Trailer Mash-Up - Best Of List

Gracious thanks to Dave During for letting us post one of his well-kept super secret awesome lists. You can contact the man at daveduring@gmail.com and maybe he'll be your friend. MAYBE. We look forward to posting more work of this dye in the wool cinemaphile in the near future.

****
In no particular order here are some of the funniest re-cut trailers you can find on the net.

Enjoy!

Must Love Jaws
A Romantic Comedy
Tagline: In a place where all hope is lost, love comes to the surface...
View Clip

10 Things I Hate About Commandments
A coming of age teenage comedy
Tagline: At Pharoe High, Ramsies was the biggest playa around, but when the new kid in school realized hanging with the in crowd wasn’t that easy he took a stand.
View Clip

Shining A heart-warming family drama
Tagline: Meet Jack Torrence, he’s a writer looking for inspiration…
View Clip

Brokeback To The Future
A love story
Tagline: It was an experiment in time. The one variable they forgot was love.
View Clip

Toy Story 2: Requiem
A drug fueled tragedy
Tagline: Woody goes to infinity and beyond to score some of that Brody shit.
View Clip

Dumb and Dumber
A Slasher Movie
Tagline: “You’re more likely to get killed on the way to the airport…”
View Clip

****

Re-Animator (US. 1985)

"Herbert West has a very hood head on his shoulders... and another one in a dish on his desk."

Re-animator is one of the stalwarts of 80’s gore comedy that still holds up today as a classic of the genre. Director/Writer Stuart Gordon (Who originally toiled in Theater before making his big screen debut) excels at what was originally designed by as quick cash grab by producing partners Bryan Yuzna and Charles Band. Gordon loosely adapts the original story by H.P Lovecraft about Doctor Herbert West and his horrifying discovery that there’s a way to bring the dead back to life. This time, the story is transposed to modern times and the main focus is pulled away from Mr. West and is put on pretty boy med school student Dean Cain (Bruce Abbott). He and his girlfriend (Barbara Crampton) have a wonderful future of yuppie emptiness in front of them. Well, that’s until Mr. West makes his neurotic appearance as Dean’s new roommate. It’s then that we clearly see why this is considered a CLASSIC: Ladies and Gentlemen Jeffery Combs. His fantastic performance as the titular doctor is one that’s filled with so much screen charisma that you may suffocate under its weight. Anyone that can sell a scene where they fight zombie cat (A stuffed animal) and sell it as a matter of life and death is going on my “Wall of Glory for a Performance Filled with Squinty Delivery through Clenched Teeth” The rest of the actor’s are flat as boards but that’s to be expected in this type of film. The real reason you came to the party was to get shocked and entertained. If so, step right up to the surgical table and try not to slip on the slippery stuff on the floor. We’ve got surgical saws through the chest, heads ripped off and sentient intestines to keep you busy. There’s nothing here that hasn’t been plagiarized a million times over, but it’ still done with wit and flair. The Bernard Herman -sque score by Charles Band propels things forward with its twangy urgency. You know that they don’t make ‘em like this anymore when the climax involves over twenty freshly dead NAKED zombies. Yikes. There’s also the famous scene where a decapitated head goes down on a…yea…well…You get the idea.

DVD: Re-released about a million times under about ten different labels, Re-Animator has finally done it all with last year's Anchor Bay's Special Edition. There's a dry but interest commentary from Gordon, a giggly fun commentary from the cast and Producer Bryan Yuzna. The second disc has has an hour and a half documentary on the production, an hour interview with the producer and the director and...I'm suprised they didn't include the filmmakers first born with this

The Forbidden Kingdom (North America, 2008)

A ‘ Jackie Chan/Jet Li team up’ has been nothing but a dream in the fairy dust filled heads of Hong Kong film Junkies since the early 80’s. By the time both of them exploded on the international scene as house-hold kung-fu maestros, the chances of them duking it out were next to oblivion. It was a match that was so jaw dropping obvious that Lord Logic had sworn it would never happen. When 2008 showed up both of stars were well into their 50’s and were rolling around in donkey dung on a regular basis. (A.K.A Making Crappy Films) The chances of them returning to the glory days of 'faster then light kicks to the crotch' were just as good ME fighting them. We all had to accept it. I would have won anyway.

And then I heard that they where about to star Hollywood funded Disney style adventure. It was going to be an adaptation (Bastardization) of the Chinese “Monkey King” legend. The lead was going to be some white kid from the Bronx who gets sent to ‘The Magical Fantasy Land of China’. It was directed by the guy helmed the Eddie Murphy abortion ‘The Haunted Mansion.’ Jackie and Jet where going to be the sidekicks. All the fun would be of the family variety. I cried bloody tears.

With every sliver of crappy marketing the film groaned under the weight of failure. It was only after I cried mercy that some good started to filter through: The film was shot by Peter Pau, the cinematographer of MANY classic Hong Kong/China films (Bride with White Hair, Swordsman, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.) It co-starred rising martial arts star Collin Chou. It was action choreographed by Hollywood friendly, but still BRILLIANT, Yue-Wo Ping. None of that meant I was going to rush to the cinema to see it any time soon. It just meant I wouldn’t have to hurt any small animals when it was released.

I finally buckled like a belt, paid my four dollars (Rainbow Cinema: Tuesdays) and watched it with an open mind.

Colour me suprised.

Forbidden Kingdom knows that it’s a kid-friendly blockbuster starring two of the most well known martial artists of all time and it never white-washes itself for mass consumption. It’s covered in film geek references to kung-fu fantasy films of days gone by. The opening credits themselves are packed with posters from the CLASSICS of the genre. They never had to do that. The only person who’d get it

The main Caucasian ‘star’ (Michael Angarano) may be the gateway to the world but by the end of the tale he’s nothing more than a glorified sidekick. And while the kid may look like a Shia Laboeuf clone he still has enough of charismatic screen presence to keep you interested. Collin Chou is a generic villain that has the moves. Female love interest Yifei Liu looks pretty and pouts. Jet Li and Jackie Chan look like they’re having the more fun on screen then they had in any North American film in the last ten years.

The action by Woo-ping Yuen is fast and plentiful, but not very original. It reeks of been there done that. The cinematography is fluid and engaging as expected. The ‘humor’ is lame and predictable. And for some reason, there was a lot of violence. People are shot on screen, killed by giant knife darts and shot by arrows. During the final fight I actually felt in my gut that the kid was being beaten to a bloody pulp. It was a surprising change from the usual light and fluffy way Hollywood treats people smacking themselves around. I don’t’ know about you, but when I’ve gotten into fights it hurts. Quite a bit.

If you want to see Jet and Jackie fight they could have done ten million times worth. It’s not a Hong Kong film, but it’s the closest we’re ever going to get from the studio system. And that’s saying a lot. See it.

Arnie Love: Part 1

I will never apologize for knowing every-line of “Commando” by heart. I’m a ripped wife-beater wearing member of the cult of the Austrian Giant. I’ll be the first in line if Ah-Nold is holding a giant (metaphorically throbbing) gun on the cover, smiling his muscle bound grin and seconds away from spitting out a one liner that could decapitate an army of giant killer serpents. The only problem I have with the ‘Nold (Other then having him kick sand in my face) is the way his career watered itself down to nothing as the years took their toll. In the 80’s a Schwarzenegger was a chunk of raw meat cut off in it a helpless baby animal with a bone saw. In the late 90’s it was canned meat that had been sitting on the shelf too long. During this period, sometimes with the right person nudging him along he’d hit one out of the park (Mostly James Cameron: Terminator 2, True Lies) but everything else was bewildering stuff to say the least (Junior, Twins, Jingle All The Way). Finally, the turn of the millennium was not kind to the one *coughgreatcough* actor: Collateral Damage, Terminator 3, The 6th Day. All of themsteaming piles of doo-doo that is better And while the satan V.S The Undefeatable Man-Granite was entertaining for having our hero knock an 80 year old woman through a glass table it was still a pale initiation of what has come before.

