'll give it One and One Half Thumbs Up just because it looks great. See it if you must. /////
That's all for the moment. What'd you think of the first day of the Impeachment Hearings? Do you think Trump is Toast? Me, I do think so (ohpleaseohpleaseohplease). Let's keep our fingers crossed! I'm off to the store, then back to Pearl's. I'll see you tonight at the Usual Time.
Tons of love! xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Of course, people in real life don't usually speak in the way a screenwriter has dictated, even in the most well written, standard format films. But that's okay, because we are experiencing drama in it's ten states of conflict (man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. himself, etc.) I learned about those in Mrs. Fields' English class in 8th grade. My point is that the embellishment of ordinary speech, or putting one's personal stamp on the dialogue ala Aaron Sorkin or someone like that, is standard procedure for the industry and perfectly fine, because it is how entertaining drama is created.
But in the late 1960s, and especially after LSD use became popular, the oratorial horizons were broadened. This turn toward deep emotional expression in theater and motion pictures actually began in the 1950s, and was promulgated though the technique of Method Acting, but at that time directors were mainly using the body language of the actors to get the point across. Though heavy psychological themes were explored, and characters engaged in self-examination, the dialogue in most scripts was still composed of more or less straightforward conversation. But after pot and acid came into prominence, the gates were thrown open. Now anything went. A writer could use a character to express an abstract concept through dialogue that he or she would never have uttered in a normally scripted film, and it was okay - it got green-lighted - because This Was The Late 1960s. The Revolution was at hand, we were gonna do away with all the "isms" and personal hang-ups, and everyone would be free. It was a time to experiment and explore.
Unfortunately, this led to some really bad scripts, and one of them was used to produce "Castle Keep".
The story is as follows : a group of eight battle weary soldiers, led by a one-eyed Major (Burt Lancaster), arrive at a beautifully preserved castle in Belgium. They've been ordered there to bivouac and wait for a possible German advance. Right away the existentialism begins. No sooner does Lancaster set foot in the castle than he is sleeping with the owner's young wife. This is partly because he's an immoral horndog, but also because the castle's owner, a Count, has ED. He wants a child but cannot produce one. This too, would be a standard dramatic plotline if it weren't for the way it is presented, almost as if it were foretold. We see the soldiers slogging through the mud and then - boom - Lancaster is in bed with the Count's wife. Maybe Burt had that stipulated in his contract, haha.
Lancaster's right hand man is Captain Beckman (Patrick O'Neal), an art historian in civilian life. He takes one look at the Count's collection of paintings and sculptures and vows to protect them from the Germans. Early on, he tries to give a lecture to the rest of the men on the importance of great art, but his speech is continuously interrupted by sex jokes. This would seem normal in the case of macho soldiers who've been looking death in the eye. Quiet reverence during a professorial chat would not be an expected reaction. But again, the way this scene is presented doesn't have a "ring of truth", or accuracy. The writer wants to present his soldiers like the characters from M.A.S.H., each man a Cutting Wit with an endless supply of one liners at the ready, but instead of using cynical or even crude humor of the type Hawkeye might utter, the men here speak in flat, idiosyncratic dictums. The conversation often seems to consist of non-sequiturs, and it's not just the dialogue that's the problem. Everyone delivers their lines as if they were speaking to a wall. And that's only during the art lecture. Things get a whole lot worse as the movie progresses.
There is a whorehouse in town called The Red Queen. Some of the men head over there in the evenings. Peter Falk, the tough Sergeant, joins them at first, until he spies a nearby bakery. He'd been a baker himself before the war, and as soon as he sees the joint, we are back in Existential Mode. The writing switches immediately from standard narrative to whatever fantasy Falk is experiencing in his head. "Where are you going"?, the men ask him. "I'm a baker", he replies. "I'm going to see the baker's wife". Now, on paper this sounds like type of sexual double-entendre a movie soldier would use, but in Falk's case, it is meant also to show that he is detached from reality. And so is the film. Falk knocks on the door, the baker's wife does answer, she invites him in with no questions, and - voila! He starts baking and becomes The Baker immediately. The Baker's Wife becomes his wife......as he gets to work baking bread, he spouts more nutty dialogue.
Scott Wilson, a great character actor most recently seen in "The Walking Dead", is another of the soldiers who bypasses the whorehouse to pursue an obsession. He discovers a disused Volkswagen on the castle grounds and falls in love with it. Literally. This is meant as light comedy, and it works as such, but again, the rapidity with which Wilson loses his mind doesn't make any sense. It feels as if we are watching an Experimental Theater production. Characters spout whatever they are thinking at a given moment. Everyone is acting out. Half the time, you can't tell if Major Lancaster is giving orders or reciting abstract philosophical concepts. It all becomes a bit maddening to keep track of.
There is a point to the story - the question of whether or not to try and save the castle and it's artworks (hence the title "Castle Keep"). Captain Beckman is willing to give his life to the effort, but Lancaster, knowing the Nazi penchant for looting, wants to use the castle as a trap. Once the Germans are inside, ka-blammo! He will explode the building. The enemy will be destroyed, but unfortunately so will the art. Whose plan will win out? Documenting the mission is a young private who dreams of becoming an author. "Castle Keep" is the name of the book he is working on, and was also the title of an actual book by writer William Eastlake, on which the movie is based. Actor/Producer Tony Bill plays the company chaplain and Bruce Dern appears late in the proceedings, leading a band of conscientious objectors. He's as nutty as a fruitcake, but then isn't he always? It's what you expect from Dern, lol. He makes the other crazy characters seem sane in comparison.