This was supposed to be a review of “Total Recall” but I got so caught up in writing the introduction that I’m going to rant and rave about few of Arnold’s films (in no particular order) and highlight why I hold these close to my heart every night I drift off into a world filled with “YARRRRRRRRRR”

Terminator - Arnie comes from the future to kill the mother of a soon to be born revolutionary, or something, the 80's dazzle was too blinding. Lots of people die! They fall through glass thing as our hero...Oh...Arnie's the villain? Whatever. He's the hero. Okay. When the HERO shoots everyone falls through giant glass things. Then Arnold glowers. He glowers a lot in this movie. It quickly became the first piece of his acting chops. It went from glowering, to squinting and finally to wide eyed suprise, then more glowering to spice things up. Arnie wears a cool leather jacket. We learn that he’s really a robot. Surprise?

Commando - Arnie needs to save his daughter so shit gets blown up. Not enough people have their arms sliced off by buzz saw balde (Only One?). Arnie can seemingly psychically deflect bullets and make them his friends (Something that he’s used throughout his career). He can get machinery to start with the threat of violence. He lies and as a result people to their death. Laws of physics don’t apply because he IS A LAW OF PHYSIC. “

Totall Recall – Arnie goes to Mars and sees a girl with three breasts. He saves people, I think, I was too busy being freaked out of my mind by the expression “They’re eyes popped out of their skull!” being taken bloody literally. It made me believe we all have a little deformed midget psychic siamese brother named Klattu in all of us. It also illustrated to me that when people get shot half of their body exits with the bullet.

Cemetery Man (Italy, 1994)

Cemetery Man. How I love thee.

I may be looking at it through a haze of nostalgia (or it could simply be the crappy Canadian only VHS tape I own) but "Dellamorte Dellamore" is the greatest gore-art-film that Sam Raimi, Wong Kar Wai aand Dario Argento birthed in an alternate dimension where Italian films ALL star Rupert Everett. Mr. Everett stars as the MAN in question, who we learn in the opening scene, is the care-taker of the cemetery. This means he walks around in a towel, cigarette dangling from his lips and blows away the recently dead with a six shooter loaded with explosive DUMB DUMB bullets. And that's pretty normal compared to what happens after the credits. You see, Mr. Dellamorte isn't leading a happy life. He constantly has to take care of those pesky zombies, he has debts to pay, and the living are such a bother. Well, that is until he meets the beautiful GIRL and they have a passionate night of love-making as the souls of the dead fly around them. He thinks that maybe there's more to life. He may even quit his job. Then she dies. And comes back. Again. And Again. And Again. But that doesn't stop our hero from wanting to get out. All he needs to do is take care of the bus-load of dead bikers and a platoon of boyscout before he closes shop. On second though, more bullets may be necessary. . Is it all a dream? Hallucination? I won't tell you if we get those answers, but you you owe it to yourself to seek out a film that defies your attempts to pin it down. Is it a dark social comedy? A boyscout killing gore film? Graveyard based erotica? Or is it simply a deconstruction of our beliefs that we all have a higher place in life? WATCH IT!

Bad Taste (1987. New Zealand)

TRAILER HERE

DIRECTOR: Peter Jackson

A retarded splatter comedy from the man who orchestrated the oscar winning trilogy that had something to do with Lords and Rings (The Non Porno version you dirty minded bugger) , Bad Taste is a cheap, messy and probably sticky piece of no-budget glee.

A group of government agents with double digit IQ’S (combined) are sent to investigate a small New Zealand town that’s been completely deserted. They quickly figure out that the perpetrators are a bunch of pesky vomit eating aliens that plan on turning the earth’s population into an ultra tasty item on ttheir intergalactic fast food chain menu. It’s now up to our heroes to shoot, decapitate and chainsaw their way to the human's race survival! All they need to worry about is that the belt is tight enoug around their head to keep the brains from falling out.

Shot over a few years on a cheap hand-crank 16 millimetre camcorder that could only record 60 seconds of film at a time (Without Synch Sound), Bad Taste should be remember as nothing more then a backyard failure. The main actors mumble their way through stilted lines, the story makes zero sense and all the extras that are blown away in the so-called “action scenes” are the same three guys with different wigs on. It’s so cheap that it it probably isn't worth your time. Go read a book instead!

If you think the above is true, you’re wrong, please leave the class. And don’t come back. (Except reading...someone told me that's enjoyable. I wouldn't know.)

Filmmakers take note: If the budget eludes you, make it up with a slavish case of go for broke enthusiasm. Every frame of this blood drenched classic feels like a bunch of pals fooling around on weekends and loving every second of it. It also helps that a certain amateur director was testing out his chops on a bunch of cinematic techniques. Sure, it’s sloppy and self-indulgent, but there’s enough swooping camera moves, decent alien affects and a few impressive explosions to make it a cut above the rest. It looks threadbare because at the end of the day it’s still a dummy that’s being thrown off the cliff. We can tell it’s a dummy. They know it’s a dummy. No one cares. All that matters is that it gets a grin on your face.

“Bad Taste” is the perfect example of a filmmaking drug. After viewing it, not only will you have enjoyed it, but you’ll want to do the same. And all you need are a few suckers that are willing to be covered in vomit. Anything for entertainment!

DVD: Anchor Bay put out a bare bones editions years back with amazing picture quality (For it’s source) that you can pick up at any retail location. The Holographic two disc edition isn’t anything to shout to the heavens about, but the 40 minute made for tv doc (around the time it came out) “Good Taste Made Bad” is good enough to hunt down to watch once.

NOTE: Peter Jackson plays not just one but TWO roles. He’s the drooling agent Derek and the bearded drooling Alien. The reason for the roles was because Jackson couldn’t always get his friends to come out and shoot, so he’d go out and shoot whole scenes by himself.

Equlibrium (2002)

Director/Writer: Kurt Wimmer

Appearing on the scene with nary a whimper and a bum’s rush theatrical release, Equilibrium by all accounts should have been stamped with a 5$ price tag and completely forgotten besides "Encino Man". It was only thanks to a huge wave of praise from Ultra-Geek Film Sites like CHUD and AINTITCOOL that the film became a minor cult smash on DVD.

“In a futuristic world, a strict regime has eliminated war by suppressing emotions: books, art and music are strictly forbidden and feeling is a crime punishable by death. Cleric John Preston (Bale) is a top ranking government agent responsible for destroying those who resist the rules. When he misses a dose of Prozium, a mind-altering drug that hinders emotion, Preston, who has been trained to enforce the strict laws of the new regime, suddenly becomes the only person capable of overthrowing it.”

This tale of dystopia isn’t anything we haven’t seen before. It’s a lumbering monster of all the best parts from 1984, Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451 by way of the John Woo gun-fight. It’s not re-inventing the wheel. It’s just a stripped down mini-budgeted actioner with a solid performance from the dour as always Christopher Bale. The whole “Gun-Kata” phenomenon that was trumpeted to the high heavens is nothing more then a few show-off gymnastic moves thrown into a gun-fight. It isn't eye-openingly awesome in the few short action scenes that pepper the last act. It's just a nifty novelty. I loved this film when it first came out, but over time I’ve found it hasn’t stood up to repeated viewings. The generic futuristic world probably has something to do with it.

NOTE: Avoid at all costs the director’s follow up “Ultraviolet” which was promised to be his ultimate cinematic vision but ended up being hodge-podge producer’s cut mockery of an action film.

Oddly enough, the most hated filmmaker alive UWE BOLL admits to stealing the concept of the in-the-dark gun battle for his film ALONE IN THE DARK.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (US. 2005)

DIRECTOR/WRITER: SHANE BLACK

It’s difficult to sum up something that’s as pitch perfect as the self aware comedy crime film Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. I’ve gone through all the great lines, hilarious characters and slick direction and tried to find a no-fool way to present it to you, dear reader, in a way that would make you want to see it now. As in run out your door and GO GET A COPY OF KISS KISS BANG BANG NOW! Are you gone yet?

"In LA, while escaping from the police after an unsuccessful robbery, the small time thief Harry Lockhart (Robert Downey Jr) is accidentally submitted to an audition for a role of detective in a movie, and invited to a party. He meets a private eye Gay Perry (Val Kilmer), who suggests him to participate of an investigation to develop his character. He also meets the gorgeous aspirant actress Harmony Faith Lane (Michelle Monoghan), and finds that she was a friend of his childhood for whom he had a crush. Harry and Perry get involved in an intricate murder case with many leads. With the support of Harmony, they find the sordid truth of the case"

The story here isn’t the important. In fact, it’s almost an afterthought. The two mysteries (That are really one) are presented in an incredibly convoluted way that befuddles more then it makes you go “Aw! So that’s how it was done!” The fun here isn’t the reveal, it's the ride. Robert Downey Jr and Val Kilmer literally light the screen on fire every time they banter back and forth at a speed that breaks the sound-barrier. They even get to play a dramatic beat or two that somehow doesn’t feel out of place between the spiders between cleavages and lines like “I’m knee deep in Pussy. I just liked Gay Perry so much I kept the name.” Michelle Monaghan looks suitably hot in a little Santa Clause number and the villains are pure 80’s cheese.

There’s absolutely no way you can catch every joke in one viewing. It’ll take two, three, even five go around for you to even begin to catch the way gags and visual cues expand, stretch and fall into each other like dominoes. Shane Black is famous for his wicked smart screenplays (most have been rotting away in development hell since he burst onto the scene with Lethal Weapon) and with his first directorial gig he puts it all on screen. It’s stylish, with a self-conscious use of color and lighting, without ever losing sight of the characters we slowly learn to love.

KKBB is a small film, there’s no denying that, but it does everything so well that it’s a must. It's not an action film (other then a few guns going off), it's a comedy with heart and creative passion to work in a genre and give you something fresh.

DVD: A skimpy little release for a film that BOMBED at the box office. There's a commentary from the two leads that is way jokey (to a fault) and I really wished the director/screenwriter had his own track. There's a puff piece Making Of and that's about it.


...And why the hell does every Shane Black film take place during Christmas? (Lethal Weapon, Last Kiss Goodnight)

SCREENING: Troll 2 at the Bloor, May 31'st!

There’s enough film labeled as THE WORST CHUNK OF CINEMATIC TURD TO EVER FESTER BLOODY TEARS FROM YOUR EYE SOCKETS to choke a large bloodthirsty garbage leopard (Editor: "Jesus christ, Justin, what are you on?), but there’s only a few as un-seen as TROLL 2.

Mostly famous for its “WORST REACTION EVER” attached to the much-seen Youtube clip HERE, Troll 2 will always go down in infamy for its subtle pieces of writing (The town is called Nilbog. Hold that up to a mirror) and its awesome use of ZERO trolls during its running time. it would be a fantastic film to see in front of a bunch of like-minded fans ready to laugh till it hurts. Too bad no one will ever screen it…*sigh*

WAIT!? WHAT’S THAT!? Cinematic organizers extraordinaire Rue Morgue and Toronto After Dark are putting on a screening at the Bloor Cinema (506 Bloor St. W.) on Saturday May 31 at 9:30 p.m!!?? Be there or be turned into a plant. Then the gobl--- I mean TROLLS --- can eat you. They're vegetarians.

Join the Face-Book Group

Indiana Jones and the alright movie.

D:

I've just come back from seeing "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull", and while it will surely stand it's place in what movie nerds everywhere are calling the "Indy canon" (*rolls eyes*) from my first impressions, I would place this an inch behind Temple of Doom. If you're reading this, you've probably heard of some of the plot elements or even seen the movie already so I won't go over the plot in detail. I will however, go over some things that I found worked, and things I thought went wrong.

*YA-HARR, HERE BE SPOILERS, M'YAR"

The opening: for some reason, I found this to be the weakest part of the film. After the interesting sequence with the fun-riding teens, the introduction to the major characters seemed stilted and uninteresting. The whole thing of Indy helping out the bad guys was weird to say the least. One of my only problems with this film is the script. The whole opening sequence, even the entire movie is incredibly clunky. Only the visuals and the enthusiastic actors manage to tie it together. Which brings me to Shia, playing the character of Mutt Williams.

I think that "Da Beef" is a great addition to the cast. He held his own and showed he has the chops to be an action star. Harrison is, of course, great as Indiana Jones, although his age is indeed starting to show through. This 4th film marks the return of Marion, our favorite Indy girl from the 1st and best film of the series, "Raiders of the Lost Ark". I felt the best and funniest scenes were those where Marion, Indy and Mutt interacting and bantering, however few and far between these scenes are. Also here is Cate Blanchett, doing commendably with what she's given as Russian spy Irina Spalko.

The pace of the film is often clunky, with long eerie cave explorations interspersed with bouts of heavy-handed exposition, but this is all part of the Indy M.O. At least John Williams' competent score gives all these drawn out segment the necessary sense of awe and wonder. The action scenes are well done, especially a chase through a college town and the truck chase through the jungle, which is the equivalent of the tank chase in "Last Crusade".

In the end, I enjoyed it, but I thought it could have been much better. I have no inclination to see it again soon, although I wouldn't mind ;)

Crows Zero (Japan, 2008)

TRAILER HERE

Takashi Miike is one of the most prolific and successful film directors that ever lived. And while while a craptacular filmakers like Jess Franco (Filmography) churned them out like they had no soul, the final films usually sucked harder than a demon possessed shop-vac. Miike on the other hand continually delivers entertaining AND original films with every sneeze. His horror film AUDITION was even included in AFI 100 horror films of all time! He’s done zombie-musical-family comedies, gay abstract art films, and hyper-violent dark comedies. And while his work has slowly took on a polished sheen, he’s never lost the little touches that make his work FEEL like a Takshii Miike film (The odd side characters, slightly saggy middles, crazy opening montages)

In the case of Crow Zero, it’s an extension of his dramatic work that he touched upon in the “Osaka” series of teenage gang films, except this time it has 10 times the budget and is filled with a plethora of Japanese pops stars.

“Based on a long running and incredibly popular manga, the story begins with Shun Oguri is Genji, a student freshly transferred to Suzuran high, a school legendary for the out of control violence that dominates social life there. The students are banded into factions, rival gangs openly battling for control in the halls, teachers or any other form of authority absolutely impotent. It’s the sort of school nobody in their right mind would willingly choose to attend but Genji has done just that, transferring to the school with the goal of doing what nobody has ever done in the entire history of the place: battle his way to the top of the heap, unite the factions and be recognized as the undisputed king of Suzuran, a feat his yakuza boss father tried and failed to accomplish himself as a student of Suzuran decades before.”

When talking about the oeuvre of Takashi Miike, it’s too easy to concentrate on just the weirdness. The man does have a habit of going off-the wall, but he also understands the key building blocks of storytelling. He may throw in a completely cartoony giant hammer fight in the middle of a story about two old friends (Dead or Alive 2) but it’ usually done in a tone that fits with the rest of the story. Many may find it odd that “Crows Zero” succeeds not because of its action or odd directorial flourishes, but because of its endearing cast of characters. Not to say that there isn’t any action, because there is, tons of it really. The realistic (but still heavily stylized) fist fights on display are all lengthy, creative and perfectly shot. But we actually care about the characters by the time the final fights roll in and while the subject matter isn’t very dramatic (Two boys fight for dominance of a school) it’s done in a sly mix of heavy handed drama and light heartedness (The final fight is inter-cut with another character’s pop song!) that it’s watchable without being cloying. There’s no real reason to really hate the main foil of our hero but we’re still cheering every bone crunching hit. It’s a perfect example of creating light pop entertainment. Without a doubt the most accessible film of the director’s career. The only thing that may turn you off is the TWO HOUR AND NINE MINUTE RUNNING TIME but that’s to be expected from Miike.