"Castle Keep" was directed by Sidney Pollack, who went on to make some pretty big films like "Tootsie" and "Out Of Africa". It says on IMDB that he was also the uncredited director for a film called "The Swimmer"(1968) that also starred Burt Lancaster and preceded this picture by a year. I have "The Swimmer" on dvd and have seen it several times. If you want Abstract, that's the movie for you. I wasn't aware Pollack was the director, but he did that one right. With "Castle Keep" I was on the ropes by the middle of the movie and was struggling to make it to the finish line. I guess it was the production values that kept me afloat. The whole thing looks great. The castle location is real and gorgeous. There is also some battle action toward the end that is, to quote the dvd box, "epic" and "furious". This much is true, though for a war film there is much less war than usual. What there's way too much of is talk, and not just talk but nonsensical talk. In the spirit of the times, they were trying to create an Existential War Movie, but it just didn't work out.
There are things to like about "Castle Keep". It's not a terrible movie, or even a bad one, per se, where you just go "this is awful". Instead, it's a misfire, a bad concept for a war film. Existentialism didn't work for Terrence Malick either, in "The Thin Red Line", which almost put me to sleep. "Castle Keep" is marginally more entertaining for it's kookyness, but I'm afraid I can't recommend it.
I'll give it One and One Half Thumbs Up just because it looks great. See it if you must. /////
That's all for the moment. What'd you think of the first day of the Impeachment Hearings? Do you think Trump is Toast? Me, I do think so (ohpleaseohpleaseohplease). Let's keep our fingers crossed! I'm off to the store, then back to Pearl's. I'll see you tonight at the Usual Time.
Tons of love! xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Wednesday, November 13, 2019
"Sink The Bismarck" starring Kenneth More and Dana Wynter
When was the last time we watched a classic British World War Two film, or more specifically, a WW2 film about the British Navy? Was it "The Cruel Sea"? We saw that one back in 2015 or so, maybe earlier. I'm not talking about Submarine Movies, which are a genre of their own. No, I mean movies that take place on the high seas during World War Two and were made in England anywhere from 1940 to approximately 1965. I'll have to check my movie list to be sure (and yes, I do keep one!), but at any rate we ended the drought tonight with the first rate "Sink The Bismarck" (1960).
Kenneth More stars as Captain Shepard, the new commander at the Navy's Admirality headquarters, located 200 feet underground below London. From that nerve center, he and his fellow executive officers plan strategy for naval operations in the North Atlantic. Right away, Shepard is faced with the prospect of having to hunt down the gargantuan German battleship "Bismarck", which is attempting to take advantage of foggy weather to sail past English defenses and into the open sea. From there, the Bismarck will be able to attack British convoys at will, and destroy their shipping lanes.
The Bismarck is the largest, fastest and most heavily armored battleship in the German fleet. It is said to be unsinkable.
Captain Shepard gets right to work. He is a disciplinarian who tolerates no informalities, as in the instance of his Second Officer Davis (Dana Wynter), who - because she is a woman - is referred to by her first name of Anne. Shepard puts a stop to this practice, and to eating in the war room. He insists on full dress uniforms, etc. He's not belligerent but quietly firm. Officer Davis takes a liking to him, because she knows he is hiding secret pain. She tries to draw him out of his reticence. This will be a subtheme of the picture.
Meanwhile, onboard the Bismarck, the German officers are raring to go. Their captain is all business, he wants to get out into the North Atlantic as soon as possible, but with caution. He considers all possible exit strategies to avoid British detection. But he has a superior tagging along, the Fleet Commander Gunther Lutjens. Lutjens is the quintessential gaunt-faced Hitler Heiling ultra proud and overconfident Nazi. He orders the captain to get going right away. "We are Germans"!, he declares. "This is the Bismarck! We cannot be destroyed! We will make the Fuhrer proud"! As you read, please try to recite these lines with the proper force and accent. Thank you.
During the first half of the film, much of the action involves cat and mouse games between the Bismarck and the English ships holding the exit points. Captain Shepard moves small plastic models around the big glass map table, to mark the current positions of his ships. When the fog clears, he attempts to use British Torpedo Planes against the Bismarck, but it's armor is as good as advertised. Though a few torpedoes score direct hits, none cause major damage. However, one has exploded near the main fuel tank, causing a slow leak. The Bismarck's captain wants to sail back to Brest (in France but held by the Germans) for repairs and refueling, but Commander Lutjens rejects this suggestion. "How much fuel do we have left"? he demands. The captain quotes an amount, which Lutjens finds more than sufficient to continue the mission. "We sail forward to sink the convoy"!, he bellows. The captain knows this could lead them to peril, but keeps his mouth shut.
Once the battle sequences begin, the movie kicks into high gear. One of the Bismarck's adversaries is the HMS King George. Scenes shot in it's torpedo room (or that of another ship representing it) are spectacular. The immense machinery is something to behold, as are the precise movements and teamwork of the loading squad, who wear what look like full body and facemask chemical suits.
The outcome of the battle will rest not only on the differing strategies of Captain Shepard and Commander Lutjens on the German side, but also on decisions made earlier. The title of the film can be seen as the objective, but will it be carried out? You can Google the answer, or use common sense, or if you are a WW2 Naval Buff you probably already know it. In the movie, it is depicted in full hellish glory as the epic showdown it must have been. But there is a human side to the story that is just as important as the war narrative. Captain Shepard is under great personal strain the entire time. He spends night and day at the map table, twenty stories below ground. He never sees the daylight, gets little sleep, and must stuff his grief because the fate of the British Navy depends on him. Kenneth More is perfect as Shepard, exemplifying the stiff upper lip fortitude the English are known for.
But only up to a point. Dana Wynter's character, Second Officer Davis, tries to get Shepard to express himself, to acknowledge his feelings, and finally, when he is alone, he does. This is a very poignant moment in the film that actor More pulls off with subtle but powerful grace.