NOTE: AGITATOR by Tom Mes is a very in depth (If academically dry) book that analyzes all the director's work from his first feature onward. You can pick it up HERE

DVD: Guaranteed to be released on DVD in North America sometime in the near future. The film is currently only available in super expensive (But English subtitled form) from Japan. You can pick up copy at YesAsia HERE

Chocolate (Thailand, 2008) and Machine Girl (Japan, 2008)

I was a little bit out of it yesterday, so I'm sorry for the lack updates. To make up for it, here are two reviews I wrote months ago for the print version of "V-Comet" (http://vcomet.blogspot.com/) that never saw the light of day. Enjoy! And please, don't hurt me.

CHOCOLATE (Thailand, 2008)

Director: Prachya Pinkaew, Starring: JeeJa Yanin

“From the team that brought you Ong-Bak and Tom Yum Goon: A girl beats a bunch of people to a bloody pulp!"

TRAILER HERE (Skip to the minute and a half mark)

*approaches the desk* The copy of "Chocolate" I watched didn’t have subtitles. I’ll even cop out to fast forwarding when the things started to melt into over-dramatic slime. I know, I’m bad. You can beat me up with lots of elbows, fists and crazy finishing moves because this movie STILL got me all riled up for some fights. Don’t get me wrong, Director Prachya Pinkaew still doesn’t know how to put together a comprehensible film (but he does know how to shoot a pretty one). The story of an autistic girl trying to solve a murder (?) is slow, heavy handed and scatter-shot, but really, when you have action this good (from the mind of Panna Rittikrai) it doesn't really matter. And while nothing reaches the height of their past collaborations with Tony Jaa, the stuff on display is still bone crunchingly creative. Female New-Comer JeeJa Yanin may seem a little stiff at first but the sheer amount of acrobatics she pulls off will impress even the most jaded martial arts snob and gives you an excuse to sell this as a “Feminist Action flick” to your cynical girlfriend. The use of multi-layered locations is also incredibly high on the eye-candy scale, with the climatic “Fight on a Side of a Building” probably guilty of killing at least half a dozen Thai stunt men.

DVD: The Weinstein company is going to release this on their "Dragon Dynasty" label in a few months, but until then you can pre-order the soon to be released HK version (Cheap but bare bones) at HKFLIX (here)

THE MACHINE GIRL (Japan, 2008)

“There’s a machine gun arm, a school girl outfit and a soft core porn actress. SOLID GOLD!”

Director: Noboru Iguchi Starring: Asami, Honoka, Yuva Ishikawa.

TRAILER HERE (Bloody. Very Bloody. And there's ninjas.)

The Machine Girl is a surprisingly well put together piece of exploitation that tries so hard you can’t help yourself from smling as you're covered in its geysers of arterial blood. The kick-ass poster sums up the film in one startling image: Young girl gets her family killed and her arm chopped off. She replaces it with a machine gun and SEEKS REVENGE! Against all odds, the film manages to look slick despite it having such a low budget and being shot on DV production; not only is all the chainsaw action lit correctly, but it's also competently shot and directed. The acting is expectedly over the top, SFX are cheap (Duh) and they come so fast and furious in the last act that every gore hound will be satiated. Which brings me to my main problem with the film: There are only so many geysers of shooting blood I can take before I start getting a little bored. The audience I was with was hootering and hollering at first but slowly died down once we saw the Umpteenth head get ripped off. I’m not saying that it’s a bad thing; just that there should have been a little bit more variation in the kills. (Ninja stars? Again?) Still, this is a keeper for everyone hankering for some splattery fun.

DVD: Because the film was funded by an American Company (Tokyo Shock), there's going to be an extremely cheap DVD release happening on June 3rd. It should be available at your local FutureShop, Best Buy or HMV.

Fahrenheit 451 (1966)

There's much to be said about cinema and the ways it can touch us, affect us in its own subtle way. Some of us want adventures, others romance. A few even delight in the karo syrup drenched macabre. I crave these feelings that can be lived through film, and as I venture more and more into the cinematic past, unearthing the classics, this phrase comes so often to my lips: "They don't make 'em like this anymore."

It's not often that I think of myself as an old fart, or even curmudgeony, but the feeling sure came up while watching Fahrenheit 451 by French standby François Truffaud. Was it the Technicolor? The stilted, outdated vision of a future? Or is it the fantastic score by legendary film composer Bernard Herrmann, at times yearning, at times hypnotic? Everything in this film somehow feels right... a feeling of rightness that I can't often find in the films of the 21st century.

I think it must be the source material.

Although I have only read Ray Bradbury's novel once, the film seemed to sum up it's spirit quite well. It is a post-censorship future in an unnamed land (the television personalities have British accents; the protagonist, a French one) where books are banned and firemen start fires instead of putting them out. The zombie-plebes eke out their lives in their living rooms, watching their view-screens, which broadcast bland programs and brain-washing segments.

Montag is a fireman. His job is to find books and burn them. He slides up and down the pole of his fire station with the same bland expression every day... but someone senses he is different. A girl, Clarisse, who has a marked resemblance to his wife (both played by Julie Christie) chats him up one day on the suspended monorail. It's an innocent interchange, but some of her questions disturb Montag.

"Have you ever read any of the books that you burn?"

"Are you happy?" (before quickly darting away)

"What do you think, Linda?"

This is the perfect setup for the exploration of themes that fascinate me so much... Freedom of expression, the banality of modern entertainment, the death of literacy. All things that seem far-fetched, but somewhat believable, if one would look at the youth of today, a collective of tech-savvy, but word-weary youngsters who frown upon reading anything more complicated than the "Harry Potter" novels. I suppose the fact that I'm an avid reader lent itself well to the scenes of horror in this film. Long, agonizing shots of pages slowly curling up into dark ash "Like flowers, or a butterfly." One shot especially, of a page from Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov" slowly being carbonated, caused me to hiss in outrage.

Some would call this film outdated or corny. Certainly on the visual level, there is much to be desired by today's standard, but the storytelling here is excellent, and there is a bountiful collection of moments in this film that shine like diamonds in the rough. When Montag hesitantly reads the first paragraph of Charles Dickens' "David Copperfield"; the scene where Montag reads from a novel to the vapid wives gathered in his home, causing one of them to cry; and whom who has seen this film could forget the hypnotizing final minutes, as humanity's last hope wanders the banks of a snowy river, reciting from the novels they have memorized, as Bernard Herrmann's score, subtly recalling Barber's Adagio for Strings, yearns in the background.

Indiana Jones and the KOTCS (U.S 2008)

Well, by the end of the weekend everyone and their dog Indy will have seen Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. So, instead of a full blown review, here are a few thoughts that whipped through my head as the adventures of our favorite archaeologist unraveled on-screen:

- Indy is back. The second the hat is pulled from the stinkin' commie truck, Harrison Ford settles down into his wise-cracking hero character with the greatest of ease. At first, I felt that Ford felt a little forced on screen, but on further examination it was just my sub-conscious fighting the fact that there was a new Indiana Jones film on screen. No one ever thought it could happen

-Shia Laboeuf is a fun sidekick, but then again, I always liked the guy so my opinion is iffy at best. If you’re worried about his quirks: He never goes “NO! NO! NO!” while running away from the big giant things chasing after him. In fact, he performs his own little action scene with guts and screen presence to spare.

-The action, when it pops on screen, is creative and multi-layered. We’re talking about "the last half hour of Temple of Doom” multi-layering. I had a grin on my face a mile wide as the heroes went from a car chase, to a fistfight, to a car-top sword-fight and finally to a fistfight surrounded by giant man eating ants. Fear of Indy becoming too “Kinetic” are unfounded because the whole thing reeks of analog. And other then the fridge bit (which I liked for it’s out-of-nowhere-ness) I didn’t find Indy had superman syndrome at all.