"Sink The Bismarck" is one of the great British Naval WW2 films I've seen. I love all of the American ones, too (and I'm thinking about going to see "Midway"), but there is something I really like about the low-key heroism of the English. A point is made in "Sink The Bismarck" about how they never cower in danger, panic in defeat, but especially they never boast in victory. In fact, they are solemn because they acknowledge the price paid by their enemy, and realise it could have been them at the bottom of the ocean. I am a huge fan of the English people. I admire their attitude toward life and their professionalism in all things, including the terrible business of war.
Two Huge Thumbs Up for "Sink The Bismarck". Highly recommended for WW2 Buffs, as mentioned.
Sorry I missed ya yesterday. It was one of those nights when Grimsley came over, so I didn't have a movie, but I am headed to the Libe right now, so we should be stocked up for the next several days. See you tonight at the Usual Time!
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Kenneth More stars as Captain Shepard, the new commander at the Navy's Admirality headquarters, located 200 feet underground below London. From that nerve center, he and his fellow executive officers plan strategy for naval operations in the North Atlantic. Right away, Shepard is faced with the prospect of having to hunt down the gargantuan German battleship "Bismarck", which is attempting to take advantage of foggy weather to sail past English defenses and into the open sea. From there, the Bismarck will be able to attack British convoys at will, and destroy their shipping lanes.
The Bismarck is the largest, fastest and most heavily armored battleship in the German fleet. It is said to be unsinkable.
Captain Shepard gets right to work. He is a disciplinarian who tolerates no informalities, as in the instance of his Second Officer Davis (Dana Wynter), who - because she is a woman - is referred to by her first name of Anne. Shepard puts a stop to this practice, and to eating in the war room. He insists on full dress uniforms, etc. He's not belligerent but quietly firm. Officer Davis takes a liking to him, because she knows he is hiding secret pain. She tries to draw him out of his reticence. This will be a subtheme of the picture.
Meanwhile, onboard the Bismarck, the German officers are raring to go. Their captain is all business, he wants to get out into the North Atlantic as soon as possible, but with caution. He considers all possible exit strategies to avoid British detection. But he has a superior tagging along, the Fleet Commander Gunther Lutjens. Lutjens is the quintessential gaunt-faced Hitler Heiling ultra proud and overconfident Nazi. He orders the captain to get going right away. "We are Germans"!, he declares. "This is the Bismarck! We cannot be destroyed! We will make the Fuhrer proud"! As you read, please try to recite these lines with the proper force and accent. Thank you.
During the first half of the film, much of the action involves cat and mouse games between the Bismarck and the English ships holding the exit points. Captain Shepard moves small plastic models around the big glass map table, to mark the current positions of his ships. When the fog clears, he attempts to use British Torpedo Planes against the Bismarck, but it's armor is as good as advertised. Though a few torpedoes score direct hits, none cause major damage. However, one has exploded near the main fuel tank, causing a slow leak. The Bismarck's captain wants to sail back to Brest (in France but held by the Germans) for repairs and refueling, but Commander Lutjens rejects this suggestion. "How much fuel do we have left"? he demands. The captain quotes an amount, which Lutjens finds more than sufficient to continue the mission. "We sail forward to sink the convoy"!, he bellows. The captain knows this could lead them to peril, but keeps his mouth shut.
Once the battle sequences begin, the movie kicks into high gear. One of the Bismarck's adversaries is the HMS King George. Scenes shot in it's torpedo room (or that of another ship representing it) are spectacular. The immense machinery is something to behold, as are the precise movements and teamwork of the loading squad, who wear what look like full body and facemask chemical suits.
The outcome of the battle will rest not only on the differing strategies of Captain Shepard and Commander Lutjens on the German side, but also on decisions made earlier. The title of the film can be seen as the objective, but will it be carried out? You can Google the answer, or use common sense, or if you are a WW2 Naval Buff you probably already know it. In the movie, it is depicted in full hellish glory as the epic showdown it must have been. But there is a human side to the story that is just as important as the war narrative. Captain Shepard is under great personal strain the entire time. He spends night and day at the map table, twenty stories below ground. He never sees the daylight, gets little sleep, and must stuff his grief because the fate of the British Navy depends on him. Kenneth More is perfect as Shepard, exemplifying the stiff upper lip fortitude the English are known for.
But only up to a point. Dana Wynter's character, Second Officer Davis, tries to get Shepard to express himself, to acknowledge his feelings, and finally, when he is alone, he does. This is a very poignant moment in the film that actor More pulls off with subtle but powerful grace.
"Sink The Bismarck" is one of the great British Naval WW2 films I've seen. I love all of the American ones, too (and I'm thinking about going to see "Midway"), but there is something I really like about the low-key heroism of the English. A point is made in "Sink The Bismarck" about how they never cower in danger, panic in defeat, but especially they never boast in victory. In fact, they are solemn because they acknowledge the price paid by their enemy, and realise it could have been them at the bottom of the ocean. I am a huge fan of the English people. I admire their attitude toward life and their professionalism in all things, including the terrible business of war.
Two Huge Thumbs Up for "Sink The Bismarck". Highly recommended for WW2 Buffs, as mentioned.
Sorry I missed ya yesterday. It was one of those nights when Grimsley came over, so I didn't have a movie, but I am headed to the Libe right now, so we should be stocked up for the next several days. See you tonight at the Usual Time!