-This bad boy needed cutting. It doesn’t have enough momentum to sustain its two hour running time and one scene in particular drags on and on with unnecessary exposition about the skull in question. You could make the case that Raiders had the same issue, but then you’d be nothing more than a nitpicking dweeb. Spielberg needs a refresher on trimming up the fat (Who am I kidding? That’s been his downfall for the last 15 years) And there should have been one more "big" action beat to quicken things up, but I say that for every movie I see. The sheer length of the scenes probably equal three times any flick you’ll see in your local multiplexes this summer.

- The ending is a wet paper bag exploding in millions of dollars worth of CGI. Indy stops being a participant and takes a step back to let the Deus Ex Machina do its work. They did the same thing in Raiders, but at least that seemed earned and had a payoff. Here, nothing. Just a lot of computer effects swirling around that signify nothing. The epilogue is touching enough, but the bad taste in my mouth still stuck as the end credits rolled.

My least favorite sequel, but one that still fight nicely in the Indy canon, Crystal Skull doesn’t disappoint nor does it blow you away. It’s an Indy film that doesn’t completely molest your child memories and for that, I’m eternally thankful.

Dragon Squad (Hong Kong. 2007)

Dragon Squad/Dragon Heat (Why the hell did they change the title!?) is about a bunch of cops (Horrifyingly bad pop-star actors) who fight crime. Well, their stunt doubles fight crime. And they...Well...*sigh* This movie hurt to watch. I'm at a loss for words at how much pain the mind numbing attempt at a hollywood/east product caused to what little grey matter I have left.

Framed and shot to make it look more internationally pleasing (As in: like the cameraperson was having continual seizures) it comes off as meek imitation of films like "The Bourne Supremacy" and "Collateral" instead. The convoluted story (Something about gangs…revenge…I think…Urghhh) isn’t helped by the editors mainlining pop rox and sitting down to put it all together in a giant sleepless marathon. It jumps around more often than a headless chicken on a trampoline. You know trouble is amiss with when you’re introduced to 15+ characters (All with their own snazzy title card) within the first 7 minutes of the film. And maybe all would be forgiven (No, it wouldn’t) if the action was any good, but as previously mentioned everything is shot so close and cut so quick that it’s completely incompressible. It doesn’t help that style over substance director Daniel Lee throws every directorial trick in the book (Stop-Frame, Shutter Speed Changes, Blue Tinted Filters) to make it all look snazzy and expensive. And it causes bits of brain to leak out of your ears.

To add insult to injury, genre Vet Sammo Hung and Simon Yam are completely wasted their roles as policemen. It takes skill to screw up a fight starring everyone’s favorite rotund acrobat, but the creative team here pulls it off admirably. Michael Bien (Terminator, Grind-House) does a good job at phoning in his top baddie performance from half-way across the world. I wonder if he gets good rates.

To cap off the whole affair, the film is produced by Steven Segal. If the mention of everyone's favorite pony tailed buddhist fat-man hiding in his giant mumu doesn’t smell like North American cash, I don’t what does.

DVD: Released by "Dragon Dynasty" (Hong Kong importer extrodinaire. Part of the evil Weinstein company) the DVD is pretty bare for such a recent flick. The most interesting part, as per all of DD's releases is the commentary track by HK film expert Bey Logan. The most insteresting his participation on this film in particular is that he was an executive producer on the project. Sadly, he's actually entertaining and it's not composed of him going "I'm sorry....I'm so sorry..."

Three Kings (US. 1999)

Directed by David O. Russell

It’s difficult to separate the art from the artist once the violent, screaming truths are unleashed. If you know anything about director David O. Russel, you’ve undoubtedly seen his hissy “YOU FUCKING CUNT” filled fit against actor Lily Thompson on the set of “I Heart Huckabees". (And if you haven’t…well, click here). The guy he belittles his crew to the point of making them cry and actor's he's worked with in the past swear they’ll never work with him again. We should bury the jack-ass and his sun baked turd sandwiches he calls his “oeuvre” right? The problem is that his movies are so damn good. From the slyly comedic incestuous subject matter of “Spanking the Money” to his broader dark comedy “Flirting with Disaster” and finally his third film, an odd mix of political tinged drama with a little bit of stylistic action to calm the masses. It’s an odd beast, but it finds its own voice quickly and delivers its message till the end credits role.

The gulf war is over. And for most of the US army it never really started. Four soldiers (George Clooney, Mark Wahlberg, Ice Cube and Spike Jonze) find a treasure map up between a prisoner's butt cheeks and hatch a plan to steal the gold it supposedly leads too. The only problem is the people who live in the town and the fact that they’ll be killed if they don’t do anything. It’s a tossup between following the rules and getting out with all the riches in the world or breaking the law and helping out your fellow man. Tough.

Starting off as a broad stylized piece of work, the film quickly finds its own groove and splits its more dramatic bits with its broad comedy while still managing to shoe-in a bit of action (mostly composed of people jumping forward in slow motion as something explodes in the background). The camera lenses are often over-exposed to light, which makes pop-up book like cinematography by Newton Thomas Sigel that is a joy to behold. The editing grabs your privates and drags you along with crazy swooping sounds in the never-ending series of camera moves and crazy non-related cut-aways to things along the lines of a characters’ wife being caught in a suburban explosion.

The cast may read like who’s-who of Hollywood stars now, but back then, this set of misfits was a hefty gamble for a 50+ Million dollar studio film. You have an untested TV star lead, an underwear model, a rapper and a music video director who are expected to emote to events like a woman being shot point blank in the head. The surprising thing here is that they all do compelling work. George Clooney is still Clooney, but a little more subdued then usual with his bag of acting ticks (“I’m squinting because I’m mad”) brought down to a bare minimum. Spike Jonze is effective as the red-neck southerner whose simpleton reactions to fantastic events are essentially the back-bone of the whole group. Ice Cube plays the same character he always plays, a smirking bad-ass that does cool things, but this time he’s Christian, even though that’s nothing more then a little window dressing. Mark Wahlberg is the clear knock-out performance of the group, proving once again that no matter how many “The Happenings” and “Four Brothers” he churns out, that kid can still FEEL IT when comes to the acting game.

Three King is grazed by the classic status dum-dum, but fails only because it feels that it needs to also be an ACTION film which makes the scenes of explosions and diving (lots of diving) a little bit out of place in the context of the story that’s being told. It makes for broad popcorn entertainment, but the director obviously cared more about the other dramatic elements and that forces the film into an uneasy allegiance with its two fighting sides. You have a great dramatic film with a bunch of EXCLAMATION points every now and then when all you really needed were commas. I probably wouldn’t like Three Kings as much if it’s over the top moments where stripped away, but it’s also the thing that hurts it the most. HIP-HIP-HURRAH for being a hypocrite!

DVD: There' a very fact-filled commentary track from the director and an even more interesting track from two of the producers. The 20 minute documentary and the 20 minutes of home video footage (By David O Russel) paint him as an excited if pushy man that really wants to get his film off the ground. The only bummer is that none of the docs deal with HOW FUCKING CRAZY HE WAS! I'd love to get my hands on some George Clooney head-butting the director footage, but that may take a little while I imagine.

Realistic Artificiality: Stop steering and start driving. This ain't no dead piece of metal.

(Caption: Epic Racer X Maneuver)

Racer X (In gimp bondage gear) - "It doesn't matter if racing never changes. What matters is if we let racing change us. Every one of us has to find a reason to do this. You don't climb into a T-180 to be a driver. You do it because you're driven. "

I was also one of the lucky few that saw Speed Racer on the massive face melting IMAX screen (I wager there’s about three of us in the entire world). The sound-vision that assaulted me over the head until I bled rainbows is more justly covered in the article by Philip Decloux (HERE), so I’ll jump right to the second time I sat down for a little speed.

The screen was barely bigger than the first television I had as a kid. I’m certain I heard the theater managers giggle when they told themselves I was paying full price to get in. The room was about 1/4 full and everyone, except for me and a female partner in crime, were families with kids under 10 years of age. The adults were wearing thousand-mile-stares that reminded me of war victims that wanted the horror to be over with. The kids squealed in the ways kids squeal. Candy was involved. (Ed. Trust me, candy makes this film better. And root beer, delicious root beer)

Then the movie started.