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Monday, November 11, 2019
"The Jeffrey Dahmer Files", another documentary from IFC
Tonight's movie was another documentary from IFC, "The Jeffrey Dahmer Files" (2013). Do you really wanna hear about it? You do? Man, you are gruesome. But that's okay, because so am I, haha, in the clinical sense of course. You know that one of my alter egos is a homicide cop, and I tackle the grimmest cases. Somebody's gotta do it. I discovered this film while watching "My Amityville Horror" (and somebody had to do that one, too). IFC designs their dvds so you can't skip the previews. If you hit "menu", a blue bar appears, reading "operation prohibited". You can't fast forward 'em, either. I learned how to beat these endless previews (and I've had dvds that contained 20 minutes worth) by pressing the "scene change" button. I don't know what you call it, but it skips over what you are watching to the next encoded scene. That doesn't eliminate the previews in one fell swoop, but it gets rid of them one at a time. Before I knew of this method, I saw the preview for "The Jeffery Dahmer Files" on the "Amityville" disc. It looked intriguing, and though - like yourself I suspect - I already knew everything there was to know on the Dahmer case, I figured it was worth a watch.
It was very well made as these things go, the trouble was that the filmmaker only had three sources to work with - just three interview subjects. Now, these three were some of the biggest players in the case, the lead detective, the chief medical examiner and Dahmer's next door neighbor in his Milwaukee apartment complex. Each told a long and ghoulish story, and in the case of Pamela Bass (the neighbor), you really felt for her because she'd befriended Jeffrey Dahmer and even had lunch with him on occasion (ahem!). You need to see the movie yourself to hear her tale, but her relationship with Dahmer scarred her badly and affected her life in other ways too. For one thing, she was hounded by Dahmer groupies and lookie-loos for years, wherever she went.
The detective, Pat Kennedy, is a linebacker-sized guy with a friendly nature. He's a natural storyteller whose animated eyes and large, moving mustachio accentuate the details of his night on the scene at Dahmer's apartment, when the grim discoveries were made. He tells you about things like opening the refrigerator in a matter-of-fact way, as if you yourself might have done it. Everybody's opened a fridge in their life, haven't they? Kennedy's eyes bulge and his mustache spreads out as he breaks into a grin. He does this a lot, as if to put an ironic and darkly humorous exclamation point on each statement. Like Pamela Bass, he also became friendly with Dahmer. Kennedy was Jeff's sole confidant from law enforcement during the investigation and trial.
The third witness is Jeffrey Jentzen, the Milwaukee county medical examiner who was called to the scene that night to handle the remains, in a situation that was unprecedented not only for his department and that of the Milwaukee police, but in all of American history. Yes, Wisconsin had also been the home state of Ed Gein (yikes! sorry, Elizabeth....), but Gein had a big house and barn to use as a workplace. Dahmer was working out of a one bedroom apartment in a crowded complex. Jentzen speaks methodically as he lists what was found, not only in the refrigerator, but in closets, drawers and the infamous Blue Barrel. He tells of the difficulty in putting it all together to determine the number of casualties and the identity of each victim.
Details from the witnesses are numerous and very specific, and you are given the crux of the matter by perhaps the three people closest to the crimes. My only complaint is that I'd have liked to see some interviews with more peripheral figures; folks on the sidelines who maybe knew Dahmer from his job at the chocolate factory, or remembered him from high school. I think it would've filled the story out a little more, but it might have been the director's intention to simply "go for the throat" and get to the meat of the matter, to use an appropriate metaphor. Or maybe he didn't get the consent of other desired interview subjects, I dunno. It's still a worthwhile documentary, and the filmmakers include re-enactment scenes - not of the murders, thank goodness - but of a Dahmer lookalike walking around town, going to the liquor store, buying his Blue Barrel from a supply yard and lugging it home on the bus. He uses a taxi to cart home a mannequin he's stolen from a boutique. Public transportation works well for Jeff, as does a local hotel he uses for one night stands. He likes it because no one asks questions, no matter how many times he goes up and down the stairs with his suitcase.
I'll give "The Jeffrey Dahmer Files" Two Thumbs Up and I'll also recommend it, but only for case-hardened folks like you and me. Watch it if you followed the story back in 1991. The rest of you should skip it, most definitely. ////
That's all for now. It's Monday afternoon. We had good singin' in church yesterday, but the Rams lost to Pittsburgh and they're gonna have to win five of their last seven games to have any chance of making the playoffs. Can they do it? (oh please don't tell me, I don't wanna know).
I'm off to the store for avocados and then back to Pearl's. See you tonight at the Usual Time!
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
It was very well made as these things go, the trouble was that the filmmaker only had three sources to work with - just three interview subjects. Now, these three were some of the biggest players in the case, the lead detective, the chief medical examiner and Dahmer's next door neighbor in his Milwaukee apartment complex. Each told a long and ghoulish story, and in the case of Pamela Bass (the neighbor), you really felt for her because she'd befriended Jeffrey Dahmer and even had lunch with him on occasion (ahem!). You need to see the movie yourself to hear her tale, but her relationship with Dahmer scarred her badly and affected her life in other ways too. For one thing, she was hounded by Dahmer groupies and lookie-loos for years, wherever she went.
The detective, Pat Kennedy, is a linebacker-sized guy with a friendly nature. He's a natural storyteller whose animated eyes and large, moving mustachio accentuate the details of his night on the scene at Dahmer's apartment, when the grim discoveries were made. He tells you about things like opening the refrigerator in a matter-of-fact way, as if you yourself might have done it. Everybody's opened a fridge in their life, haven't they? Kennedy's eyes bulge and his mustache spreads out as he breaks into a grin. He does this a lot, as if to put an ironic and darkly humorous exclamation point on each statement. Like Pamela Bass, he also became friendly with Dahmer. Kennedy was Jeff's sole confidant from law enforcement during the investigation and trial.