“Oh! This film isn’t animated” my friend said, almost relieved, as we watched a young speed bob his cute Hollywood child actor’s head .

Then Speed stepped out into the street.

“Why does the world look like that?” my friend asked. The candy colored, completely fabricated universe that popped off the screen pitched the audience on its side. Many fell to their death and only the strong held on. Some adults grimaced. Others kept smiling the forced smile of parental responsibility. The kids kept watching as if nothing had changed. As “mature individuals” we’ve come to terms with what we accept and what we deem as ‘silly’ in the entertainment we consume. Aliens? Okay. If they aren’t TOO weird. Serial Killers? They exist. I’ll buy it. Ghosts? Yea. Sure. My mom saw one once. Crazy car tracks that loop-the-loop? NO WAY! Impossible!!! THE CAR WOULD FALL! We can handle little tea-spoons of disbelief, but a whole, ludicrous film is really pushing the limit. It’s not like “STAR WARS” where they’re working in a genre (Science Fiction) ingrained into us from birth. It’s new. And we’re scared. It takes more effort to for us get lost in the world then it takes to fight it and push away the reality they're trying to apply. So why do we always throw the first punch? The narrative itself invites us to delve into other, unexplored worlds. We don't need to wear life-vests if we want to go deep sea diving.

The husband and son team in front of me watched passively at first, the father poking his son every time the monkey made a silly face, but eventually it was the kid who was laughing all on his own. By the end of the film every child was literally on the edge of their seat as Speed Racer zoomed down the track. My friend even had her hands to her mouth, eyes wide as saucer plates. Everyone above 10 knew that Speed was going to win the race, but through the sheer skill of storytelling and creativity they where mesmerized. It didn’t matter that the screen was two feet across, or that the sound was fuzzy and distorted or that everything was fake. All that mattered was the experience.

The closest example I can think of this kind of willing suspension of disbelief is found in “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?” As a child, I didn’t care if some characters were cartoons, they were all real to me because it was all on the screen. The special effects didn't seem out of place to me. It just WAS. As adults watching that film we could relate to the cartoons we grew up with during our youth. With Speed Racer it’s nothing like we’ve experienced before. The closest comparison people make is “It’s like a Video Game” but that’s kind of a knee jerk reaction caused by the wholesale use of CGI in the film.

At one point in the showing, Speed is down and out, the Mach 6 has busted a fuse or something, and everyone is on edge. We've spent 2 hours with this character and this world. We care. And as we care, Speed Racer listens to the car, the living metal his brother taught him to hear. The brother who is watching him right then and there, sending him mental lightning bolts across the track. The Speed jams it into 5th. The Mach 6 ROARS into action!!!! A five year old threw his fist in the air and yelled “GO SPEED RACER!”

Then everyone burst into applause.

In today’s diluted, white-washed society, a piece of entertainment that gets that kind of reaction out of the collective of brain-dead kids is something that should be cherished.

Now, go let your kids drive the car. Don't you want to encourage their creativity?

BOOK: Rebels on the Backlot

A book I found on the cheap shelf at Suspect Video, “Rebels on the Backlot” charts the rise (and fall for a few suckers) of all the big so-called ‘indie’ director’s that invaded Hollywood in the late 90’s. If you’ve always wanted reasons to actively dislike directors like Paul Thomas Anderson (Magnolia) Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction) and David O. Russel (Three Kings) this book will be your holy bible. I already cherish the horror in the eyes of thousands of film snobs as they realize that their hero’s aren’t the saints they’ve been dreaming of.

We follow the director’s attempts to get their “big” film off the ground (Fight Club, Magnolia, Being John Malcovich) and everyone’s singular story is broken apart and told in chunks, instead of dedicating whole chapters to each director. It makes indexing harder, but it does make the novel flow a lot easier. Keep in mind the stories aren’t necessarily about the directors breaking into Hollywood, but is instead their attempt at getting their “classic” through the gauntlet of fire like studio system. Author Sharon Waxman interviewed almost every major player in these dramas and she doesn’t go out of her way to paint them in a heavenly hurt artist light. In fact, everyone gets their faults reiterated over and over again. Paul Thomas Anderson is a crazy self centered Auteur. Quentin Tarantino ditches his friends at the drop of the hat. David Russell (As THAT video on the web showed) is incredibly aggressive and mean spirited. None of it is earth shattering stuff, but it does make an interesting read.

At times the words stinks of Tabloid journalism, but with the wide range of participants being (seemingly) honest as they discuss a handful of soon to be classic movies, I’ll have to recommend “Rebels on the Backlot” to all the aspiring filmmakers out there who want a snort of that Hollywood glory. These pages will either fill them with hope or send them back to College for another Arts degrees so they can keep dreaming and avoid the real world.

Narrative VS. Spectacle: Ph. D. chim-chimes in in support of speed racer.

The critics this summer have been an enigma to me. Before going to see Iron Man, I noticed that it had an unbelievable 93% rating on Rottentomatoes dot com. This, I confidently assured myself, should be the best superhero movie ever made! Look at all of that critical acclaim! I was deluding myself. While every facet of the film was polished to a mirror shine, as I walked out of the theater, I found myself... ambivalent. I started unconsciously nit-picking certainly elements of the film... the shitty, phoned in soundtrack, Terrence Howard's weak voice (and I loved him in "Hustle and Flow"!), Gwyneth Paltrow's uneven performance. Things that, while somewhat detracting from the film shouldn't affect the overall sense of satisfaction I felt from watching it. But the damage was done. Perhaps it was the overwhelmingly positive critical reception... the hyping and promoting on various websites I frequent. Somehow it couldn't possibly meet the bar that had been set.

Now that I've got my original ambivalent reaction out of the way, lets look at one thing that Iron Man got right: for one, it has a very finely tuned balance between it's superhero origin narrative, and a solid sense of spectacle. It doesn't only have one or the other, it has a very crowd-pleasing, critic appeasing blend of these two elements, and that's what has made it a success. Robert Downey Jr. is Tony Stark, and ILM did a real awesome job on the special effects. So really, unless you're a basement dwelling, scum-sucking aintitcoolnews talkbacker, you should be able to realize the success of Iron Man, as it pertains to this balancing act of Narrative and Spectacle.

It's what cinema is all about, it's about taking you out of your normal, everyday life and infusing it with concentrated suspense, romance, action, adventure, or comedy. The best films please you on the visual, purely aesthetic platform of film while engaging your mind with wit, subtext, and other things that intellectuals like to blabber about. This is why Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" is by far my favorite film that I have seen to this date. Real, vibrant cinema is about the ideal marriage of visual entertainment and storytelling. They live off each other, and if one outstrips the other, the whole suffers.

Adam has proposed that critics have panned "Speed Racer" in the same way they derided "Pirates of the Carribean 3: the World's End". He proposed that critics panned POTC3 because the film was a meandering mess, unredeemed by it's well-tuned audio-visual experience. They panned it because the movie did not live up to the promise of the first film, and the fact that it did not improve upon the second film, which was a somewhat bloated, confused CGI-fest. POTC3 didn't have a point. If we're talking about Narrative vs. Spectacle, it's a failure. No matter how impressive your 2 million dollar shot of a pirate ship exploding is, it isn't worth squat if the audience doesn't care about any of the characters or the plot. In the end, it's ridiculous to think that ILM special effects and a Hanz Zimmer score (he's as practiced as James Horner at cannibalizing his past efforts) are redeeming values. These qualities alone make a good popcorn film, but not what I would deem good cinema.