The third witness is Jeffrey Jentzen, the Milwaukee county medical examiner who was called to the scene that night to handle the remains, in a situation that was unprecedented not only for his department and that of the Milwaukee police, but in all of American history. Yes, Wisconsin had also been the home state of Ed Gein (yikes! sorry, Elizabeth....), but Gein had a big house and barn to use as a workplace. Dahmer was working out of a one bedroom apartment in a crowded complex. Jentzen speaks methodically as he lists what was found, not only in the refrigerator, but in closets, drawers and the infamous Blue Barrel. He tells of the difficulty in putting it all together to determine the number of casualties and the identity of each victim.
Details from the witnesses are numerous and very specific, and you are given the crux of the matter by perhaps the three people closest to the crimes. My only complaint is that I'd have liked to see some interviews with more peripheral figures; folks on the sidelines who maybe knew Dahmer from his job at the chocolate factory, or remembered him from high school. I think it would've filled the story out a little more, but it might have been the director's intention to simply "go for the throat" and get to the meat of the matter, to use an appropriate metaphor. Or maybe he didn't get the consent of other desired interview subjects, I dunno. It's still a worthwhile documentary, and the filmmakers include re-enactment scenes - not of the murders, thank goodness - but of a Dahmer lookalike walking around town, going to the liquor store, buying his Blue Barrel from a supply yard and lugging it home on the bus. He uses a taxi to cart home a mannequin he's stolen from a boutique. Public transportation works well for Jeff, as does a local hotel he uses for one night stands. He likes it because no one asks questions, no matter how many times he goes up and down the stairs with his suitcase.
I'll give "The Jeffrey Dahmer Files" Two Thumbs Up and I'll also recommend it, but only for case-hardened folks like you and me. Watch it if you followed the story back in 1991. The rest of you should skip it, most definitely. ////
That's all for now. It's Monday afternoon. We had good singin' in church yesterday, but the Rams lost to Pittsburgh and they're gonna have to win five of their last seven games to have any chance of making the playoffs. Can they do it? (oh please don't tell me, I don't wanna know).
I'm off to the store for avocados and then back to Pearl's. See you tonight at the Usual Time!
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Sunday, November 10, 2019
"Doctor Sleep"
This afternoon I went to the Granada Hills Theatre to see "Doctor Sleep". Like the "It" movies, I had to see it on the big screen. Stephen King flicks can be hit and miss, but the "It"s were tremendous and "DS" got good advance reviews, so off I went, and two and a half hours later all I can say is "Wow" and "Holy Smokes" and a few other exclamatory superlatives. Because it's a new release and you may be seeing it yourself, I'm not sure how much I wanna tell you about the plot. Have you read the book? Well anyway, maybe I should say nothing at all. I'll have to think it over while I write. What I will say is that director Mike Flanagan has knocked it out of the freakin' park, and in doing so, he has also partially restored and re-envisioned "The Shining" in a way that will make Stephen King proud. King famously detested Stanley Kubrick's movie, and here I'd like to go on one of my asides to describe my own ups and downs with "The Shining".
I remember seeing it in Westwood on opening night in May 1980. The line was around the block and for me the anticipation was sky high. I'd read the advance publicity, and though I wasn't a Kubrick devotee I knew he was a master filmmaker. The thought of a Kubrick/King collaboration on SK's greatest work to date (up to 1980) was tantalizing. I remember thinking that it had the potential to be on par with "The Exorcist" as one of the greatest horror movies of all time. As the film got underway, I was ready to be pinned to my seat, and Kubrick did create a strong sense of dread with his buildup to the major action. The drive to the Overlook Hotel, for example, was very well done, as were the early interior sequences. Danny's visit to Room 237 was legendary, one of the great horrors in all of cinema.
But then Jack Nicholson stepped in and decided to ruin the movie by delivering a deliberately hammed up performance. The capper was when he uttered the inane line "Here's Johnny" after axing through the door in the penultimate scene. That Kubrick would've allowed such a performance, or even encouraged it, suggested that he didn't take the material seriously. I think he felt superior to it, and because of that he brought it down to a joke. Yes, there were moments of frightful horror, scenes of mystery and utter terror, but Nicholson ruined the movie and Kubrick let him do it. And what's more, Kubrick lit the whole thing in bright florescent light, as if he was still working on "2001". With the exception of "Barry Lyndon", he lit all his movies in that cold, office building way, and the setting of King's Overlook Hotel suffered greatly for it.
After that opening night screening I was of two minds about the picture. On the one hand, I thought it was really scary, but on the other I thought Nicholson was terrible, and even worse, that Kubrick butchered the book. And though at first I liked "The Shining", because I didn't want to admit I was disappointed, in later years - and especially after reading of Stephen King's disapproval - I came to acknowledge that it wasn't very good. It's not that it sucked, it's that it was an Enormous Letdown. Kubrick made a mockery of one of the scariest horror stories ever written by allowing a once great actor to run roughshod over his character. That's my final opinion of "The Shining".
Like Stanley Kubrick, Mike Flanagan also took liberties with King's source material. A filmmaker almost can't help but do that, because SK's books are so lengthy and crammed with detail. There are character backstories and subthemes. That's why a lot of his books have been made into miniseries, because a director often needs 6 to 8 hours to tell a King story. "It" took over five hours, in two parts, but by taking his time, director Andres Muschietti created a work of legend that was more or less true to the book, even though he, too, had to adjust the story. Flanagan does more than adjust, he reworks an entire section of "Doctor Sleep" the book, and yes, he re-imagines the written work much like Kubrick did.