Adam is correct in asserting is that critics have unfairly panned "Speed Racer". I've seen this one twice now, both times in IMAX. Critics hated it because they couldn't get past the ground-breaking visual effects and childish sense of play that make this seem like a real-life anime-cartoon. If Adam gets to see this film (and I dearly wish him and every reader of this blog to see it before it leaves IMAX screens), he'd realise that not only have critics been unfair, but that he is (happily) mistaken in thinking (through the views of misled critics) that Speed Racer is a purely visual spectacle, or lacking "a good story". The Wachowskis have achieved quite a feat, because they made a real family film. There is heart here. There are morals to teach to the youngsters who are going to love the racing segments. I don't know why, but the critics have mistakenly ignored on the great, avant-guarde examples of Narrative-Visual cinematic art ever achieved.

We, as the film-going public, have mis-treated this film. I enjoyed it much more than Iron Man, and tons more than POTC3. If you have any sort of inner child which is not covered with the sickly burlap of cynicism, go and see this film now and realize how wrong the critics have been, and how utterly crazy the Wachowskis were to attempt to make this film.

Narrative VS Spectacle: Mortal Kombat

BY ADAM SLIGHT

For you reading pleasure, an article from my friend (and fellow Film Junkie Facebook Poster) Adam Slight. Check out his blog at http://shmahfilms.blogspot.com/ for tons of crazy articles with well thought out subjects like "Justifying Attack Of the Clones." And give him props for having the balls tackle subjects that most fanboys are more comfortably just HATING.

***

Although I have yet to see Speed Racer I have noticed a common trend in its reviews. The line is divisive. On one side critics marvel at the film’s style and breaking of visual conventions. On the other side more critics simply long for a “good story”. Sometimes this can be an issue with me. Since when do movies need an in-depth story when it’s strong in its other departments?

We could blame history. Theorist Tom Gunning wrote that since 1906 cinema has increasingly been more focused on story over visual spectacle. It was in 1906 that the number of narrative-oriented films surpassed that of visually-focused film. These visual films had been able to stand on their own merely through display of images moving independently on a screen. At the time this spectacle was enough to keep audiences paying. And I bet most critics love that old stuff. So why not Speed Racer? Why is it that audience would pay for a purely visual spectacle then, but not now?

For that matter let’s use examples that I’m more familiar with. Last summer Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World’s End hit the screens. While praised for its visuals the film widely flopped with critics due to a series of tedious and confusing plot twists. This makes me wonder when it was that pirate movies picked up the expectation to rival Shakespeare’s Macbeth? Instead of dwelling on where the film lacks, why not emphasize the film’s strengths. This scene in particular struck me as one of the most inventive and unique sequences I had ever seen in a summer blockbuster. It may not have made sense necessarily but it was executed very well. In fact the movie’s cinematography grabbed my attention for most of the film. Aside from the cinematography, the music was also noteworthy. In fact, there are plenty of elements that make up a film and yet story is most widely favoured by audiences.

But I suppose one could argue that as a summer blockbuster Pirates of the Caribbean 3 should have a balance between story and visual as to not isolate audience. This privileging of narrative has plagued technical cinema for decades. Soviet filmmaker Dziga Vertov (1896-1954) dealt with similar criticisms. Vertov felt that by seeing the world through the eye of a camera lens, the masses could achieve a higher understanding of the world they live in resulting in political revolution. Vertov avoided narrative and fiction in his films as they were bourgeois notions. Vertov’s Man With a Movie Camera was meant to mobilize the masses through the stylized representation of Russian workers. Instead, some critics felt that the “flashing of images was exhausting”.

Perhaps it can be argued that films dependent on visual spectacle should be short and sweet. After all, Pirates clocks in at 168 minutes and Man With a Movie Camera (which depends strictly on visuals) clocks in at 80 minutes. With no rest in sight it is understandable how one may have trouble sitting through these films without narrative tension driving them forward.But I’m not letting narrative off that easily.

I’m sure everyone has at least one friend who can not sit through a film without pointing out every plot hole that he or she may find. You may be watching a generally solid film with your disbelief relatively suspended by the plot, yet your friend refuses to submit. It is my own personal theory that these people refuse to allow the suspension of their disbelief in an insecure attempt to appear better or smarter than the logic of the film. Not that I condemn the heckling of a movie. I’m talking about extreme cases here.

What these people fail to grasp is that the film itself relies on such discrepancies and trickery to exist. This not only applies to narrative but also to other formal elements. First off, a film’s narrative can never be completely coherent. As a construction at the hands of a writer, a film’s narrative will always be fundamentally flawed. The audience has an advantage of viewing the events of a film’s narrative at a distance, making it easier to criticize the events and actions of the film. With this in mind, I think it is important to quickly identify what a film is going for and not resist the suspension of disbelief. After all, the visual presentation of a film also relies on audiences to submit to illusion. One easily forgets that the motion that is perceived as cinema relies on the viewer’s eyes to fail in distinguishing all 24 frames that a film presents each second. Do people feel the need to point that out every time they see a movie?

I think that people are conditioned to pay more attention to the story of a film. Not only have we been presented with narrative cinema our entire lives, but the history of narrative surpasses that of cinema by millennia. It isn’t a surprise that film has stepped up to the plate as a vehicle for story and narrative. We see the same thing happening to video games. Games that once relied entirely on game play now adopt narrative structures. For example, this is evident in the Super Smash Bros. which, with every installment, incorporates more and more storytelling elements.

We can’t forget about the purely visual aspect of cinema which originally defined the medium. There is an importance in occasionally distancing story and visual in an attempt to appreciate the spectacle. There is validity in Vertov’s desire to avoid narrative. Our culture’s emphasis on “good story” (which can be considered bourgeois…if you want) eclipses the important social functions of cinema. We more often look at films in hopes of having a good time, when often the function of cinema is the opposite.

Aside from that though, can’t we all agree that it can be fun to just go to a theater, turn our brains off, smile at the pretty lights and maybe forget about those undesirable plot twists.

The Hidden (1987)

Director: Jack Sholder
Kyle Maclachlan – Lloyd Gallagher
Michael Nouri – Tom Beck

The Hidden is a sly tongue-in-cheek mix of sci-fi action with pinch of gory horror. It’s obviously a well worned formula phoned in by a bunch of people working for their paychecks, but at least the product shows off that they know how to do their jobs.

Detective Lloyd Gallagher (Kyle Maclachlan) is befuddled by a large string of robberies committed by regular people who all die horrible deaths. He’s especially peeved when he’s saddled with an out of town rookie detective Tom Beck (Michael Nouri). But as the they get deeper and deeper into the case, he realizes that maybe the villain he’s dealing with is…out of this world. (Ed. cue eerie music?)

A body hopping alien who can’t stay in his host for long due to a rapid case of body decay isn’t anything you haven’t seen before, but the fact that this particular alien loves rock ‘n roll and destruction spices things up. The acting is pure B-Movie woodiness, but the direction is stylish enough to capture all the carnage in interesting and creative ways. Said carnage is lovingly rendered in all the over the top ways it can go (See the escalating opening car-chase) and director Jack Sholder doesn’t shy away from showing off his slightly rubbery Alien FX every chance he can get. The whole thing was never meant as high art, coming, as it was, out of New Line Cinemas at the time they where a dedicated genre studio that only cared about the bottom line. However, it'll do for a Saturday night.

DVD: There's a slyly sardonic commentary by Director Jack Sholder that is composed 90% of chewing out the horrible actors. There’s also little SFX making of, but it's mostly a waste of time without any of the original team that helped create them present. The most common edition these days is package with The Hidden 2, a terrible sequel that should never steal any of your time.

Walk Hard (2007)

Yet another film from the Producer Judd Apatow's assembly line (Superbad, Knocked Up, 40 Year Old Virgin), Walk Hard may always be singled out as the first of his films to completely crash and burn at the box office. Was it because John C. Reilly couldn’t handle a leading role? Or the fact that it was a specific parody of a genre that is a self-parody in itself (The music bio)? Or was it because people just missed out?
Dewey Cox is scarred for life when his brother is accidentally killed in a friendly Machete Fight. Promising himself he’ll dedicate his life to being super double awesome, he walks hard, has fifty kids, and does every drug known to mankind. That’s only a small part in the epic movie tapestry that Walk Hard attempts to weave with song.