The difference is that Flanagan has reverence for the material. I don't wanna tell you what he has done, but I'll say that he's created a vision of what "The Shining" could've been. Holy freaking smokes is it amazing. I need to add, as another aside, that there was a cable version of "The Shining" produced in 1997 starring Steven Weber, that even with television production values was far more effective than Kubrick's movie, which for some reason critics have come to champion in the ensuing years, when at first they derided it almost in unison. The cable version is truly grim stuff, but that's what the book is made of. There's not a speck of black humor, which is ironic considering that Weber was best known as a sitcom actor. Even so, his performance blows Jack Nicholson's off the map. Watch it and see.
At any rate, let me just say about "Doctor Sleep" that Flanagan has created an extremely eerie film, using photographic effects and atmosphere to create the horror. It's not what they call a "jumpscare" movie. Instead, he mixes elements of fantasy with night footage of the natural landscape of Georgia (passing for New Hampshire), to create a sense of otherworldly weirdness. You feel like a witness to the events in the campground, where a group calling themselves The True Knot is hiding out. There is one sequence of horrific violence that, due to the location, reminded me a little bit of the notorious scene in "The Walking Dead" in it's extremity. I hate to even make the comparison - and I quit watching "TWD" after that episode - but it's strong stuff. Unlike the makers of that show, however, Flanagan knows when to pull away, and he never lingers on the agony. Kudos must go to Rebecca Ferguson, who plays Rose the Hat, the arch-villain of the film. She's got ice in her veins, and great powers, but she's met her match in Danny (Ewan McGregor) and young Abra (Kyliegh Curran), a girl with unprecedented Shine.
Flanagan, who also wrote and edited "Doctor Sleep", has developed the characters so that they aren't simple cut-outs. You care about Danny's life story, you hope he will beat his alcoholism. But at the same time, he's trying to keep the demons of the Overlook at bay. The last thing he needs is little Abra jumping inside his head, but when she tells him what she's seen, he cannot back away. The movie works on a human level, it has pathos, so while it's one of the creepiest horror movies to ever come down the pike, it's more than that. It's got a spiritual core that feels redemptive.
There is one shot I have to mention, because I think it's one of the greatest shots I've ever seen in any movie, but especially in a horror film. Man......I really wish I could describe it to you. It's an exterior shot of a building, that's all I'll say, but when I saw it, I just sank down in my seat and thought "Holy Shit"........(oh my goodness what a shot).
"Doctor Sleep" is one of the best Stephen King movies ever made, and also a great movie on any level. I'm gonna shut up about it now, but if you like horror, run to the theatre to see it. Thanks to Mike Flanagan for reclaiming "The Shining". I hope he works with Stephen King again, Two Gigantic Thumbs Up. /////
That's all for now. I'm back at Pearl's again, and I'll see you tonight at the Usual Time. Go Rams!
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
I remember seeing it in Westwood on opening night in May 1980. The line was around the block and for me the anticipation was sky high. I'd read the advance publicity, and though I wasn't a Kubrick devotee I knew he was a master filmmaker. The thought of a Kubrick/King collaboration on SK's greatest work to date (up to 1980) was tantalizing. I remember thinking that it had the potential to be on par with "The Exorcist" as one of the greatest horror movies of all time. As the film got underway, I was ready to be pinned to my seat, and Kubrick did create a strong sense of dread with his buildup to the major action. The drive to the Overlook Hotel, for example, was very well done, as were the early interior sequences. Danny's visit to Room 237 was legendary, one of the great horrors in all of cinema.
But then Jack Nicholson stepped in and decided to ruin the movie by delivering a deliberately hammed up performance. The capper was when he uttered the inane line "Here's Johnny" after axing through the door in the penultimate scene. That Kubrick would've allowed such a performance, or even encouraged it, suggested that he didn't take the material seriously. I think he felt superior to it, and because of that he brought it down to a joke. Yes, there were moments of frightful horror, scenes of mystery and utter terror, but Nicholson ruined the movie and Kubrick let him do it. And what's more, Kubrick lit the whole thing in bright florescent light, as if he was still working on "2001". With the exception of "Barry Lyndon", he lit all his movies in that cold, office building way, and the setting of King's Overlook Hotel suffered greatly for it.
After that opening night screening I was of two minds about the picture. On the one hand, I thought it was really scary, but on the other I thought Nicholson was terrible, and even worse, that Kubrick butchered the book. And though at first I liked "The Shining", because I didn't want to admit I was disappointed, in later years - and especially after reading of Stephen King's disapproval - I came to acknowledge that it wasn't very good. It's not that it sucked, it's that it was an Enormous Letdown. Kubrick made a mockery of one of the scariest horror stories ever written by allowing a once great actor to run roughshod over his character. That's my final opinion of "The Shining".
Like Stanley Kubrick, Mike Flanagan also took liberties with King's source material. A filmmaker almost can't help but do that, because SK's books are so lengthy and crammed with detail. There are character backstories and subthemes. That's why a lot of his books have been made into miniseries, because a director often needs 6 to 8 hours to tell a King story. "It" took over five hours, in two parts, but by taking his time, director Andres Muschietti created a work of legend that was more or less true to the book, even though he, too, had to adjust the story. Flanagan does more than adjust, he reworks an entire section of "Doctor Sleep" the book, and yes, he re-imagines the written work much like Kubrick did.
The difference is that Flanagan has reverence for the material. I don't wanna tell you what he has done, but I'll say that he's created a vision of what "The Shining" could've been. Holy freaking smokes is it amazing. I need to add, as another aside, that there was a cable version of "The Shining" produced in 1997 starring Steven Weber, that even with television production values was far more effective than Kubrick's movie, which for some reason critics have come to champion in the ensuing years, when at first they derided it almost in unison. The cable version is truly grim stuff, but that's what the book is made of. There's not a speck of black humor, which is ironic considering that Weber was best known as a sitcom actor. Even so, his performance blows Jack Nicholson's off the map. Watch it and see.
At any rate, let me just say about "Doctor Sleep" that Flanagan has created an extremely eerie film, using photographic effects and atmosphere to create the horror. It's not what they call a "jumpscare" movie. Instead, he mixes elements of fantasy with night footage of the natural landscape of Georgia (passing for New Hampshire), to create a sense of otherworldly weirdness. You feel like a witness to the events in the campground, where a group calling themselves The True Knot is hiding out. There is one sequence of horrific violence that, due to the location, reminded me a little bit of the notorious scene in "The Walking Dead" in it's extremity. I hate to even make the comparison - and I quit watching "TWD" after that episode - but it's strong stuff. Unlike the makers of that show, however, Flanagan knows when to pull away, and he never lingers on the agony. Kudos must go to Rebecca Ferguson, who plays Rose the Hat, the arch-villain of the film. She's got ice in her veins, and great powers, but she's met her match in Danny (Ewan McGregor) and young Abra (Kyliegh Curran), a girl with unprecedented Shine.
Flanagan, who also wrote and edited "Doctor Sleep", has developed the characters so that they aren't simple cut-outs. You care about Danny's life story, you hope he will beat his alcoholism. But at the same time, he's trying to keep the demons of the Overlook at bay. The last thing he needs is little Abra jumping inside his head, but when she tells him what she's seen, he cannot back away. The movie works on a human level, it has pathos, so while it's one of the creepiest horror movies to ever come down the pike, it's more than that. It's got a spiritual core that feels redemptive.
There is one shot I have to mention, because I think it's one of the greatest shots I've ever seen in any movie, but especially in a horror film. Man......I really wish I could describe it to you. It's an exterior shot of a building, that's all I'll say, but when I saw it, I just sank down in my seat and thought "Holy Shit"........(oh my goodness what a shot).
"Doctor Sleep" is one of the best Stephen King movies ever made, and also a great movie on any level. I'm gonna shut up about it now, but if you like horror, run to the theatre to see it. Thanks to Mike Flanagan for reclaiming "The Shining". I hope he works with Stephen King again, Two Gigantic Thumbs Up. /////
That's all for now. I'm back at Pearl's again, and I'll see you tonight at the Usual Time. Go Rams!
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Saturday, November 9, 2019
"The Cloud-Capped Star" by director Ritwik Ghatak
Tonight's movie was called "The Cloud-Capped Star"(1960), directed by Ritwik Ghatak of India. It's a brand new release from Criterion, telling the story of Nita, the adult daughter of a poverty stricken Bengali couple. Her father is an eccentric parttime schoolteacher who reads Wordsworth, but the pants in the family are worn by her mother, a shrew with a sharp tongue who constantly lashes out at Nita and her three siblings. Mama is always worrying about money, so she can make ends meet. Papa barely earns a salary, but still maintains his facade of being a middle class gentleman. The only person in the household with a steady income is Nita, who tutors local students while working on her Master's Degree at the nearby university. She is studying to become a teacher like her fussy father.
Nita has an older brother named Shankar whom she idolises, even though he takes advantage of her. He is practicing to become a singer, and has genuine talent, but he's also a mooch, hitting Nita up for a "tenner" every time she gets paid. The mother saves special ire for Shankar, telling him to get a job, calling him dead weight on the family who eats for free and does nothing to contribute. But Nita loves her brother. She has a photograph taken when they were little and the only two children yet born. Nita keeps it close by her bedside because it reminds her of happier times. Shankar has the soul of an artist. He still treats Nita like a baby sister, but he also encourages her to follow her dreams. His pet name for her is "Idiot", but it is said with love and humor. Nita knows her brother needs her, and she accepts him for who he is. She knows he will make it as a singer and tells him so.
As Nita works hard to support her family, a young man from the university becomes interested. He is Sanat, a handsome physics student who is also pursuing a degree in order to move up in the world at a time when India was rising out of the middle ages. Nita's parents like Sanat. Dad likes him because he is educated, Mom likes him because of the promise of more money if he marries Nita (Mom only cares about money), but Sanat has a roving eye, and he catches the attention of Nita's younger sister Gita, a sultry seductress with the sensibilities of a Valley Girl. All Gita cares about is shopping, for new Saris and makeup. She doesn't have the money for these things, so she uses another reliable currency - her looks and her smile, to charm Sanat away from her angelic, responsible sister. The next thing you know, Sanat and Gita are engaged to be married, and Nita the good girl is left in the lurch.
The fourth sibling, a brother named Mantu, is leaving the family hovel to take work in a factory, but only because he has been selected for their soccer team. Mantu is glad to be out, even if it means hard manual labor. He will even return on occasion to contribute part of his salary to the family coffers, but he wants nothing more to do with the instability inside that home.
Everything is on Nita's shoulders. The rest of the family depends on her entirely, and now it looks as though she will need to quit the university and take a second job, because the rent is overdue and the grocer will no longer extend credit. On the surface, Nita seems happy to oblige. No sacrifice is too great for her, so long as she can help her family, and in fact you can see in her expression that she enjoys her martyr role, because with it she becomes Head Of The Family over her ineffectual father and her griping mother, who bitches about everything but has never contributed anything of value to her children.
It's all a bit soap opera-ish, and reminiscent in plot of some of Yajuhiro Ozu's Daughter Dramas like "Late Spring" or "Early Summer", both starring the great Setsuko Hara. Cinematically the film resembles the work of Ghatak's legendary countryman Satyajit Ray, yet Ghatak goes further with his brilliant camerawork, often framing his actors against fluttering patterns of light. His nighttime photography is stunning and reminded me of the imagery of another Japanese director, Kenzo Mizoguchi, whose movies also depicted deep suffering. Ghatak also uses a European technique, perhaps made famous by Bergman or Antonioni, where he will frame two actors facing the camera at different depths and angles. The closer one will look at the corner of the frame while the one in back, usually the character of Nita, will recite her dialogue poetically with a dreamy-eyed smile on her face. It appears as if Ghatak has many influences, but he uses them to create a work wholly his own. This is a tremendous looking film with a musical backdrop than runs through the entirety like a form of narration.