Walk Hard is a strange beast, a film that is mostly silly but often times awkwardly dramatic. It’s a weird mix that is funny in short bursts but doesn’t sustain itself in the long run. The fact that it concentrates its satire on the Johnny Cash centric Walk The Line, is a boon and a handicap at the same time. Some of the jokes are chuckle worthy but when they’re understood in the correct context (The Cash inspired sink breaking) they resound ten times funnier. It’s the peril of any kind of satire but director Jake Kasdan plows through it without missing a beat. It’s a shame that they don’t keep the joke quota as high as a classic Zucker brothers film. They repeat the same joke, again, and again until the laughs completely dry up. But even when the gags fall flat on their face, John C. Reilly is an amazing performer because he brings his dramatic acting chops give lines like “I want fifty thousand digeridoos!” Jenna Fischer sexes it up (Breasts!) as his on again off again wife. The rest of the cast is made up with a few big cameos (The Beatles scenes) and a laundry list of Appatown C-listers from the salad days when he was producing Anchorman, Freaks and Geeks, and Undeclared. The style of the film is also right on the money, with Jake Kasdan (Another Apatow directorial regular) giving everything a perfect glossy sheen. It's key to make a parody look as expensive as the original product and in this case, they pull it off.

The one thing the film does hit right on the note is the numerous songs. Instead of being nothing more than goofy breaks from the slapstick comedy they actually work as pieces of musical composition. Songs like “Walk Hard” and “Lets Duet” aren’t necessarily laugh out loud on the first listen, they grow on you, and the vocal performance on every track from Reilley never ceases to amaze.

Walk Hard lives off the strength of John C. Reilley’s performance and a dozen and a half extremely strong musical numbers. If they had thrown in a few more fresh jokes and slowed down the repetition they would have had a winner, but as it stands it’s a noble effort that will probably garner its own little cult following as the years roll by. Every night I’ll mouth a little prayer deep down in my heart that Mr. Reilly stars in every one of his films from now on.

DVD: The 2-Disc edition with it's SELF INDULGENT DIRECTOR'S CUT fleshes out the movie in every regard. The jokes may come even slower then before (Ouch), but at least the story flows easier which results in the film feeling shorter. The commentary by the whole gang is suprisingly calm with an actual serious discussion running through the whole film. The extras on DISC 2 shine in the Extended Musical scenes where we get over 40 mintues more songs, many not in the film, from the Reily himself. You may never want to hear a complete version of the Dylan parody "Royal Jelly", but at least it's there just in case.

Fritz the Cat (1972)

Director: Ralph Bakshi
Starring: Skip Hinnant - Fritz the Cat

A film based on the underground Comix created by Robert Crumb, Fritz
the Cat is famous for being the first “X” rated feature length animated film. It has a handsome hand-made style of animation that FEELS like the early 70’s, as opposed to cleaner cartoons like the Looney Tunes (That have a timeless feel). The thing that distances it from its adult subject matter is that the whole thing is peppered with cartoon sight gags (Eyes widen, Characters bounce off walls) no matter how adult the material gets. And it gets REALLY adult. Almost to the point that to the point of annoyance as the film’s episodic structure jumps from scene to scene without any rhyme or reason of what’s come before. Fritz the Cat walks around New York, has an orgy, gets chased by cops (Pigs! Get it?), runs across some black “Crows” and then joins a nazi cult, gets blown up, then has another orgy There’s no flow, but there is the novelty of seeing all the anamorphic characters get naked on screen. It just gets old fast. And while the whole thing is watchable as curiosity, the film itself doesn’t stand up as anything more than a relic of its time that is famous for reasons that don’t equate to value. Check it out for the nifty animation and try not to get too disturbed when a Nazi worshipping blue bunny beats his hippo girlfriend with a chain till she’s covered in blood. Remember, it's just a cartoon.

DVD: It's a available everywhere for about 15$ under the Midnight Movie label. The disc is bare-bones and the transfer is a little scratchy, but I have a funny feeling it's the best we're going to get for a while.

Maniac (1978) and Maniac Cop (1980)

Thanks go out to Rue Morgue Magazine for hosting a screening of Maniac at Bloor Cinema yesterday with Director William Lustig himself in attendance. And to mark the occasion, here’s my thoughts on the film of the night and review of another piece of Lustig’s short (but fondly remembered) filmmaking career.



MANIAC (1980)

A smash when it was released on the grindhouse circuit in the late 70’s, Maniac is famous for it’s boffo sleazoid performance from writer/star Joe Spinnel and it’s Tom Savini orchestrated gore. That’s about ALL it has going for it. The problem is the film has zero forward momentum. The whole thing is spent following Spinnel as he randomly kills and scalps pretty young women. Then the end credits roll. The fact is that it is utterly devoid of any sympathetic characters, has an unrelentingly depressing tone and has the forward momentum of cold molasses. The only reason to pick this one up is for the few fantastic gore gags (Slow Motion Explodo-Head and the out of nowhere acid tripping climax) to make this worth a watch. William Lustig doesn’t seem to know how to properly keep an audience glued to the screen yet, but it didn't take long for him to learn to stab straight for the heart.

The memorable original electronic score by Jay Chattaway sounds a little like the bastard child of "Goblin"...who, ironically, were originally supposed to write the score! They dropped out when Dario Argento was pulled from the Executive Producer slot.

DVD: The film is available on a passable DVD from Anchor Bay. The picture is grimy as expected, the sound is clear as it’s going to get but the commentary is worth a listen because William Lustig is a born storyteller.

MANIAC COP (1988)

A hulking cop is killing innocent civilians in New York and the city is in murderous panic. The biggest suspect on the block is Jack Forrest (A young, non-mugging Bruce Cambell) and the only person who can clear his name is the detective on his case (A growlingly on his game Tom Atkins.) Will they be able to solve the mystery in time before plowing through a series of well-played action clichés in the process? My money’s on “No."

With a lean script from genre vet Larry Cohen (“Q: The Winged Serpent”, “God Told me To” ) and a cast of genre stalwarts on the acting front, Lustig crafts a flawlessly directed mix of action/horror that knows where it stands on the genre ladder and never attempts to overshoot it’s mark. The gore (Other than a few cases of arterial spray) is pretty tame compared to his past work but you’ll get so caught up in rapid fire narrative that you won’t even notice. The film isn’t originality squared, but it is incredibly well done and fun to boot. And it has nothing to do with Maniac. Thank God!

DVD: There’s a few versions floating around of this film, but the one to get is SYNAPSE’S recent re-issue (with boosted picture and sound) of Elite’s DVD version. It boats a DTS track, clear picture and a brand new interview with the maniac cop himself Robert Z’dar. The commentary by the composer, screen-writer, director and The Chin is a half making fun of the film and another praising on how well it turned out.

P.S: Cinemacabre is a screening Rue Morgue Magazine puts on every months at the Blood Cinema. It’s 10$ and always a hell of a time, so check out what’s coming up next on their forum http://www.rue-morgue.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=91e8697d7dfffdb4e1c377556dd6d36c&f=4

As a rock hard-genre fan, it's only logical that I take naps after the carnage is over. (Ed. Nice shirt... fag)

Twitch Film: Awesomeness!

While we hope our dear readers love TFJ like the shivering addicts they are, there must come a time when we bow our heads to the bigger and better movie related website that float on the waves of the Interwebs. (Ed. It's a series of tubes, ya know!)

TWITCHFILM.NET (Run by Toronto native Todd Brown) is my favourite web-site in the entire universe. There’s no better place to find movie news and reviews (With a SEVERE slant on the odd and foreign) with a sly personal style. You’re always guaranteed to find new nuggets, exclusive trailers and interviews with rising stars that the bigger sites (Aintitcool and Chud) won’t hear about for at least five years.

If you don’t check it out at least three times a day, your TFJ membership (with that cool holograph of my head morphing into a shark) will be officially revoked.