At 139 minutes, ir's a tad long and very slow in parts, but then it's an art film and meant to affect the viewer as more than simple entertainment. Watching it reminded me of my nights at the former CSUN Cinematheque, where Professor Tim would begin the evening with a lecture on the movie and it's director. Man, I miss The Professor and our Thursday Nights at the Cinematheque!
This is one of those movies that I cannot recommend highly enough. The actors are uniformly excellent and again, the photography and soundtrack and absolutely stunning. As with many foreign films, you'll have to have patience, but you'll be richly rewarded in return.
Two Gigantic Thumbs Up for "The Cloud-Capped Star". Apparently, the films of Ritwik Ghatak have been tied up for a long time by contractual matters or even lack of perceived interest, but now that this masterpiece has been restored, hopefully we can look forward to more from this unusual director, who himself was a schizophrenic and severe alcoholic who died at age 50. ////
That's all for now. It's Saturday afternoon and we're gonna try for a hike. "We" means you and me, remember? So I'll meet ya at the trail and then I'll see you back here at the Usual Time later tonight.
Tons and tons of love! xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Nita has an older brother named Shankar whom she idolises, even though he takes advantage of her. He is practicing to become a singer, and has genuine talent, but he's also a mooch, hitting Nita up for a "tenner" every time she gets paid. The mother saves special ire for Shankar, telling him to get a job, calling him dead weight on the family who eats for free and does nothing to contribute. But Nita loves her brother. She has a photograph taken when they were little and the only two children yet born. Nita keeps it close by her bedside because it reminds her of happier times. Shankar has the soul of an artist. He still treats Nita like a baby sister, but he also encourages her to follow her dreams. His pet name for her is "Idiot", but it is said with love and humor. Nita knows her brother needs her, and she accepts him for who he is. She knows he will make it as a singer and tells him so.
As Nita works hard to support her family, a young man from the university becomes interested. He is Sanat, a handsome physics student who is also pursuing a degree in order to move up in the world at a time when India was rising out of the middle ages. Nita's parents like Sanat. Dad likes him because he is educated, Mom likes him because of the promise of more money if he marries Nita (Mom only cares about money), but Sanat has a roving eye, and he catches the attention of Nita's younger sister Gita, a sultry seductress with the sensibilities of a Valley Girl. All Gita cares about is shopping, for new Saris and makeup. She doesn't have the money for these things, so she uses another reliable currency - her looks and her smile, to charm Sanat away from her angelic, responsible sister. The next thing you know, Sanat and Gita are engaged to be married, and Nita the good girl is left in the lurch.
The fourth sibling, a brother named Mantu, is leaving the family hovel to take work in a factory, but only because he has been selected for their soccer team. Mantu is glad to be out, even if it means hard manual labor. He will even return on occasion to contribute part of his salary to the family coffers, but he wants nothing more to do with the instability inside that home.
Everything is on Nita's shoulders. The rest of the family depends on her entirely, and now it looks as though she will need to quit the university and take a second job, because the rent is overdue and the grocer will no longer extend credit. On the surface, Nita seems happy to oblige. No sacrifice is too great for her, so long as she can help her family, and in fact you can see in her expression that she enjoys her martyr role, because with it she becomes Head Of The Family over her ineffectual father and her griping mother, who bitches about everything but has never contributed anything of value to her children.
It's all a bit soap opera-ish, and reminiscent in plot of some of Yajuhiro Ozu's Daughter Dramas like "Late Spring" or "Early Summer", both starring the great Setsuko Hara. Cinematically the film resembles the work of Ghatak's legendary countryman Satyajit Ray, yet Ghatak goes further with his brilliant camerawork, often framing his actors against fluttering patterns of light. His nighttime photography is stunning and reminded me of the imagery of another Japanese director, Kenzo Mizoguchi, whose movies also depicted deep suffering. Ghatak also uses a European technique, perhaps made famous by Bergman or Antonioni, where he will frame two actors facing the camera at different depths and angles. The closer one will look at the corner of the frame while the one in back, usually the character of Nita, will recite her dialogue poetically with a dreamy-eyed smile on her face. It appears as if Ghatak has many influences, but he uses them to create a work wholly his own. This is a tremendous looking film with a musical backdrop than runs through the entirety like a form of narration.
At 139 minutes, ir's a tad long and very slow in parts, but then it's an art film and meant to affect the viewer as more than simple entertainment. Watching it reminded me of my nights at the former CSUN Cinematheque, where Professor Tim would begin the evening with a lecture on the movie and it's director. Man, I miss The Professor and our Thursday Nights at the Cinematheque!
This is one of those movies that I cannot recommend highly enough. The actors are uniformly excellent and again, the photography and soundtrack and absolutely stunning. As with many foreign films, you'll have to have patience, but you'll be richly rewarded in return.
Two Gigantic Thumbs Up for "The Cloud-Capped Star". Apparently, the films of Ritwik Ghatak have been tied up for a long time by contractual matters or even lack of perceived interest, but now that this masterpiece has been restored, hopefully we can look forward to more from this unusual director, who himself was a schizophrenic and severe alcoholic who died at age 50. ////
That's all for now. It's Saturday afternoon and we're gonna try for a hike. "We" means you and me, remember? So I'll meet ya at the trail and then I'll see you back here at the Usual Time later tonight.
Tons and tons of love! xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)